Showing posts with label political brinkmanship. Show all posts
Showing posts with label political brinkmanship. Show all posts

Friday, September 23, 2016

Duterte Lashes at EU; As Expected, S&P Threatens Credit Downgrades!

The Philippine government appears to be been digging itself into a deeper hole with her persistent recalcitrant foreign policy anchored on profane laced ad hominem and blackmail politics

It’s not just the US government now. The other day, EU was shown the “middle finger” (Washington Post September 21) and accused of being “hypocritical” (BBC September 21)!

Perhaps, the EU may be reacting to the summary execution of the daughter of a British baron, who was accused of “drug pushing” to celebrities (The Guardian September 19)

Ironically, even after radiating signs of backpedaling on the demand for US troops to withdraw where the leadership “acknowledged that his country needed American troops in the South China Sea”, the Philippine president “assailed the US over criticism on the war on drugs”. (Bloomberg September 21, 2016)

War on drugs has turned into a vicious war of words with foreign political peers.

Now I’d like to remind you of the potential ramifications of the swiftly unfolding saga of foreign policy gaffes by the administration. (September 13)

If the Philippine government makes real of the threat to undermine the interests of the shadow but powerful and highly influential political forces behind Washington—the neo-conservative and military industrial complex—then potential responses or repercussions may have already been set in motion. To repeat:

 -This would eventually prompt US rating agencies credit downgrades—especially if US military interests are compromised.

-This would reduce investment and portfolio flows from the US and allied nations.

-Credit flows will likely ebb too, thereby putting pressure on access to international credit markets and thereby tightening financing conditions. This will be baneful to a leftist government with a penchant for political spending profligacy: social spending (welfare state), bureaucracy, infrastructure, and most importantly, the military institution.

 The reduced access to credit and fund flows will likely accelerate on the unraveling of the mounting economic and financial imbalances inherited by this government from the previous two regimes.

-The Philippine government will be alone to deal with territorial disputes. (This should be a good thing if only the Philippines government’s response would be to increase trade rather than through brinkmanship politics)

-Finally, it would be a lot cheaper or cost effective for the US government to engage in covert operations to influence the domestic political environment than to pullout from the country. The US government may surreptitiously work to offset whatever leverage the administration has been building to countermand the US government’s influences in the country. The US government has been no stranger to the financing, influencing and orchestrating destabilization to regimes it perceives as hostile to its interests. Operation Gladio should be a stark reminder.

As for credit downgrades, the latest from the Nikkei Asian Review (September 22) [bold mine]

President Rodrigo Duterte blasted credit-rating agencies and international organizations on Thursdayafter Standard & Poor's warned of a downgrade if the Philippines' recent economic gains are reversed.

In an invective-laden speech, Duterte lashed out at his critics, including a Philippine senator, the U.S., the European Union and the United Nations for criticizing his war against drugs which has killed more than 3,000 suspected drug users and peddlers since Duterte took office on June 30.

"Do not keep on complaining about my mouth, because my mouth is not the problem. It cannot bring down a country, but it can erase a generation of right-thinking Filipinos," Duterte said.

Duterte's tongue-lashing expanded to credit-ratings agencies a day after S&P said the rise in extrajudicial killings could undermine the country's credit scores, due to "rising uncertainties surrounding the stability, predictability, and accountability of its new government."

The Philippines earned its first investment-grade credit score in 2013 as a result of governance and fiscal reforms.

First of all, credit downgrades are coming.

Second, the US government has now used the S&P to wag the proverbial geopolitical “stick” to contain the Philippines government. As such, current events bolsters or reinforces my case that the past Philippine credit upgrades had hardly been about “governance and fiscal reforms”, but about the prominence of US military interests here (Phisix: BSP’s Tetangco Catches Taper Talk Fever July 29, 2013)

Third, Philippine government’s balance sheet should be expected to massively deteriorate given the intensified demands of an expansionary government due to the war on drugs. The war on drugs, of course, represents nothing more than camouflage for an “Ochlocratic dictatorship” or a populist Police State (Welcome to the Police State August 18)

Fourth, “unpredictable” eh, according to the mainstream? Heck, leftist governments operate like clockwork!

International access to credit will narrow as the budget deficits are destined to bulge! This leaves higher taxes, ballooning local debt and the BSP (monetization of government spending or helicopters) as the key sources of financing!

What happens to the race to build supply, once interest rates start moving higher?! What happens to the US dollar short exposures by the listed and non-listed firms and by the government?

