"A soft answer turneth away wrath," teaches Proverbs 1:15.
Our new secretary of defense, Robert Gates, seems familiar with the verse. For his handling of Saturday's wintry blast from Vladimir Putin at the Munich security conference was masterful. #1
"As an old Cold Warrior, one of yesterday's speeches almost filled me with nostalgia for a less complex time," said Gates, adding, "Almost." A former director of the CIA, Gates went on to identify with Putin: "I have, like your second speaker yesterday ... a career in the spy business. And I guess old spies have a habit of blunt speaking.
"However, I have been to re-education camp, spending the last four-and-a-half years as a university president and dealing with faculty. And as more than a few university presidents have learned in recent years, when it comes to faculty it is either 'be nice' or 'be gone.'"
Gates added he would be going to Moscow to talk with the old KGB hand, who will be retiring as Russia's president around the time President Bush goes home to Crawford. Excellent.
For one of the historic blunders of this administration has been to antagonize and alienate Russia, the winning of whose friendship was a signal achievement of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. And one of the foreign policy imperatives of this nation is for statesmanship to repair the damage.
What did we do to antagonize Russia?
When the Cold War ended, we seized upon our "unipolar moment" as the lone superpower to seek geopolitical advantage at Russia's expense.
Though the Red Army had picked up and gone home from Eastern Europe voluntarily, and Moscow felt it had an understanding we would not move NATO eastward, we exploited our moment. Not only did we bring Poland into NATO, we brought in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, and virtually the whole Warsaw Pact, planting NATO right on Mother Russia's front porch. Now, there is a scheme afoot to bring in Ukraine and Georgia in the Caucasus, the birthplace of Stalin.
Second, America backed a pipeline to deliver Caspian Sea oil from Azerbaijan through Georgia to Turkey, to bypass Russia.
Third, though Putin gave us a green light to use bases in the old Soviet republics for the liberation of Afghanistan, we now seem hell-bent on making those bases in Central Asia permanent.
Fourth, though Bush sold missile defense as directed at rogue states like North Korea, we now learn we are going to put anti-missile systems into Eastern Europe.
And against whom are they directed?
Fifth, through the National Endowment for Democracy, its GOP and Democratic auxiliaries, and tax-exempt think tanks, foundations and "human rights" institutes such as Freedom House, headed by ex-CIA director James Woolsey, we have been fomenting regime change in Eastern Europe, the former Soviet republics and Russia herself.
U.S.-backed revolutions have succeeded in Serbia, Ukraine and Georgia, but failed in Belarus. Moscow has now legislated restrictions on the foreign agencies that it sees, not without justification, as subversive of pro-Moscow regimes.
Sixth, America conducted 78 days of bombing of Serbia for the crime of fighting to hold on to her rebellious province, Kosovo, and for refusing to grant NATO marching rights through her territory to take over that province. Mother Russia has always had a maternal interest in the Orthodox states of the Balkans.
These are Putin's grievances. Does he not have a small point?
Joe Lieberman denounced Putin's "Cold War rhetoric." But have we not been taking what cannot unfairly be labeled Cold War actions?
How would we react if China today brought Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela into a military alliance, convinced Mexico to sell oil to Beijing and bypass the United States, and began meddling in the affairs of Central America and Caribbean countries to effect the electoral defeat of regimes friendly to the United States? How would we react to a Russian move to put anti-missile missiles on Greenland?
Gates says we have been through one Cold War and do not want another. But it is not Moscow moving a military alliance right up to our borders or building bases and planting anti-missile systems in our front and back yards.
Why are we doing this? This country is not going to go to war with Russia over Estonia. With our Army "breaking" from two insurgencies, how would we fight? By bombing Moscow and St. Petersburg?
Just as we deluded ourselves into believing this war would be a "cakewalk," that democracy would break out across the Middle East, that we would be beloved in Baghdad, so America today has undertaken commitments, dating to the Cold War and since, we do not remotely have the resources or will to fulfill. We are living in a world of self-delusion.
Somewhere in this presidential campaign, someone has to bring us back to earth. The halcyon days of American Empire are over.
To find out more about Patrick Buchanan, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.
Putin Pushes Back
By Thomas L. Friedman New York Times, February 14, 2007
Foreign policy experts are still trying to parse Vladimir Putin's weekend blast against America, which he described as a brutish country that "has overstepped its national borders, in every area." But rather than asking what exactly motivated Mr. Putin to lash out at the U.S. in this way, the question we should be asking is: why do remarks like these play so well in Russia today? #2
I've just returned from Moscow and I can tell you what analysts there told me, what even Russian liberals reminded me of: NATO expansion. We need to stop kidding ourselves. After the end of the cold war and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in 1991, the Bush I and Clinton administrations decided to build a new security alliance – an expanded NATO – and told Russia it could not be a member.
So, Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic were invited to join NATO in 1997, and Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia followed in 2002. Lately, there has been talk of Ukraine and Georgia also joining.
I believe that one reason Mr. Putin, a former K.G.B. officer and cold warrior, was able to come to power after Mr. Yeltsin was partly due to the negative vibes of NATO expansion. We told Russia: Swallow your pride, it's a new world. We get to have spheres of influence and you don't – and ours will go right up to your front door.
But now that high oil and gas prices have made Russia powerful again – the gasman of Europe – Mr. Putin is shoving Russia's resurgent pride right back in our face. In effect, he is saying to America: "Oh, you talkin' to me? You thought you could tell me that the cold war was over and that NATO expansion was not directed at Russia – but we couldn't be members anyway. Did you really think we were going to believe that? Well, now I'm talkin' to you. Get out of my face."
Mr. Putin was only slightly more diplomatic in his Munich remarks, where he said: "The process of NATO expansion has nothing to do with modernization of the alliance. We have the right to ask, 'Against whom is this expansion directed?'" We all know the answer: it's directed against Russia. O.K., fine, we were ready to enrage Russia to expand NATO, but what have we gotten out of it? The Czech Navy?
For those of us who opposed NATO expansion, the point was simple: there is no major geopolitical issue, especially one like Iran, that we can resolve without Russia's help. So why not behave in a way that maximizes Russia's willingness to work with us and strengthens its democrats, rather than expanding NATO to countries that can't help us and are not threatened anymore by Russia, and whose democracies are better secured by joining the European Union?
I'm not here to defend an iron-fisted autocrat like Mr. Putin. But history is prologue. The fact is, we helped to create a mood in Russia hospitable to a conservative cold warrior like Mr. Putin by forcing NATO on a liberal democrat like Mr. Yeltsin. It was a bad decision and one that keeps on giving.
Just when we need to be getting Russia's help, we're getting its revenge.
Putin's Moment To Seize
By David Ignatius The Washington Post, February 14, 2007
Vladimir Putin made headlines last weekend when he blasted the Bush administration for its "almost uncontained hyper-use of force" that has created a world where "no one feels safe." If he had been a Democratic presidential candidate, it would have been a standard stump speech. But coming from a Russian president, his remarks had pundits ruminating about a new Cold War. #3
I was in the audience in Munich when Putin made his speech, and the tone seemed to me more one of resentment than belligerence. He was proud, prickly, defiant – a leader with all the Russian chips on his shoulder. You could hear his inner voice: We let you dismantle the Berlin Wall. We folded the Warsaw Pact. We dissolved the Soviet Union – all on your promises that you wouldn't take advantage of our weakness. And what did we get? Nothing! You surrounded us with NATO weapons.
Putin's comments may be jarring to Americans, but they express a bitterness that's widespread here. His generation of Russians grew up in a country that claimed the status of "superpower," and they don't like being taken for granted. Putin, a former KGB officer with a black belt in judo, has been pugnacious in standing up for his country's interests, and Russians seem to like that. In the latest opinion polls, his popularity is well above 70 percent.
I met with one of Putin's top aides yesterday in a building that once housed the headquarters of the Soviet Communist Party. "We want to work together with you," he explained. "But please open your eyes. We will never accept that the sole power in the world will be the U.S."
Russia is back. That's the real lesson I take from Putin's blunt comments. A country that was near collapse after the fall of Soviet communism has regained enough confidence and stability to take a verbal shot at its old rival. "We are emerging from nothing," the Putin aide told me. To explain the Putin phenomenon, the Kremlin's chief ideologue, Vladislav Surkov, recently compared him to Franklin Delano Roosevelt, another president who brought his country back from economic disaster and restored its pride. Like FDR, Putin is using "presidential power to the maximum degree for the sake of overcoming the crisis," Surkov said.
Visiting here for the first time since 1990, I am struck by how everything in Russia is different, and everything is the same. Driving in from the airport, you see the familiar monument marking the farthest German advance in World War II – a testament to the Red Army's fierce resistance to foreign invasion. And next to it is the Mega Mall with its huge Ikea showroom – a foreign invasion that, in the end, proved unstoppable.
