By Ollie Richardson for The Saker Blog
The person reading this article has most likely seen some form of re-enactment of a Roman trireme navigating some waters and being surrounded by fog, not being able to see further than 1km around them and thus possessing limited knowledge about what lies beyond the “draw distance” provided by their cerebrum. It is this fear (and handicap when it comes to survival) that pushed such ancient civilisations to improve the technology that they possess in order to reduce the risk that sailing the seas bears. The discovery of optics, mathematics, construction techniques, iron and metal works, physics, even astronomy brought the horizon within an arm’s reach and allowed vessels and their captains to become even more ambitious with their plans.
Even though at the time of writing this article it is late 2018 and we now have laptops that are almost paper-thin and electric cars that are almost noiseless, this fear of what may or may not exist beyond either the visible or proverbial horizon has not disappeared anywhere. But the manner in which it is expressed has acquired a more sophisticated character. If 28,000 years ago the human used cave drawings to pass on information about alleged dangers to their successors, then today the human uses contemporary means of mass communication to broadcast similar information about threats to survival. For example, in a recent article posted on the “strategic culture” website there is the following headline: “US Switching to Ukraine as Location to Start World War III Against Russia”. Now the title by itself is rather frightening, let’s agree. If one is seeing the expression “World War III” for the first time and they choose to use the digital library search engine known as “Google” to acquire some “knowledge” about this term, then they almost certainly will require a change of underwear. To illustrate matters, let’s refer to the image below:
In a word: horrifying! We can see a whole city being blown to smithereens, with a fireball that would surely make the sun look like a coin in comparison. So a connection is made: “World War III” equals fire and explosions. But it is unlikely that the inquisitive person’s curiosity will end here. As is the case when someone drives past the scene of a car accident, it is seemingly impossible to not look. This fear, or more precisely – the fear of death (not knowing what happens when life ends), speaks to us and says: “Look, look, look!”. So, after satisfying the need to read more about this “World War III” by reading the information presented in the article, we learn that because Russia reached an agreement with some other countries over Idlib and America gave 2 boats to Kiev, this “World War III” will now not start in Syria, but in Ukraine!
But wait just a minute here, because the notion of cities being engulfed by fireballs is very serious and there is the chance that it might involve death… lots of death… And since descriptions of this “World War III” give the impression that it won’t be just one street or town that may be affected, but entire cities, regions, or maybe nations, one’s wish to have more specific details leaves one in a bit of a pickle, because it follows from the information in the specified article that there is fog on the horizon when it comes to providing specific details. So, without further ado, let’s pull out our modern-day equivalent of a “spyglass” and do some basic reconnaissance before running for the ejector seat and escaping to the moon.
On September 27th the US did indeed give Ukraine 2 vessels. According to the current President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko’s website, they are Island-class patrol boats. I.e., coast guard ships.
However, there was a caveat with the handing over of the boats: “America handed over the vessels for free but Ukraine will pay an estimated $10 million for their renovation in Baltimore, Maryland, where they will remain until, likely, next fall”. Ah, so already we are starting to see the real nature of this “generous gesture”. If we remember, in 2018 France reached an agreement with Kiev over the sale of 55 Airbus helicopters, which consists of “21 repurposed H225s, and 10 brand new H145s and 24 H125”. I.e., non-combat helicopters. Poroshenko’s propaganda machine, which consists of the media outlets that he personally directly owns and the agencies that are under his control, did not publicise the fact that most of the helicopters are second-hand. Furthermore, America was jealous of the fact that France was able to swindle Kiev in such a way. And back in 2017 there was the Javelin fiasco, where the US government was mulling (according to the media) over giving “Javelins” to Kiev. It was then reported in December, 2017 that Trump had given the green light for the sending of Javelins, but all we know from that moment is that they were “tested” by the Ukrainian Armed Forces in May, 2018 in Western Ukraine. However, many tabloid spin machines (for example) were adamant that the delivery of these Javelins signalled the beginning of this “World War III”. And they weren’t alone in this hysteria: social media “experts” pressed the “panic” button in unison and decided that if Russia didn’t drop Tsar Bomba on Kiev, it was game over. For them it doesn’t matter that the DPR/LPR don’t use tanks anymore because of the Minsk Agreements and what is happening in Donbass today can hardly be called a “war” (in a war there are offensives, not cowardly shelling on residential areas from a safe area, trying to bait Russia into responding).
But shock horror, as of the time of writing these Javelins have never been used outside the training ground near Lvov, something that your humble servant already predicted long ago. One would think that if Russia is so “aggressive”, as Kiev claims, and Ukraine’s economy is being decimated by “Russian troops”, then there would be some urgency concerning using these Javelins in order to repel the aggressor. But no…
So coming back to the topic of these boats: knowing that Poroshenko is willing to literally pay the Trump administration thousands of dollars just for a fake meeting that will give his Euromaidan and Banderist electorate back home the illusions that “America stands with us”, it is more than likely that this was yet another PR stunt concocted by Poroshenko’s campaign HQ, which has also authored the “autocephaly“, “Russian aggression in the Azov Sea“, and “termination of the Treaty of Friendship” bullet points of his 2019 Presidential electoral campaign.
So how can these splendid vessels be, as the author of the aforementioned “World War III” article put it, exploited “for use against Russia”? Well the first problem here is that Ukraine has no money. Yes, it is more than bankrupt. Its GDP is now exclusively being used to pay back the money that the West lent to it at extortionate interest rates. As soon as a hryvna enters the coffers, it is immediately dispatched abroad. In fact, its GDP has been substituted with IMF/World Bank/EU/US loans – something that Greece is very familiar with. In fact, Ukraine’s economy makes most African countries look like paradises.