Oh, by the way, the USD peso closed the week at 47.99 to match the 47.995 January 26 2016 high!

C-H-A-N-G-E is indeed coming!

USD Php 50 here we come! (That's just the first target)

Thursday, April 14, 2016

Geopolitical Risk Theater: Russian Jets Buzzed Over a US Destroyer!

Will a global arms race, inspired by a cauldron of ideology based on economic military keynesianism and the rise of nationalism, financed by inflationism, lead to a detente or a world at war? 

Perhaps a clue to the answer may be seen from the other day's close encounter between US and Russian forces at the Baltic Sea.

Apparently, Russians wanted to test the defenses of the US navy. So Russians jets buzzed over a US destroyer, not once but several times in a "simulated attack" formation.

Two Russian warplanes with no visible weaponry flew simulated attack passes near a U.S. guided missile destroyer in the Baltic Sea on Tuesday, a U.S. official said, describing it as one of the most aggressive interactions in recent memory.

The repeated flights by the Sukhoi SU-24 warplanes, which also flew near the ship a day earlier, were so close they created wake in the water, with 11 passes, the official said.

A Russian KA-27 Helix helicopter also made seven passes around the USS Donald Cook, taking pictures. The nearest Russian territory was about 70 nautical miles away in its enclave of Kaliningrad, which sits between Lithuania and Poland. "They tried to raise them (the Russian aircraft) on the radio but they did not answer," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity, adding the U.S. ship was in international waters.

The incident came as NATO plans its biggest build-up in eastern Europe since the Cold War to counter what the alliance, and in particular the Baltic states and Poland, consider to be a more aggressive Russia.

The three Baltic states, which joined both NATO and the European Union in 2004, have asked NATO for a permanent presence of battalion-sized deployments of allied troops in each of their territories. A NATO battalion typically consists of 300 to 800 troops.

Moscow denies any intention to attack the Baltic states.
Videos of the incident seen from the links here and here.


Monday, March 23, 2015

Geopolitical Risk Theater Links: Russia Threatens Denmark with Nukes, Putin Signs Pact with Georgia Breakaway Group, US-China Square off over Missiles at South Korea

Underneath those record setting stocks and frantic central bank rescues have been risks developing in the sphere of geopolitics

Below are excerpts of some news articles and opinion columns and their corresponding links.

1) Russia threatens to aim nuclear missiles at Denmark ships if it joins NATO shield (Reuters, March 22,2015)
Russia threatened to aim nuclear missiles at Danish warships if Denmark joins NATO's missile defense system, in comments Copenhagen called unacceptable and NATO said would not contribute to peace.

Denmark said in August it would contribute radar capacity on some of its warships to the missile shield, which the Western alliance says is designed to protect members from missile launches from countries like Iran.

Moscow opposes the system, arguing that it could reduce the effectiveness of its own nuclear arsenal, leading to a new Cold War-style arms race.
War drums beat louder.

2) Putin Signs Pact With Breakaway Georgian Region (Radio Free Europe, March 18, 2015)
Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed a pact with a Moscow-backed breakaway region of Georgia, despite condemnation by Tbilisi and the West.

Putin and the de facto leader of South Ossetia, Leonid Tibilov, signed the "alliance and integration treaty" in the Kremlin on March 18. 

Part of the treaty gives Russia responsibility for ensuring the defense and security of South Ossetia, including guarding its borders.

Security and mliitary forces currently tasked with defending the region are to be incorporated into Russia's armed forces or Russia security bodies.
More brinkmanship geopolitics

3) U.S. Nuclear Warfighting Plan Could Wipe Out the Human Race (Executive Intelligence Review March 13, 2015)
The reality is that the United States is not only creating the “appearance” of preparing to fight and win a nuclear war, but it actually is preparing to fight and win a nuclear war, although the idea that the United States can do that against another nuclear power is a dangerous delusion. Gen. Maj. Andrei Burbin, chief of the Central Command Post of Russia’s Strategic Missile Forces (SMF), made this clear in an unusual March 1 on-air briefing on Russia’s RSN Radio. The message he delivered was that “utopian” military schemes for “limited nuclear war” or a “counterforce” destruction of Russia’s nuclear weapons are illusory: They will fail, and the result will be retaliation against the U.S. by Russia using the missiles of the SMF. (See “Hear These Russian Warnings: They Might Save Your Life,” EIR, March 6, 2015.)…

Indeed, the delusion that the U.S. could wage and win nuclear war against Russia could lead to the end of civilization itself.
Yikes!