In Red Square, the somber stones of Lenin's tomb are a reminder of Soviet power. But across the way, in what used to be the drab GUM department store, are glittering displays of the latest fashions from Vuitton and Dior.
What hasn't changed is Russia's neurotic relationship with the West. Russian friends tell me the country feels unloved and unappreciated – a political doormat that Western powers think they can walk on at will. That's the frustration that surfaced in Putin's speech in Munich.
By Russian standards, this is something of a golden age. Putin recently touted some of the country's achievements: Russian average incomes increased 10 percent in 2006 over the previous year; the economy grew by about 6.7 percent; inflation was in single digits for the first time in many years. Russia's currency reserves rose to $303 billion, the third-largest in the world, and its "stabilization fund" of energy profits was nearly $100 billion. All this in a nation that in 1998, on the eve of Putin's presidency, was essentially bankrupt.
The new Russia has a moment of opportunity. America, far from the "unipolar" superpower Putin describes, is weakened by the Iraq war and is badly in need of allies. If Putin is wise, he can play a pivotal role in resolving the Iranian nuclear crisis – and thereby restore some of Russia's lost diplomatic clout. Or he can keep complaining that nobody appreciates his country – and let his old rival struggle a while longer in the Iraq quagmire.
Was Putin's Munich manifesto an "invitation to dialogue," as one of his aides told me? Or was it a warning shot from a newly confident Russia that is rather enjoying America's troubles? If Putin wants to play a role in stabilizing the post-Iraq world, he is pushing on an open door. But does he have the vision and political will to seize the moment?
From Russia, Without Love
Re "Putin accuses U.S. of making world unsafe," Los Angeles Times, February 11, 2007
Tragically, Russian President Vladimir V. Putin's criticism of U.S. foreign policy is valid. The Bush doctrine of preemptive invasion is not only morally wrong, it undermines U.S. security interests. The rush to war in Iraq, in defiance of U.N. resolutions and while weapons inspectors were still permitted access, signaled a disregard for international law. The fact that the rationales for war — weapons of mass destruction and ties to Al Qaeda — were demonstrably untrue compounded the effect. The virtual adoption of analytical positivism by the Bush administration inevitably and rationally encourages all nations to seek nuclear parity or deterrence. To restore American honor and trust abroad, we must repudiate this provocative policy and punish those responsible by the only constitutional means available: impeachment. #4
JOHN WEINELL
Dana Point
• • •
It grieves me terribly to have to agree with Putin on almost everything he said about U.S. policy. It is almost criminal what this administration has done with respect to world affairs. Our standing in the world is at an all-time low because of irresponsible, go-it-alone actions. It is a pity that the reputation of this great country has to suffer because of an incompetent president who pushes ideology over diplomacy.
RANDELL HILL
La Verne
• • •
Had it been a member of Congress or a U.S. presidential candidate quoted as saying that "we are witnessing an almost uncontained hyper-use of military force in international relations," or "unilateral, illegitimate actions have not managed to resolve any problems, but made them worse," there would be no controversy at all.
HOWARD W. HAYS
Sierra Madre
• • •
I lived under Soviet occupation in postwar Berlin. When the infamous Berlin Wall was dismantled, thanks to President Reagan's tireless efforts, and the Western world believed that the Russian Federation and its ex-KGB leaders could be trusted as partners in a new political and economic alliance, those of us who still remembered the barbaric practices of the Soviet occupiers cautioned all who would listen to not let our guard down in our dealings with the Cold War enemy. Perhaps now that former KGB Lt. Col. Putin dropped his mask at the Munich security summit, the Western world will see him for what he truly is.
GORDON FROEDE
Los Angeles
• • •
Will Bush threaten to bomb Russia now? We will all pay the price in world opinion for our unbridled militarism. World War III is at hand, and it will be our doing.
Only one with a heart of stone
can fail to be moved by this video
Friends, I must admit that despite being myself
quite a hardy, tough, and experienced man, as I am
nevertheless
I could not hold back my bitter tears
when I was watching this
extremely heartbreaking video
Click on the picture to watch it yourself
No true Christian can ever watch this video
without tears in the eyes!