Secondly, the conveyor of the information about “World War III” being launched in Ukraine cites a comment made by a Mr Ryan Zinke, who is the US Secretary of the Interior. Yes, precisely Secretary of the Interior, and nothing else. For reasons that rhyme with “clickbait” various publications (for example) decided to report “US Hints At Naval Blockade Of Russian Energy Exports”. Again, the comment was made by the Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke, at an “industry event in Pittsburgh hosted by the Consumer Energy Alliance”. And even if such a statement was made by the White House, so what? After decade upon decade of blah blah blah about how they are going to do this and that to Russia, actions never follow. After all, dumping a few tomahawks on empty warehouses in Syria (both “attacks” were coordinated with Russia beforehand because Washington is very afraid of its own incompetence) is not only a sign of weakness, but also actually helps Russia’s operations in Syria (the “democratic and just wolf” showed the “aggressive Bear” that behind the facade is a scared and futile puppy).
Thirdly, the events in the Azov Sea in the month of September can hardly be described as “war” or even fisticuffs. The fact is that Russian pilots were allowed to come onboard Ukrainian ships to help them navigate through the shallow waters of the Azov Sea. Does this sound like something a country would do if it were indeed “at war” with an “aggressor”? Here are two more referrals that cite other Ukrainians who debunked Poroshenko’s PR stunt: Link 1 and Link 2.
So now onto the topic of Syria and the Idlib conundrum. On September 4th Donald Trump did indeed tweet the following:
“President Bashar al-Assad of Syria must not recklessly attack Idlib Province. The Russians and Iranians would be making a grave humanitarian mistake to take part in this potential human tragedy. Hundreds of thousands of people could be killed. Don’t let that happen!”
Yes, Trump tweeted. But what does it mean? The tweet in itself is designed for internal consumption, of course. I.e., for GI Joe Americans to feel like America is still powerful and can flex its muscles anywhere in the globe. The precise reason why no strike followed and Russia and Turkey instead reached an agreement to avoid another Sarin spectacle is beyond the scope of this article, but it can be summarised as international law (not the R2P version, but the S-400 version) triumphing over chaotization (the new format of the R2P version of international law). Furthermore, America would risk a direct war with Russia on Syrian soil no more than it would on Ukrainian soil. I.e., not at all. Assad already won in Idlib (and in the war in general) when Russian jets touched down at Hmeymim in 2015. This event gave impetus to processes that could not be stopped neither by token Israeli airstrikes at alleged “Hezbollah” cow sheds nor by Tomahawk PR extravaganzas. Thus, the actual cleaning of the city from jihadist filth is merely a formality, and by all accounts Nusra & Co are doing a pretty good job already – infighting, a lack of support, and Turkish arm twisting are softening the city itself up for the inevitable 2019 final deal (based on the terms of the Russia-Turkey-Iran axis) regarding Idlib. Thus, Russia is in no hurry to resolve the Idlib question, especially when Iran can launch missiles directly over America’s head in Eastern Syria (Albu Kamal).
It must be stated (once again) that at no point in the Syrian war (2011 onwards) was a direct clash between Russia and America an option. There is the misconception (or wishful thinking) that “the US Government was setting Syria up as the place to start WW III”, but this implies not only that the US government is suicidally unaware that it would be utterly annihilated if it decided to raise the stakes to the skies, but also that the UN is frozen in 2002, when a mock vial of anthrax was all that was needed to bulldoze Middle Eastern country “X”. And whilst America is “setting up Syria” for the “WW III” bonanza, do other processes stop? Does Nord Stream-2, the Silk Road, Turkish Stream, BRICS (T?), SCO, EEU, etc just freeze in time?
Also, if the US was “setting Syria up as the place to start WW III”, does it mean that: a) Assad helped America to “set up” Syria since it was his (and those of his father) socio-economic policies (free handouts + overpopulation) that weakened Syria enough for Wahhabism to grab it by the throat? And if the US was “also setting up Ukraine as an alternative possibility” for nuclear war, does that mean Ukraine’s problems started only when America started to do this? Or are things more complicated, and the roots of Syria’s and Ukraine’s problems extend beyond 2011 and 2014 respectively? Moreover, the causes of these problems are multi-faceted and have different layers of complexity. They are not just “America vs Russia” chess games. In fact, it is quicker to enumerate the countries that AREN’T meddling in Syria or Ukraine. And each party has their own interests and objectives (we are not in the 2002 Iraq/Afghanistan invasion era where the West is a single consolidated bloc dancing to Tel Aviv’s tune).
Lastly, as was touched on in passing earlier, the situation in Donbass is far from being what it was in even 2016. The Ukrainian Armed Forces (and its comrade “volunteer” battalions) and the mainstream Ukrainian society (those who were duped by the Euromaidan spectacle, didn’t fully commit to the idea that Russia is an aggressor, and slowly experience moments of clarity when they witness how their bank balance diminishes every month) is completely exhausted from what has happened not just in the zone of the “Anti-terrorist operation”, but also nationwide as a whole. And here the fact that various DPR political figures have already launched their electoral campaigns for the November 11th elections is very indicative of where priorities now lie. It is clear that America gave Poroshenko the green light to concentrate on the new front in the churches (replacing the old, failed one in Donbass).
And on this front there is an increased chance that Russia may indeed “do something” and intervene in one way or another, as the Minsk Agreements was designed to allow Russia to freeze the situation in Ukraine that arose in 2014 and enter Syria without overexposing its rear. We are now in 2018, fast approaching 2019, and Moscow’s operation in Syria is de facto complete. It was succeeded to keep Syrian statehood intact and to firmly remind Tel Aviv that there is a new sheriff – invited by the legitimate president of Syria! – in the town called “MENA”. Whether the OSCE will be obliged to protect Ukrainian canonical churches from the Banderist hoardes that are already trying to seize churches despite “Autocephaly” not yet being granted, unless the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople is playing Poroshenko like a fiddle?