4) Russia Sends Nuclear-Capable Bombers to Crimea (Daily Signal March 20, 2015)
As NATO and Russia simultaneously launch military exercises stretching from Eastern Europe into the Arctic, Russian defense officials said this week that supersonic bombers capable of carrying nuclear weapons will be deployed to Crimea.

According to the Russian news agency TASS, Tupolev TU-22M3 strategic bombers will be positioned in the former Ukrainian territory as part of a snap military exercise involving Russia’s Navy’s Northern Fleet, which has been put on full alert, and other ground and air units across Russia. The Russian military drills comprise 40,000 troops, more than 41 warships, 15 submarines and 110 aircraft and helicopters, according to RIA news agency.

The TU-22M3 is capable of carrying the Kh-22 anti-ship missile, which was designed by the Soviet Union to target U.S. warships and is capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear warheads.

Russia’s military exercises began Monday and are scheduled to last until Saturday. The stated intent of the mobilization, according to Russian defense officials, is to evaluate Russia’s northern defenses and the capabilities of its Northern Fleet.
5) Russia Orders Surprise Test of Central Nuclear Base (Newsweek March 4, 2015)
The Russian armed forces’ strategic missile command (RVSN) have ordered a snap inspection of the state of the nuclear arsenal in one of the country’s central military bases near the city of Yoshkar-Ola.

The surprise test, announced today by RVSN, will assess the condition of the intercontinental ballistic and nuclear missile units, as well as test the readiness of the nuclear facilities near Yoshkar-Ola in hypothetical emergency situations.

“During the tests, specific attention will be paid to matters of the command’s preparedness to eliminate hazards in the event of an accident related to the nuclear weapons and also in the instance and it will test the emergency squad of the command,” Colonel Igor Yegorov, the RVSN spokesman, told press.
6) ‘Tanks? No thanks!’: Czechs unhappy about US military convoy crossing country (RT.com March 22)
Czech anti-war activists have launched the ‘Tanks? No thanks!’ campaign to protest the procession of US Army hardware through the Eastern European country. They say it has been turned into a “provocative victory parade” near the Russian border.

The American military vehicles, which took part in NATO drills in Poland, Lithuania and Estonia, plan to cross the territory of the Czech Republic between March 29 and April 1 on their way to a base in the German city of Vilseck.

The exercise, entitled the ‘Dragoon Ride,’ will involve over a hundred Stryker vehicles, which the US is expected to station in Europe, and will see the convoy stop in a new city every night. Last week, it was authorized by the Czech government, without any debate in the parliament, Pressenza news agency reported.

The US procession has been labeled “an unnecessary and dangerously provocative military maneuvers, which only increase international tension” on the ‘Tanks? No thanks!’ page on Facebook.
7) Is Russia building a new supersonic aircraft? (news.com.au March 21)

image

ACCORDING to a Kremlin propaganda media outlet, Russia plans to be able to deploy its army anywhere in the world within seven hours. It’s a future that involves a fleet of huge heavy transport aircraft that will be capable of moving around 400 Armata tanks, with ammunition anywhere in the world.

According to the Military-Industrial Commission in Moscow, a new aircraft, named the PAK TA, will be capable of flying supersonic speeds (up to 1235km/h), can carry up to 200 tonnes and have a range of at least 7,000 kilometres. Or roughly the distance between Sydney and Hong Kong.

Russia is supposedly hopeful to build 80 of the new PAK TA cargo aircraft by 2024.
Woe to the average Russians whose resources will be rechanneled for the production of unproductive and destructive goods or instruments.
 
8) Russia's Vladimir Putin brandishes the nuclear option (CBC.ca March 17)
The Kremlin has hardly been secretive about its overall strategy. Two years ago it unveiled a new military doctrine of what it called asymmetrical warfare, in effect high-tech guerrilla fighting alongside unrelenting technological and propaganda offensives against smaller, less militarily able neighbours.

That so many in eastern Ukraine see themselves as victims of Kyiv and not of Moscow is testimony to the success of the propaganda offensive.

Along with the doctrine came a vast increase in Russia's military budget.

According to the World Bank, it stood at over four per cent of Russia's gross domestic product in 2014 and was due to climb by almost 25 per cent in 2015.

When it comes to its military, Russia far outspends its European neighbours and now even spends more than the U.S., at least when measured as a percentage of its GDP.