Now, you will have to realize
why we Russians love and esteem Stalin:
This is because
Stalin denied the Soviet children
the "freedom" to be homeless and marooned
He denied all of us the dubious "freedom"
to starve and perish in the street
as in America
IN THE SOVIET UNION
NOBODY HAD THE DUBIOUS "RIGHT"
EITHER TO BE HOMELESS, OR UNEMPLOYED
OR TO LIVE AND DIE IN THE STREET
HELPLESS AND ABANDONED
AS IN AMERICA
ALL OF US THE SOVIET PEOPLE
WERE DENIED SUCH WESTERN "HUMAN RIGHTS"
BY THE STALIN'S REGIME
In this regard I suggest that
you should have a look at the shrewd observations
by an American expat now living in Russia:
click HERE
IS THE WEST HELL?
NO, IT IS NOT HELL
THE WEST IS
TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE HADES
THE WEST IS
A REALM OF FEAR AND LOATHING
The West's Fundamental Slogan
has been this:
HOMO HOMINI LUPUS EST
Which means:
Man is a wolf to man
In contrast to the West's inhumane slogan
our Russian motto has always been this:
Человек
человеку
друг,
товарищ
и
брат
HOMO HOMINI AMICUS, SOCIUS ET FRATER EST
Which means:
Man is a Friend, Comrade and Brother to Man
This great Christian idea
has been a fundamental one for all of us
living both in modern Russia and in the Soviet Union
despite all the official communist anti-religious stance
because this great idea has been always based upon
the ingrained Russian sense of the Divine Justice
which moreover had happily conformed
to Stalin's own views on patriotism
Inasmuch as the former Soviet Union
used to serve formerly as a permanent open rebuke
to the Western inhumane godless way of life
so today's Russia continues to serve
as the same rebuke to the West
at the present time
And this is the only true reason
why our beloved great country Holy Russia
has been vilified, defamed, reviled and hated so much
by the West's ruling class
as well as by the mass media under their control
No wonder!
Freedom of Speech conquerred Freedom of Thought
Once a year, and even more often, the tragedy happens in America: the schooler buy weapon, goes to school and shoots at whom he meets. Why such things are accidental in Russia, China or Europe?
The Human Rights Disaster in the United States of America
An excerpt from the
REPORT
Each year, 30,000 people die in gun-related incidents in the USA.
There were 14,180 murders in 2008.
In the first ten months of 2009, 45 people were killed by police use of tasers, bringing the total for the decade to 389.
In 2008, 315 police officers in New York City were subject to internal supervision due to "unrestrained use of violence."
7.3 million Americans were under the authority of the correctional system, more than in any other country.
An estimated 60,000 prisoners were raped while in custody last year.
On democratic rights, the report notes the pervasive government spying on citizens, authorized under the 2001 Patriot Act, extensive surveillance of the Internet by the National Security Agency, and police harassment of anti-globalization demonstrators in Pittsburgh during 2008 G-20 summit. Pointing to the hypocrisy of US government "human rights" rhetoric, the authors observe,
"the same conduct in other countries would be called human rights violations, whereas in the United States it was called necessary crime control."
It does offer a few facts rarely discussed in the US media:
712 bodies were cremated at public expense in the city of Los Angeles last year, because the families were too poor to pay for a burial.
There were 5,657 workplace deaths recorded in 2007, the last year for which a tally is available, a rate of 17 deaths per day (not a single employer was criminally charged for any of these deaths).
Some 2,266 veterans died as a consequence of lack of health insurance in 2008, 14 times the military death toll in Afghanistan that year.
All this said, I do by no means wish, however,
that my readers could come to a wrong conclusion
that we Russians might have ever hated Americans
No, not at the least!
The following website will show you
WHICH AMERICA WE RUSSIANS LOVE
Click on the picture to have a look at
a huge collection of fascinating portraits of
the Americans in San Francisco, San Jose,
Carmel, Monterey, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz
and other places of the United States
THIS IS JUST THE AMERICA
WE RUSSIANS DO ALWAYS LOVE
It is worth being noticed here also that even in the height of the so-called Cold War, in the mid-1960s we used to consider America as a friendly country.
Why "the so-called"?
Because we Russian chidren had never been taught to regard the Americans as enemies. Hence we did never think about whatever "Cold War" at all.
Nor we Russians had ever had such moronism as the "Duck and Cover" idiotic drills like the American children had to have at the time.
On the contrary, we Russians never feared anything, which is why during the so-called Cold War in our cinemas we enjoyed watching good American movies that were perfectly dubbed into the Russian language, without any subtitles. I can recall how we Russian boys in the 1960s went to watch The Magnificent Seven film scores of times on end (sic!), over and over again, because the tickets in the USSR were incredibly cheap and the American movie was brilliant, most impressive and absolutely exciting.