If the West is going to use Ukraine to do something “against Russia”, it will merely be an extension of what we have already seen: since reality has proven that defeating Russia militarily is a pipedream, Ukraine acts like a fifth-column battering ram designed to incite Russian society (and as much of the peripheral post-Soviet space as possible) against Putin. The Kremlin reacted quickly to save Crimea from the “love” of “Right Sector”, and the Minsk Agreements solved the problem of saving Donbass without giving America what it wanted – Russian troops inside Ukraine. Putin knows much more than you the reader or I know when it comes to what is best for the Russian nation, and it’s not a coincidence that he regularly meets with the President of Belarus Aleksandr Lukashenko. The West’s attempts to turn this former Soviet Republic into another anti-Russia battering ram continue unabated, and the work of NGOs (both Soros-funded and non-Soros-funded) to subvert Belarusian society won’t stop just because the West is having an economic crisis.
However, the modern color revolution scheme that was tried and test in Egypt with the “Twitter revolution” has one major flaw – if the financial situation of the working man and woman is stable (assuming that the West’s toxic NGO’s haven’t already infected their brains and convinced them that the “dictator” represses them because they don’t have the latest sports car or Armani bag), then inciting them (along with the village people who are political outcasts and perhaps have sentiments for “heroes” like Stepan Bandera) to overthrow the legally elected President becomes difficult. A good example: the West tried to hijack the “pension reform” topic in Russia, but alas, they failed. In fact, it isn’t excluded that Jeff Monson’s observations played an important role in this.
What is “World War III”? We’ve heard so much about it and we’re always told by certain blogs that it is imminent, and sometimes learning more about it requires a PayPal transaction. But when some time has passed and nothing matching the description of “World War III” has happened, there is always some excuse as to why it hasn’t happened yet. And diplomatic solutions to problems are in general not promoted in the blogosphere. Why? Because they are “boring”. Talking around a table doesn’t quite have the same Hollywood effect as a “Kinzhal” missile hitting USS Donald Cook. And since social media has reduced attention spans and thinking patterns to 20 minute blocks, the cravings for endorphins become more and more stronger.
It is also said on forums that in 7.5 billion years the sun will engulf our planet. So should we all strap a stopwatch to our wrists and countdown for the “big one”? After all, how far can we take this pant-pooping? Could it be that (brace yourselves) there will be no nuclear exchanges in our lifetimes? Does any contemplation of this possibility make life “boring”? Why support Putin and the Eurasian project if we are all doomed? Why do Foreign Ministers hold bilateral meetings and coordinate raw material trade under contracts that will expire in 2050 if “World War III” is imminent? Does the blogosphere know something that Presidents, Cabinets, and recognised analysts/advisors don’t know? Why is the stock market not in mass panic if “World War III” is imminent? After all, in 2013 the price of the hryvna had already plummeted but it wasn’t a fact back then that Yanukovych would be removed… Traders, like Ministries of Defence, have algorithms to help them forecast future movements. Like a complex spyglass. Why does Germany want Nord Stream 2 so badly (to counter America’s economic blackmail) if “World War III” is going to start soon? Why bother laying the pipes underwater, completing a mountain of paperwork, and signing long-term contracts for Gazprom gas? After all, Germany is meddling in Syria and Ukraine just as much as the US is…
In my previous article I was asked what the following expression means:
“…the core of fourth generation warfare is using simulacra to position a digital hologram over actual ground warfare in order to carve out space to manoeuvre diplomatically”
The answer as to why “World War III” – according to the alt-media’s definition of the term – hasn’t yet happened lies inside it. But this will be the topic for a future article. In the meantime it is wise to remember that as of this moment geopolitical processes are happening in PARALLEL, and not SERIAL.
The problem is that when people talk about World War 3, they only think of nuclear war or at least major conventional war.
But the nature of war is changing such that all domains of social existence are increasingly militarized and weaponized by America in order to wage war by unconventional means.
This includes political warfare (e.g. Colored coup d’etats/”revolutions”); economic and financial war (e.g. America’s trade wars and Fiat Dollar currency wars); information war (e.g. staged provocations combined with subsequent propaganda campaigns like the UK’s Skripal scam or the USA’s “Russia stole our election” hysteria); cyberwarfare (e.g. America’s creation of the Stuxnet virus or staging of false flag cyberattacks to be blamed on foreign patsies as revealed by Wikileaks Vault 7 release); identity wars (e.g. America’s weaponization of LGBT rights, migrants, and religion against a targeted state), etc….
Granted, these forms of unconventional warfare have existed in the past, but now the USA is escalating these tactics in a desperate bid to maintain American unipolar dominance.
Speaking of US-Russian conflict, Saker himself has stated that the USA is *already* at war with Russia, but it is “roughly 80% informational, 15% economic and 5% kinetic” in nature at this particular moment.
Hell, if you believe former CIA director James Woolsey, World War 3 itself already happened and indeed ended decades ago, as it was better known as the Cold War.
In other words, we are already *inside* of World War 3 (or World War 4, if you go by Woolsey).
The real question is whether this world war will escalate, as America’s ambition for Full Spectrum Dominance of the planet spawns a true cataclysmic war-to-end-all-wars.
One definition of world wars is that these are those three that were planned, announced and staged by The Freemasons. This plan and prediction was written before WW I happened, and since long after the end of WW II and the begin of the internet for everybody that particular quotation was published again and again (not often enough for me for remembering the names of the 2 WWs planning gentleman in ca 1870+) in the assumption that if the FMs were so good in predicting WW I and WW II, because they launched them themselves, then they would certainly not err an WW III, which therefore was already a given in… uh… when did we all start to read the internet instead of the morning paper? 1995? 2000? Was it coming or was it over already, unremarked by everybody, and then very untypical for a WW, if compared to WW I and WW II?
Someone remarked that not only but also FMs seem to suffer from calendromania, i.e. the tic that something must be achieved „always” (i.e. repeatedly) on certain (thus recurring) at a certain calender constellation – and neither on others (which would make the things done then void) nor to be – God forbid – forgotten to be achieved (or underachieved) when due according to the rules of that particular mania. So, the date of WW III should be (or have been) in accordance with that mania. Since WW II followed WW I after 25 years, WW III should have been started after the next 25 years, in 1964. Indeed, during that year and during the war starting season in late summer, and by a FM country in in a sly, shabby, under human way, the Vietnam war was purposefully started by the Tonkin incident. This was a war with world wide dimensions provoking worldwide attention and disgust and other reactions, but finally it was not included in the gallery of Real World Wars.