'No more illusions'

Putin has been equally open about his regime's goals.

After annexing Crimea in 2014, he delivered a triumphant speech saying the Kremlin reserved the right to intervene to protect and defend Russians wherever they lived.

Within weeks Russian-speaking separatists in eastern Ukraine had begun a military offensive, setting up Soviet-style local regimes with Soviet names — the Donetsk People's Republic and the Lugansk People's Republic.

In the following months, according to Western intelligence, these rebels were heavily armed by Russia, which has also provided hundreds, if not thousands of troops.

The Putin doctrine simply thumbed its nose at two international agreements, the Helsinki accords of 1974 signed by Russia's predecessor state, the USSR, and the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, signed by Russia.

The first guaranteed the inviolability of all borders in Europe and the second specifically guaranteed Ukraine's borders and independence in return for handing over to Russia 1,900 Soviet-era nuclear weapons on Ukrainian soil.

Thanks in part to these Ukrainian weapons, Russia now has the largest nuclear stockpile in the world, 8,400 warheads to the 7,500 controlled by the U.S.
While Putin unleashes psychological warfare, the Russian economy will suffer.

9) U.S. Squares Off With China Over North Korea Missile Defense (Bloomberg, March 22)
The U.S. and China are squaring off over deployment of an anti-missile system in South Korea, the latest source of tension between the world’s two biggest economies as they vie for influence in Asia.

The U.S. is considering placing a Thaad ballistic missile defense system in South Korea to counter improved North Korean weapon technology. A group of lawmakers from the ruling Saenuri party has also begun lobbying for South Korea to purchase the Lockheed Martin Corp. missile system directly. China fears the U.S. could use Thaad to target its missiles and has called on South Korea to reject deployment.

“How can we fight with a knife when North Korea is brandishing a gun?” Won Yoo Chul, a lawmaker who heads the ruling party’s policy-setting committee, said in a March 20 interview. “North Korea’s nuclear and missile threat is advancing by the day and China’s response over Thaad is excessive.”

The Thaad issue has left South Korean President Park Geun Hye caught between the U.S, which maintains more than 28,000 troops in the country to defend against North Korea, and China, its biggest trading partner and ally in efforts to resolve historical and territorial disputes with Japan. Mounting evidence that the Kim Jong Un regime has developed the ability to launch nuclear-tipped missiles is adding urgency to the debate.
More encirclement strategy by the US government that will provoke a response in China.

10) Indonesia's president says China has no legal claim to South China Sea: newspaper (Reuters, March 22)
Indonesian President Joko Widodo says China's claims to the majority of the South China Sea have "no legal foundation in international law," Japan's Yomiuri newspaper reported.

The comments, in an interview published on Sunday ahead of visits to Japan and China this week, were the first time Widodo, who took office in October, has taken a position on the South China Sea dispute.
10) China Dominates the Scramble for the South China Sea (National Interest.org March 19)
Far from revisiting its assertive posturing in adjacent waters, China is seemingly determined to consolidate its position in the South China Sea at the expense of its smaller neighbors. The latest satellite imagery, released by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, indicate extensive Chinese construction activities in highly contested areas, particularly the Spratly Islands, which have been actively claimed by Vietnam, Malaysia, China, Taiwan, and the Philippines.

Though Vietnam has occupied the greatest number of contested features in the Spratlys, China is the most capable, ambitious (and geographically distant) claimant in the area. Given the magnitude of the power asymmetry between Beijing and its Southeast Asian neighbors, China has the wherewithal to unilaterally dictate the tempo and trajectory of maritime disputes in the South China Sea. Despite being a relative late-comer, China has rapidly augmented its position, artificially transforming highly strategic features such as the Fiery Cross Reef, which has been enlarged to eleven times its original size.

The reef is a formidable military garrison, with up to two hundred Chinese troops stationed there. It is expected to host its own airstrip in the near future, a crucial prelude to what could become a de facto Chinese Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the South China Sea. This would complement China’s ADIZ in the East China Sea, paving the way for China to dominate the skies above the entire first chain of islands in the western Pacific.
Beating the drums of nationalism to divert the public’s attention from deepening economic troubles?

11) U.S. Navy Urges Southeast Asian Patrols of South China Sea (Bloomberg, March 18)
The commander of the U.S. Navy Seventh Fleet called on Southeast Asian nations to form a combined maritime force to patrol areas of the South China Sea where territorial tensions flare with China.