I do remember by heart almost all of the dialogues from the famous movie The Magnificent Seven even to the present day, despite the fact that it is almost fifty years that have already lapsed since those blessed times of our youth. Of course we knew well that the famous Hollywood actor Yul Brynner was of the Russian descent, and we Russian boys were then very proud of the fact.
You can watch a short (3 min) trailer from the famous American movie
THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN
by clicking on the picture
FOR THE FAITH INDEPENDENT STATE AND THE NATIVE COUNTRY
Russian armored column is rushing to stop the genocide in South Ossetia
SAVED!
A South Ossetian military man holds a child as he looks at
an armored Russian column arrived to save them from Georgian assault
A PATH TO PEACE IN THE CAUCASUS
By Mikhail Gorbachev, 12 August 2008 The Washington Post
MOSCOW - The past week's events in South Ossetia are bound to shock and pain anyone. Already, thousands of people have died, tens of thousands have been turned into refugees, and towns and villages lie in ruins. Nothing can justify this loss of life and destruction. It is a warning to all.
The roots of this tragedy lie in the decision of Georgia's separatist leaders in 1991 to abolish South Ossetian autonomy. This turned out to be a time bomb for Georgia's territorial integrity. Each time successive Georgian leaders tried to impose their will by force – both in South Ossetia and in Abkhazia, where the issues of autonomy are similar – it only made the situation worse. New wounds aggravated old injuries.
Nevertheless, it was still possible to find a political solution. For some time, relative calm was maintained in South Ossetia. The peacekeeping force composed of Russians, Georgians and Ossetians fulfilled its mission, and ordinary Ossetians and Georgians, who live close to each other, found at least some common ground.
Through all these years, Russia has continued to recognize Georgia's territorial integrity. Clearly, the only way to solve the South Ossetian problem on that basis is through peaceful means. Indeed, in a civilized world, there is no other way.
The Georgian leadership flouted this key principle.
What happened on the night of 7th August 2008 is beyond comprehension. The Georgian military attacked the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinval with multiple rocket launchers designed to devastate large areas. Russia had to respond. To accuse it of aggression against "small, defenseless Georgia" is not just hypocritical but shows a lack of humanity.
Mounting a military assault against innocents was a reckless decision whose tragic consequences, for thousands of people of different nationalities, are now clear. The Georgian leadership could do this only with the perceived support and encouragement of a much more powerful force. Georgian armed forces were trained by hundreds of U.S. instructors, and its sophisticated military equipment was bought in a number of countries. This, coupled with the promise of NATO membership, emboldened Georgian leaders into thinking that they could get away with a "blitzkrieg" in South Ossetia.
In other words, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili was expecting unconditional support from the West, and the West had given him reason to think he would have it. Now that the Georgian military assault has been routed, both the Georgian government and its supporters should rethink their position.
Hostilities must cease as soon as possible, and urgent steps must be taken to help the victims – the humanitarian catastrophe, regretfully, received very little coverage in Western media this weekend - and to rebuild the devastated towns and villages. It is equally important to start thinking about ways to solve the underlying problem, which is among the most painful and challenging issues in the Caucasus – a region that should be approached with the greatest care.
When the problems of South Ossetia and Abkhazia first flared up, I proposed that they be settled through a federation that would grant broad autonomy to the two republics. This idea was dismissed, particularly by the Georgians. Attitudes gradually shifted, but after last week, it will be much more difficult to strike a deal even on such a basis.
Old grievances are a heavy burden. Healing is a long process that requires patience and dialogue, with non-use of force an indispensable precondition. It took decades to bring to an end similar conflicts in Europe and elsewhere, and other long-standing issues are still smoldering. In addition to patience, this situation requires wisdom.
Small nations of the Caucasus do have a history of living together. It has been demonstrated that a lasting peace is possible, that tolerance and cooperation can create conditions for normal life and development. Nothing is more important than that.
The region's political leaders need to realize this. Instead of flexing military muscle, they should devote their efforts to building the groundwork for durable peace.
Over the past few days, some Western nations have taken positions, particularly in the U.N. Security Council, that have been far from balanced. As a result, the Security Council was not able to act effectively from the very start of this conflict. By declaring the Caucasus, a region that is thousands of miles from the American continent, a sphere of its "national interest," the United States made a serious blunder. Of course, peace in the Caucasus is in everyone's interest. But it is simply common sense to recognize that Russia is rooted there by common geography and centuries of history. Russia is not seeking territorial expansion, but it has legitimate interests in this region.