Therefore someone invented the theory that our world rulers are perhaps not the FMs but somebody else suffering from calendromania, who loves to stage important disturbing events every 25 years, yes, but not always Real World Wars … if only because those envisaged by the FMs should be limited to a total of 3 (three) so that the third and Real real world war should be the decisive one that will change everything, transforming the world in nothing but a playground for the FMs while until then it isn‘t. The world suffered from WW I and II, yes, but then went on, but after WW III it would no more, or no more as before, if that malign prediction of that malign FM chieftain is of any worth. Thus it is understandable that the blog reading public wants to know when the Real real wordl war will happen, and is eager to pick up any information promising to tell The Secret.
If one agrees with that FM chieftain that the world is steered by FMs and that they will stick to their own calendromaniac rules, then the 25years yardstick should be observed constantly. Well, yes, in 1964 an important war was invented and started, but the 1964+ war was *not* WWW III. Then, next, perhaps the 1964+25=1989 war was?
The 1989 date had long been predicted, though not by the FMs but by the SJ. These have, perhaps since their start in 1534 (founded) or 1541 (ready for action), used a not convincingly explained acronym, namely „+IHS“. If the SJ is a secret society (yes), then its messages should be coded, but weakly enough that they can be decoded for everyone wanting to shudder beholding the mystery of their secret powers. So, their slogan is perhaps just reversed, and letters stand for numbers? Then „+“ could be a small „t“, and the SJ‘s slogan „SHIt“ says 19-8-9_20. The small „20“ seems to hint at a unit smaller than a year within that year of 1989. Thus, the 20th day? would be 1989-1-20, inauguration of Bush1, definitely a war monger, but not the start of a war. Then, the 20th week? Perhaps… in that week in May 1989, Bush1 delivered an arsonist speech in the Far East, andd what happened next was the Tiananmen event which was to be the first „peaceful revolution“ planned to wipe away communism wherever it was „in power“ and heavily guarded. Thus – this plan was one of a world wide war, by one superpower against the other/s, the West against the East, America against the Soviet Union and its world system to which China belonged in some way (and definitely in the ideological sense most importan to SJs and FMs, and Communists, too).
Yes, the 1989 war is counted in Russia… of course not by VVP and his government of „friends“, uh, „partners“ of their Western „partners“=outspoken enemies… as WW#3, and rightly so, since it diminished the position of Russia much more than Hitler ever achieved, and yielded a sudden demographic decline typical for a war. And a defeated power decline in political weight, as the now published Clinton-Yeltsin telephone conversations show. So, as far as FMs and SJs are concerned, the SHI+-war was a very good „world war“ (against Russia as WWI+II, with devastating effects namely for Russia) – but, in the end, just another war, and not the end of the world, nor that of Russia. Thus, not good enough for pathological Russia haters. Not the „Final war“ which the war gazers expect and hope for so that they may finally be able to go to sleep in peace, no more obliged to predict and watch for WW III.
Since the 25 years interval (1/4th of a century, hinting at the FM „square” obsession) denoted wars or war attempts from 1914-1989 one should expect its further working…. and its being observed by the SJ or the Catholic Church before 1878 (start of te reign of the first SJ pope, Franjo being the 2nd, not the 1st as he pretends) already. Forward from 1989 we get 2014 (Angel Hitler’s attempt at staging yet another WWiii in the Ukraine through the remote controlled downing of MH17) and 2039…
In 1889 the most important elected politician in the empire of Austria-Hungary, Lüger (liar) announced a complete rewinding „of everything the French revolution of 1789 has brought – even if this should take a 100 years“ – a panorama strecthing from 1789 to 1989 in 25 years intervals. Obviously this very catholic „Liar“ (or really Truther) was in the know of the calendromaniac machinations of the SJ, which coincide(d) with the machinations of the FMs.
In the other direction 1864, (1839?) 1814 and 1789 denote further steps of importance for the Catholic church: 1864+5 the 1st Vatican council (calenderwise out of step, as the whole Catholic church at that time), 1814: „First Real” world war, against Napoleon, and end of his reign, after he had made the english chieftains’ guelphish or welfish homebase, Hannover (Hun over!) a kingdom. Also restart of the SJ which had been illegal for some short decades. In 1714 the Welfs/Wolves/Hunovers take over England as its kings, in 1613 the Romanov dynasty was founded, in 1514 Macchiavel wrote his „Prince”, model for all manuals of covert warfare inside societies (like the, uh, „Protocols”), in 1414 Jan Hus is sentenced to death for having invented protestantism (on English instigation), in 1214 emperor Friedrich II defeated the Welf Otto IV…. so that the 1×14 mark (with its 1/4 subdivisions) seems to be the mark of the english Wolf Beast that rules the world to this day, with the Catholic church and the FMs being two of their fronts.
Combatting the institution of regular World Wars (under this or other names), i.e. preventing their regular occurrence, necessitates combatting England, the Welfs/Wherewolves forteress. After smashing them a world without world wars may be possible.
the real source and potential for escalation into hot war is Israel..and only..and it is located here: the Khazars chose to bleed the humans species in order to live, to feed themselves. that is a most awful, retrograde, violent and dangerous way to live and is bound to bring absolute revenge
the converted Jews, Khazars have committed vast crimes against humanity, told huge lies and made the world pay for those lies big time. the Khazars cannot afford to lose their power. if they do they will be called to account and that may be for them a price to high to pay, to even contemplate
the Jewish parasitic power, is entirely dependent on the bleeding the world to live. the Jews and western capitalism are a contiguity, one and the same, an entwined reality. should Jewish exploitation of humanity be ended there is no land mass, rich in agricultural and other resources the Jews can fall back on.
the end of Jewish exploitation of humanity means impoverishment for them and for their nation Israel, which without parasitic returns will not be able to maintain itself, its military etc.
it is my contention that the Khzars/Ashkenaze Jews will not accept any such reality and are a good bet to try to blow the planet if their power waning slides away to nothing. they will blow the planet before any such day. I have a sense of those guys that tells me that is exactly what they have planned in such event
that’s how hot world war 3 is most likely to come about..the final failure of western capitalism, reform or revolutionary social change that changes the social structure, renders actual power into popular control..a structure that cannot be corrupted and bribed. as already stated they are entirely dependent on corruption and bribery to live. what are they going to do when all of that ends?