Countries could streamline cooperation on maritime security while respecting sovereignty and coastal space, as in the case of counter-piracy efforts in the Gulf of Aden, Vice Admiral Robert Thomas said Tuesday at the Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace Exhibition in Malaysia.

The U.S. has reassured allies in the region it will back them against China’s assertions to about four-fifths of the sea. China has ratcheted up pressure on some Association of Southeast Asian Nations members, and has accelerated reclamation work on reefs in the waters criss-crossed by claims from Vietnam, Taiwan, Brunei, the Philippines and Malaysia.
More business for the US military industrial complex at the expense of ASEAN's economies.

12) China's Military Can Beat The US In South China Sea And Diaoyu/Senkaku Island Conflicts: Poll (International Business Times, March 13)
Public confidence in China's military is higher than ever. According to a public opinion poll, an overwhelming majority of Chinese citizens think the People’s Liberation Army is capable of facing and beating the United States if it comes to that over various disputed islands and maritime territories.

According to a study by the Perth USAsia Center, a foreign policy think tank that focuses on the Indo-Pacific region, over 87 percent of those surveyed agreed that China’s military was already equipped to “retake” the Diaoyu Islands, a cluster of resource-rich islands in the East China Sea, known as the Senkaku to the area's other claimants, the Japanese. Regarding potential military action in the South China Sea, where several Southeast Asian countries like Vietnam, the Philippines and Brunei all dispute China’s territorial and maritime claims, the Chinese public still echo a sense of confidence, with 86 percent saying the PLA is capable of taking the area.
Incredible delusions. If there should be a war, then this will mean the end human civilization as we know of.

13) Islamic State Rises in Libya (FreeBeacon, March 20)
The Islamic State terrorist group is expanding its operations in Libya with high-profile attacks following the recent beheadings of 21 Christians, according to a State Department security report.

In Libya, Islamic State (IS), also known as ISIS or ISIL, formed out of existing al Qaeda-affiliated and Islamist extremist groups in early 2015. It is said to number between 1,000 and 3,000 fighters and has been exploiting the conflict between two Libyan groups fighting for control of the oil-rich North African state, Libya Dawn and Operation Dignity.

The Islamist and pro-al Qaeda Libya Dawn and the anti-Islamist Operation Dignity, headed by Lt Gen. Khalifa Haftar, have created rival parliaments and military forces and are said to receive foreign government support.
What happened to the supposed role by the US as 'policeman' of the world? Or has the ISIS--not only been a Frankenstein (a monster created by the US government)--but has really been an ally of the US

The more the global economy sinks, the greater the risk of an outbreak of societal upheaval via revolutions or war. Inflationism will entrench on such prospects.


Saturday, December 06, 2014

Ron Paul: H.Res. 758: Reckless Congress Declares War on Russia

Oh no. The US House of Representatives just paved way for a square off with Russia’s Putin.

Ron Paul warns (Ron Paul Institute) [bold mine]
Today the US House passed what I consider to be one of the worst pieces of legislation ever. H. Res. 758 was billed as a resolution “strongly condemning the actions of the Russian Federation, under President Vladimir Putin, which has carried out a policy of aggression against neighboring countries aimed at political and economic domination.”

In fact, the bill was 16 pages of war propaganda that should have made even neocons blush, if they were capable of such a thing.

These are the kinds of resolutions I have always watched closely in Congress, as what are billed as “harmless” statements of opinion often lead to sanctions and war. I remember in 1998 arguing strongly against the Iraq Liberation Act because, as I said at the time, I knew it would lead to war. I did not oppose the Act because I was an admirer of Saddam Hussein – just as now I am not an admirer of Putin or any foreign political leader – but rather because I knew then that another war against Iraq would not solve the problems and would probably make things worse. We all know what happened next.

That is why I can hardly believe they are getting away with it again, and this time with even higher stakes: provoking a war with Russia that could result in total destruction!

If anyone thinks I am exaggerating about how bad this resolution really is, let me just offer a few examples from the legislation itself:

The resolution (paragraph 3) accuses Russia of an invasion of Ukraine and condemns Russia’s violation of Ukrainian sovereignty. The statement is offered without any proof of such a thing. Surely with our sophisticated satellites that can read a license plate from space we should have video and pictures of this Russian invasion. None have been offered. As to Russia’s violation of Ukrainian sovereignty, why isn’t it a violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty for the US to participate in the overthrow of that country’s elected government as it did in February? We have all heard the tapes of State Department officials plotting with the US Ambassador in Ukraine to overthrow the government. We heard US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland bragging that the US spent $5 billion on regime change in Ukraine. Why is that OK?