The international community's long-term aim could be to create a sub-regional system of security and cooperation that would make any provocation, and the very possibility of crises such as this one, impossible. Building this type of system would be challenging and could only be accomplished with the cooperation of the region's countries themselves. Nations outside the region could perhaps help, too – but only if they take a fair and objective stance. A lesson from recent events is that geopolitical games are dangerous anywhere, not just in the Caucasus.
The writer was the last president of the Soviet Union. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1990 and is president of the Gorbachev Foundation, a Moscow think tank.
RUSSIAN BEAR WILL GROWL THEN BITE DEADLY – IF PROVOKED
Well what did else the West expect? Any self-respecting bear will growl first as a sign to ward of attackers, then pounce and maul them if provoked sufficiently.
Remember the dire fate of Napoleon, Hitler, and all the other bloody murderous scum who dared to insult Holy Russia.
The Russian Bear is confident and proud and looking more for respect in international affairs rather than a fight. But we Russians are always ready to make mincemeat of any aggressor.
With 4,237 strategic Russian warheads, approximately 2,000-3,000 operational tactical warheads, and approximately 8,000-10,000 stockpiled strategic and tactical warheads Holy Russia is being remarkably well equipped to defend herself and her allies.
RUSSIA IS A SUPERPOWER – WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!
Some say we are five minutes to a new Cold War
This is a false assertion
In fact, with the NATO Navy entering the Black Sea
THE WORLD IS ONE MINUTE TO A THERMO-NUCLEAR WAR
ARE YOU READY FOR NUCLEAR WAR?
The Mindlessness is Total
By Paul Craig Roberts, August 19 2008
Nothing real issues from the American press, which is about demonizing Russia and Iran, about the vice presidential choices as if it matters, about whether Obama being on vacation let McCain score too many points.
The mindlessness of the news reflects the mindlessness of the government, for which it is a spokesperson.
The American media do not serve American democracy or American interests. They serve the few people who exercise power.
When the Soviet Union collapsed, the US and Israel made a run at controlling Russia and the former constituent parts of its empire. For awhile the US and Israel succeeded, but Putin put a stop to it.
Recognizing that the US had no intention of keeping any of the agreements it had made with Gorbachev, Putin directed the Russian military budget to upgrading the Russian nuclear deterrent. Consequently, the Russian army and air force lack the smart weapons and electronics of the US military.
When the Russian army went into Georgia to rescue the Russians in South Ossetia from the destruction being inflicted upon them by the American puppet Saakashvili, the Russians made it clear that if they were opposed by American troops with smart weapons, they would deal with the threat with tactical nuclear weapons.
The Americans were the first to announce preemptive nuclear attack as their permissible war doctrine. Now the Russians have announced the tactical use of nuclear weapons as their response to American smart weapons.
It is obvious that American foreign policy, with its goal of ringing Russia with US military bases, is leading directly to nuclear war. Every American needs to realize this fact. The US government’s insane hegemonic foreign policy is a direct threat to life on the planet.
Russia has made no threats against America. The post-Soviet Russian government has sought to cooperate with the US and Europe. Russia has made it clear over and over that it is prepared to obey international law and treaties. It is the Americans who have thrown international law and treaties into the trash can, not the Russians.
In order to keep the billions of dollars in profits flowing to its contributors in the US military-security complex, the Bush Regime has rekindled the cold war. As American living standards decline and the prospects for university graduates deteriorate, "our" leaders in Washington commit us to a hundred years of war.
If you desire to be poor, oppressed, and eventually vaporized in a nuclear war, vote Republican.
This is the final part of an article by P. C. Roberts.
Warning
This video contains images depicting the reality and horror
of war/violence and should only be viewed by a mature audience
with their nerves of steel
Massacre Caught on Tape: US Military Confirms Authenticity of Their Own Chilling Video Showing Killing of Journalists
One of the men on the ground, believed to be Chmagh, is seen wounded and trying to crawl to safety. One of the helicopter crew is heard wishing for the man to reach for a gun, even though there is none visible nearby, so he has the pretext for opening fire: "All you gotta do is pick up a weapon." A van draws up next to the wounded man and Iraqis climb out. They are unarmed and start to carry the victim to the vehicle in what would appear to be an attempt to get him to hospital. One of the helicopters opens fire with armour-piercing shells. "Look at that. Right through the windshield," says one of the crew. Another responds with a laugh.
Sitting behind the windscreen were two children who were wounded.
† CURTAIN
† 
#1
#1