I mean there are signs now in american that the American people are fed of of Jewish domination and voices are rising in opposition. the loss of the Khazar power over the west can be lost even before capitalist collapse
(I have a low blood sugar, unawares problem that can result in inconsistent focus. still readable anyway. if its not Saker will surely toss it)
this incidentally is why the Israelis are risking Armageddon at the moment. it is not risky on their level but quite normal behavior.
they know the depth of their crime and what is involved and their behavior is equal to their state of exposure as perceived by them
The US has a stated policy of achieving full spectrum domination.
The only way it can achieve this is by using nuclear weapons.
Hence the apprehension.
how serious was trump om the campaign trail when he wanted to withdraw from the world as america is and has been embroiled in effort as full spectrum dominance..to drain the swam, and to refuse on american well being?
Trump won so there must be a whole lot of Americans who agreed with him.
so there is sentiment in America that is numerous and powerful relatively so far, that is not interested at all in full spectrum dominance and would like to see and end to American imperialism and a national refocus inside the american borders.
so in America, and outside America is interested in full spectrum dominance and has brought power to bear on Trump to direct him away from American withdrawal from the world in effort to achieve full spectrum dominance?
in whose interest then is American full spectrum dominance if it is increasingly seen by the american people that that is not in their best interest.. which sentiment is now reflecting itself in the politics of the people, the politics of the politicians they are listening to and electing?
apprehension for sure… things are utterly dangerous. but it aint Americans for sure utterly behind it
Historically Americans have not wanted to go to war—not into the World wars, at any rate.
They were lied into it
There is a lot wrong with American culture, but I don’t think actually wanting to go to war in foreign countries is one of the American vices.
This is the vice of American leaders. Or, a certain subset of “leaders” who have been able to attain and maintain power and have manipulated and lied to the American public to gin up war fever. Values that should have positive results such a “freedom” have been subverted to justify wars and to get the populace to go along. Up to a point. Also, the AMerican Congress has been craven in its bowing to the executive branch and monied interests in enabling a series of terrible wars (WW1, WW2, Korean War, Vietnam, etc.).
One of the Aemrican vices might be inadequate education and sophistication to understand how they are being played. But even when they do understand this, the political system does not afford adequate expression to “the masses,” who aren’t all that curious about the rest of the world and mainly want to stay home and enjoy the American way of life.
“Well the first problem here is that Ukraine has no money. Yes, it is more than bankrupt. Its GDP is now exclusively being used to pay back the money that the West lent to it at extortionate interest rates. As soon as a hyrnia enters the coffers, it is immediately dispatched abroad.”
I understand that the Ukrainian economy is herniating, but changing the hryvnia to hyrnia is just…not nice.
Yes it true. In the last page of bibles book . Yes world War 111.
Great article. Explains clearly what is going on in this world. How misconstrued the media is with twisting things about. It basically clarifies what I have tried to explain to my family and friends as to what is really happening in this world. Wish the conspiracy theory people would straighten out their actions and stop trying to brainwash people with fear. Life is good. No worries. Thank you for your article
Phew ….had to have a quick double think about a hernia or hyena……ah , hrynva…entering the coffers….
“Mr Ryan Zinke, who is the US Secretary of the Interior”
This may confuse people from other parts of the world, as in many places the “Interior Minister” is a powerful position that controls all domestic police. In the USA, the “Secretary of Interior” is in charge of the national parks and of giving away America’s natural resources for cheap to corporations who pay the neccessary bribes, uh, excuse me, make the neccessary campaign contributions.
The conflicts between national park rangers (the force Sec Zinke controls) and bears used to be well documented back in the era of greater glasnost known as “the sixties” in a memorable set of cartoons known as “Yogi Bear”.
It is a fair certainty nobody normal wants Armageddon however hardly anyone gets a say regarding it.
I think the author might be find himself holding an alternative view if he were to read the article at the link pasted above.
Unfortunately we cannot put too much trust in rationality. To believe rational people, or people in general, are always in control is to believe in the illusion of control. One of the problems with all this war mongering and upping the ante every time a plan is blocked or defeated is that, without fail, something is going to go catastrophically wrong somewhere at some point.
If you play Full Spectrum Dominance and wage Full Spectrum warfare on all fronts always increasing the tension, sooner or later a disaster is going to happen on one of the fronts which will cause a chain of reactions that will spread to the other fronts. The more tension there is, the less it takes to start this chain reaction, or trigger that one accident, incident or strategic situation that is intolerable to one side. As we saw with how the First World War unfolded, things take on a momentum of their own, far beyond the control of any individual or groups of individuals. Suddenly the “The Great Game” is not a “Game” anymore but a Great War.
When on discusses the idea of WW3 one may ask not when will it start, but when will it end? It seems to have begun in 2014 with the nazi coup in Kiev..
In line with the war, assuming it continues, I place this quote: “La Russie a demandé des explications aux États-Unis et se prépare à saisir l’Organisation pour l’interdiction des armes chimiques (OIAC).”
The verb “salisir” translates rather nicely as seize or take or grab…but my French is inadequate.
What say fluent speakers of French?
Entire article at http://www.voltairenet.org/article203358.html (so one has contextual meaning)
It would seem to say that Russia sees the War as well-underway and the near term objectives now include OPCW as a feature requiring “attention”… “Seizure”?
I have no idea how that would work.
„Saisir” definitely means „to grab, to take” – this is the normal meaning, not an especially contextual one. For the context… OIAC is an institution, so what does „to grab“ mean if it is not Trump speaking, and if the target is not a, uh, body part, but an international institution. You can seize an institution by making soldiers storm the building, or you can bribe its member, or you can try to change their votes by opinion shaping etc. etc.
There have, of course, been recent moves by the Brits (Boris, again) to radically alter the nature of the institution (OPCW) turning it from a fairly neutral, non-partisan, investigative body into an organ for assigning blame. Since it has paymasters and funders, that blame is likely to be politically weaponised in favour of its masters.
“Putin knows much more than you the reader or I know when it comes to what is best for the Russian nation,”
But wait, you mean all those websayanim posting all those negative comments around the web about Putin and Russia are lying? ;-D
“Why support Putin and the Eurasian project if we are all doomed?”
Indeed, that goes to the heart of the matter of this negative spamming psywar strategy. Convince people resistance to zionazia is futile. As that bush jr. regime gofer once said “we make our own reality”, or something like that, they create illusions and pretend this is reality. With the almost total control of communications in the hands of loyal zionazis, they are able to do it with little fear now that the zombies will pull aside the curtain and expose their frauds.
In a way, Schopenhauer addressed the question in his PhD thesis, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/schopenhauer/#2
Essentially one simply assumes that things happen for reasons, that the universe is a logical machine. This may not be a valid assumption.
One struggles or resists against evil or defeat, not because one knows he can win, but because one must. This is the nature of life. Peace exists for the dead alone.
Of course we are all doomed. We have always been doomed.
Chris Hedges addressed this recently on RT – I think it’s within these two parts https://www.rt.com/shows/on-contact/438556-america-book-conversation-economy/
Climate scientists seem to expect some 300 feet of sea level rise by AD 2100 Think about that. And experts say that Empire will be gone by 2025…Russia will still be Russia in 2025. Meantime VVP mitigates….very sensible man. Wait for opponent to ask for instruction from JudoMaster? Why not?
The shape of the future is dark…so what?
While most of his actual points concerning, e.g., the ships sold to Ukraine, are correct, the author reveals a massive optimism which is not justified by the events of the past 15 years.
The last fifteen years have seen the US invade or support the invasion of by other countries or terrorists some six countries – Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine, Libya, Syria and Yemen – with further threats to North Korea (which fortunately the South Koreans intercepted and blunted.)
These operations have forced Russia to intervene in two of those countries, and be involved in diplomacy in North Korea.
In addition, while some of the recent threats against Russia have been made, as the author correctly points out, by people in the Trump administration who are not exactly the Commander in Chief of the armed forces, this doesn’t lessen the fact that such people feel they can make direct threats of war in echo of the real Commander in Chief who has been uttering such threats to North Korea. While Trump clearly doesn’t want to utter such threats to Russia, and indeed his uttering of any threats at all appears to be mere bluster, this doesn’t make the reality of such threats any less unacceptable. It’s also possible for him to paint himself into a corner and be forced to back up some future threat.
Trump is completely surrounded by people with no sense of proportion – with the possible exception of General Mattis, who is likely on his way out like so many other people Trump has fired in the last 18 months. These people seem to be utterly drunk on power and clueless as to the limits of what the US can do in the world without consequences ever being experienced.
It is true that we’ve heard worries that Ukraine would explode again over the summer – and it didn’t happen. But while Ukraine appears to be frozen at the moment, there is no guarantee it won’t heat up again next year or at any time for some completely random reason, e.g., the assassination of the DPR leader which recently occurred. For that matter there is no guarantee that Syria won’t explode again if Israel decides to do yet another reckless attack on Russian elements there.
So being dismissive of the flash points in the world really isn’t helping. The overall trend towards war – or at least a second Cold War – is quite clear. Nothing is happening to reverse that trend that I can see – and nothing such is described in the article.
“These operations have forced Russia to intervene in two of those countries, and be involved in diplomacy in North Korea.”
Russia has been involved in Syria long before Putin came to power, and in North Korea also long before Putin came to power. So there was nothing forced here. There was simply an intensification of energy.
“there is no guarantee it won’t heat up again next year or at any time for some completely random reason”
The UAF and Ukrainian society at large is spent, there won’t be any more offensives in Donbass. Zakharchenko’s death changed nothing. A moral blow – yes, but a strategic one? Not at all.
“So being dismissive of the flash points in the world really isn’t helping”
We’re not in the era where the assassination of an Archduke can provoke a wide conflict. Today we are experiencing a boom in the realism branch of International Relations, simply because the Sykes-Picot project is over, and there is a need to recharge the batteries.
The US knows it cannot take on Russia militarily, so it is hoping i) to provoke Russia into some rash action that can be used to justify totally economic sanctions against Russia, especially its energy infrastructure, ii) to use false flag attacks to justify Russia’s removal from the UNSC, and iii) to promote / provoke internal dissent that could lead to Maidan or even better separatist movements in the energy rich east.
Whilst there are some US military leaders who regard Dr. Strangelove as an instruction manual, some are a little more realistic, hence the interest in the US version of the Japanese Unit 731 around Russia’s borders.
Thank you for posting this article, and for Ollie Richardson’s sincere attempts to refute the conspiracies around WwIII. Unfortunately, the arguments can actually be seen from a completely different perspective.
For example, this article makes a big deal about Ryan Zinke being “only” secretary of interior when he made the WWIII comment. Wesley Clarke wasn’t even part of the government when he talked about the 5 year plan for the destruction of 7 countries in the Middle East, which proved to be correct and which is what we are witnessing now. What Zinke’s comments show is that it WWIII as an option is openly discussed within the US government. How is this reassuring?
The stock market is a function of monetary policy, not geopolitics. Since we are in an inflationary environment it’s normal that it has gone up. If you look at the Dow Jones yearly industrial average, you will see that there were no major moves before or during WWII.
As for long term agreements signed with Russia and or Russian entities as a sign of peace, I can only point to the history of broken agreements such as the German-Soviet non aggression pact that was due to last 10 years, (they broke it after 2 years) USA signed the agreement with Iran, USA signing UN1244 which guaranteed the territorial integrity of my country etc. Maybe there’s short term gain from these type of long term agreements but it doesn’t mean they can’t or won’t be broken.
The author implies the situation in Ukraine is much calmer than in 2016 but the trend needs to be looked at from a much longer timeline of 10 -20 years not 2 years! In less than 20 years NATO has cometely surrounded Russia … Thankfully it seems the Russian leadership is less complacent about the threat on it’s doorstep and has taken measures to protect itself.
Based on the a/m arguments, I fear peace is not about to break out…
“What Zinke’s comments show is that it WWIII as an option is openly discussed within the US government”
Not only does International Relations not work in such a cartoonish/binary way, but the US isn’t capable of starting the social media-advertised version of “WW3” in the first place, for many many reasons, but there is one in particular that stands out: because the consequences of the mutual exchange of nuclear warheads would – as a fact – demolish the US’ own economy and, potentially, statehood (artificially constructed countries are exactly that – artificially constructed)! The idea that Uncle Sam can strike a blow on Russia first and escape unscathed is beyond laughable. And it is the fact of Moscow’s counterpunch (or pre-emptive strike) that keeps the US holding exercises instead of actually declaring war on Russia.
In reality it doesn’t matter what Wesley Clark said or didn’t say, because the process that led to the demolition of the Middle East started before he was even born. I only cited him as an example in my previous article to speak in the same language as my target audience. Those who make decisions do so behind the proverbial curtain and DO NOT blurt it out publicly. For example, did any Ukrainian politician or foreign diplomat say that they might be involved in overthrowing Yanukovych or even the attempts to oust Kuchma a decade prior? In fact, may Rada deputies only got wind of what was happening in the winter of 2013, when it was already too late to do something (not that anything could really be done anyway). The fact that Clark can say such things and not wake up the next morning in the ground is very indicative.
As for NATO, the Kremlin really doesn’t give a rat’s ass where any of its units are. It is a fact that Russia (and allies, if needed) can demolish NATO should Breedlove actually show the courage to cross Russia’s border. Again, this is why the West does exercises instead of actually declaring war. And this is why the West uses proxies, which are like condoms that can be disposed off with minimal risk. Have you ever considered that Russia prefers NATO to be as close as possible? Similar to how Turkey and Israeli were once very close to Russia on the Syrian battlefield (see my last Saker article)…
Ukraine is self-imploding, not exploding, and there is a very big difference. The Minsk Agreements designed things in such a way, protecting the core of the Russian nation from Project Bandera, and now we see Kiev sending military equipment to Transcarpathia, and not Donbass.
It’s time to stop pant-pooping and understand that no matter how much you scoop water out of the boat, it won’t be going anywhere until the hole is patched up.
“rvene in one way or another, as the Minsk Agreements was designed to allow Russia to freeze the situation in Ukraine that arose in”
Minsk agreement was done against wishes of victorius Donbass to give relief to british and american terrorist mercenaries who were trapped inside Enclaves.
Lavrov was more concerned with fate of british nercenaries than of donbass people…
Russia is expert in turning winnable war into frozen conflict all to please her anglosaxon enemy.
Pure nonsense. Most of the residents and troops of Donbass who I’ve seen interviewed and asked the “minsk” question respond positively and are fully aware that it helped preserve the Russian nation. Don’t believe me? Ask them yourself!
Here is a relevant article by R.Lesnoix from this website about escalation into nuclear war.
His point is that most people assume that nuclear war escalates from a conventional military conflict but it can in fact result from non-military conflicts including economic warfare and cyber warfare:
“As I mentioned in the second and third paragraph, escalation into nuclear war is commonly associated with military confrontation. The public perception is that such an escalation only becomes an issue if there is some kind of military on military incident first. Unfortunately this perception is false. There are several non-military escalatory roads that can lead to that same destination. It starts with a misconception of what war is, or what acts of war are. These are not limited to military confrontations or acts by armed forces of one country.
Those of you familiar with this blog will know that you can make the case that the US and Russia are already at war. At the moment most of it is informational, a big chunk is economic and a small portion is ‘kinetic’. In addition to these categories you could also include covert operations (including assassinations and sabotage), cyber-warfare and diplomacy as non-military means through which war can be waged. All of these have the potential to escalate dramatically, even into nuclear war. Keep in mind though that these are unlikely to be used on their own but probably in some sort of combination with each other. This can create synergistic effects that may be hard to contain.”
“Military and non-military escalation into nuclear war”
Even assuming logical behavior (which is a false assumption, but a happy one) I Agree. Impossible to predict….these conditions in the realm of geopolitical affairs, particularly hostile affairs, are unknowable, as the data are never defined and are generally secret anyway. There is however a mathematical principle that states as a postulate that whatever can happen will happen – so as long as the weapons exist it is simply a matter of time….so we may “predict” nuclear as a a certainty if the existential condition makes it possible.
See for example of irrational https://thebulletin.org/2015/10/the-okinawa-missiles-of-october/
See also the JFK tapes from the “Cuban Missile Crises”…LeMay and the fellows, and CIA, worked hard to force Kennedy into attacking Cuba, stupidly imagining that a large number of tactical and strategic bombs did not exist…they did. Nuclear war under those and present conditions is simply a matter of probability >0/T, ie a sure thing.
I still hope somebody will speak to the meaning of the cited quotation: ” “La Russie a demandé des explications aux États-Unis et se prépare à saisir l’Organisation pour l’interdiction des armes chimiques (OIAC).” What is the contextual meaning of the verb “saisir”? (vide supra for url) Does the word refer to the OPCW itself, as this is my reading? But it is out of my expertise and may be a figure of speech of some sort. The sentence does not seem to be logical…
It seems quite clear that Empire creates the ground and ability set to attack Russia via biologic and chemical agencies at any time – as this seems to be the sole purpose of accusing Russia of a multitude of “violations”.
PARALLELLY, India has bought the S-400 and will continue to buy Iranian oil(without using US dollars). So, I’d guess there’s going to be a Maidan in New Delhi to overthrow Modi.
It appears that India doesn’t like being a Quad loser. HaHa.
I have a stopwatch strapped to my wrist ready for the countdown to the “big one” of Neocon pant-pooping time.
Fact: Israel receives 3.8 billion a year in military grants not loans from the USA. They do not spend these on lollipops nor is the money stashed in Swiss banks or off shore accounts at least not in substantial amounts. So how this fits into some inherently benign hologram of pretend is beyond my obviously feeble imagination unless Syria is running around inflating decoy sites As targets for benign Israeli bombs. The danger is not in the 90 percent say of life which is run predictably but in the 10 percent which is run in the realm of the gamechangers. Maybe it is just an effect of living in Looneylandia where millions of people watch a major information source (Alex Jones)sob in relief that WWII was averted on April 14 2018. But it is real in an upside down land where emotions morph into facts. So far these “facts” have not been acted upon. May adults still stay in the room.
Few months ago,while driving through Lithuania, I was told that the US already brought some nukes into the country. This is obviously just a gossip but many people over there are very worried to see so much military equipment is constantly driven throughout the country, and always by night. Also, some of the people I met in Lithuania were surprisingly not russia-phobic, and expressed lots of doubts about the EU/NATO/US…
In other words, some Lithuanians are convinced that their land will be used to stage an attack on Russia.
My logic dictates that the West will not declare war for a simple reason that if they do so, and they do it to a capable adversary (one that is capable of striking their homeland infrastructures and properties) they will be seriously hurt economically.
Let me elaborate – have anyone noticed that the West never declares a war against the nations they overtly or covertly attack? In 2011 they declared “war on terror”, then went on attacking Afghanistan an Iraq, but they never declared war against those countries.
Even before that – it was NATO that attacked Yugoslavia, but not a single NATO member state declared war on Yugoslavia?
I believe that this is deliberate and done so to avoid certain issues in case the attacked state manages to respond meaningfully and damages property ot infrastructure during a declared war.
It all comes to insurance – as all private an commercial insurance clearly have war exclusion clauses, if insured property is damaged, it will not be provided with cover.
Hence the attacks always happen under the principle of undeclared/undefined war and against nation states that cannot respond in any meaningful manner.
That is my logic – if someone disagrees, please provide proof of opposite and I will humbly stand corrected.
I have read similar optimistic views as those expressed by this writer. I hope he is correct. But what happens when criminal madness as psychopaths are in control? It is not unusual in history to spend a period of time demonizing the next victim before attacking with the intent to destroy them. The political class in much of the west is putting their insanity on display for all to see. I don’t really think they care at all if their people are mostly killed by a big war. Not if it serves a larger purpose. What if the plan is either to get everyone to submit and surrender or simply destroy the old order so that there is no choice? I know this sounds conspiratorial, but the U.S. and their allies have banking and military operations over most of the planet. I don’t think they are just going to give it all up and play nice.
They don’ have any counters to Russian military supremacy. IE S-400, S-500, long-range hypersonic ASM’s, EW and long-range cruise missiles.
The US MIC is good at wasting money and losing wars. Hows the blitzkrieg of Afghanistan going these days?
The short but provocative essays will help you to:
identify the decay – moral, mental and physical – in America’s defenses,
understand the various “tribes” that run bureaucratic life in the Pentagon,
appreciate what too many defense journalists are not doing, but should,
conduct first rate national security oversight instead of second rate theater,
separate careerists from ethical professionals in senior military and civilian ranks,
learn to critique strategies, distinguishing the useful from the agenda-driven,
recognize the pervasive influence of money in defense decision-making,
unravel the budget games the Pentagon and Congress love to play,
understand how to sort good weapons from bad – and avoid high cost failures, and
reform the failed defense procurement system without changing a single law.
The thing about playing with fire (even the thermonuclear variety) is that, after you do it so many times, one becomes rather casual about it…and eventually you get burned. Some commander somewhere doesn’t get the memo, or thinks he knows better; some communications snafu, some technical glitch or just a string of very bad luck and things spiral out of control.
I don’t have the quote handy, but I believe it was a military officer/consultant who stated that having participated in several exercises wherein nuclear warfare was “gamed”, he had yet to see a successful strategy for de-escalation.
Let me secure my tinfoil hat snugly before I throw out there the idea that there might even be forces in this world, powerful forces, that might perceive such a war as desirable
I think you’re correct, Bob. And I recall that Michael Rupert deduced that the “elite” sought to reduce the global population to a few million slaves under absolute control. That their idea is delusional and suicidal means nothing.
The idea that the US intends to do a first strike is addressed today on Crosstalk…but it is obvious. And the intent to do it goes back to 1945-46, at least…as abundant evidence shows.
I am increasingly worried at how rogue the US Administration is. It seems that they are poking the Bear and Dragon without caring about what their actions might cause!
Are the Americans really, really keen to start WWIII and unleash all the horrors it’ll bring to the world or are they just mouthing off in the hope that they scare Russia (and China) into acquiescence?
I’ve just come across this article on a Russian site which was written in November last year. It’s worth translating and reading it. If true, it’s making me hyperventilate at the thought of what will happen to my children and grandchildren if the US continues to travel down that path 😯
About the coming big war against Russia
О грядущей большой войне против России
They have been at war more or less since the declaration of independence,,,,but when they got the bomb it was only 2 weeks until they had plans to nuke USSR…
Now, facing the end of the road, they have no choice but attack.
This is very thorough and a helpful analysis and i appreciate the knowledge and effort that has gone into it. However, just because multilateral and bilateral transactions and plans continue unabated is not am argument that war is not imminent. Were the Germans not engaged diplomatically and tradewise with the Soviet Union until the moment Barbarossa was launched? In fact if you want to pursue war the best chance of success is to behave normally. As for the immediacy of major events more generally i am sure the Soviet Block did not stop functioning in anticipation of its own collapse
Excellent article…I hope Mr Richardson continues to contribute in this space…also like the line by Jeff Monson…does this mean the pension ‘reform’ [ie ripoff of working folks] is running into trouble…let us hope so…