The resolution (paragraph 11) accuses the people in east Ukraine of holding “fraudulent and illegal elections” in November. Why is it that every time elections do not produce the results desired by the US government they are called “illegal” and “fraudulent”? Aren’t the people of eastern Ukraine allowed self-determination? Isn’t that a basic human right?

The resolution (paragraph 13) demands a withdrawal of Russia forces from Ukraine even though the US government has provided no evidence the Russian army was ever in Ukraine. This paragraph also urges the government in Kiev to resume military operations against the eastern regions seeking independence.

The resolution (paragraph 14) states with certainty that the Malaysia Airlines flight 17 that crashed in Ukraine was brought down by a missile “fired by Russian-backed separatist forces in eastern Ukraine.” This is simply incorrect, as the final report on the investigation of this tragedy will not even be released until next year and the preliminary report did not state that a missile brought down the plane. Neither did the preliminary report – conducted with the participation of all countries involved – assign blame to any side. 

Paragraph 16 of the resolution condemns Russia for selling arms to the Assad government in Syria. It does not mention, of course, that those weapons are going to fight ISIS – which we claim is the enemy -- while the US weapons supplied to the rebels in Syria have actually found their way into the hands of ISIS!

Paragraph 17 of the resolution condemns Russia for what the US claims are economic sanctions (“coercive economic measures”) against Ukraine. This even though the US has repeatedly hit Russia with economic sanctions and is considering even more! 

The resolution (paragraph 22) states that Russia invaded the Republic of Georgia in 2008. This is simply untrue. Even the European Union – no friend of Russia – concluded in its investigation of the events in 2008 that it was Georgia that “started an unjustified war” against Russia not the other way around! How does Congress get away with such blatant falsehoods? Do Members not even bother to read these resolutions before voting?

In paragraph 34 the resolution begins to even become comical, condemning the Russians for what it claims are attacks on computer networks of the United States and “illicitly acquiring information” about the US government. In the aftermath of the Snowden revelations about the level of US spying on the rest of the world, how can the US claim the moral authority to condemn such actions in others?

Chillingly, the resolution singles out Russian state-funded media outlets for attack, claiming that they “distort public opinion.” The US government, of course, spends billions of dollars worldwide to finance and sponsor media outlets including Voice of America and RFE/RL, as well as to subsidize “independent” media in countless counties overseas. How long before alternative information sources like RT are banned in the United States? This legislation brings us closer to that unhappy day when the government decides the kind of programming we can and cannot consume – and calls such a violation “freedom.”

The resolution gives the green light (paragraph 45) to Ukrainian President Poroshenko to re-start his military assault on the independence-seeking eastern provinces, urging the “disarming of separatist and paramilitary forces in eastern Ukraine.” Such a move will mean many more thousands of dead civilians.

To that end, the resolution directly involves the US government in the conflict by calling on the US president to “provide the government of Ukraine with lethal and non-lethal defense articles, services, and training required to effectively defend its territory and sovereignty.” This means US weapons in the hands of US-trained military forces engaged in a hot war on the border with Russia. Does that sound at all like a good idea?

There are too many more ridiculous and horrific statements in this legislation to completely discuss. Probably the single most troubling part of this resolution, however, is the statement that “military intervention” by the Russian Federation in Ukraine “poses a threat to international peace and security.” Such terminology is not an accident: this phrase is the poison pill planted in this legislation from which future, more aggressive resolutions will follow. After all, if we accept that Russia is posing a “threat” to international peace how can such a thing be ignored? These are the slippery slopes that lead to war. 

This dangerous legislation passed today, December 4, with only ten (!) votes against! Only ten legislators are concerned over the use of blatant propaganda and falsehoods to push such reckless saber-rattling toward Russia.

Here are the Members who voted “NO” on this legislation. If you do not see your own Representative on this list call and ask why they are voting to bring us closer to war with Russia! If you do see your Representative on the below list, call and thank him or her for standing up to the warmongers.  

Voting “NO” on H. Res. 758:
1) Justin Amash (R-MI)
2) John Duncan (R-TN)
3) Alan Grayson, (D-FL)
4) Alcee Hastings (D-FL)
5) Walter Jones (R-NC)
6) Thomas Massie (R-KY)
7) Jim McDermott (D-WA)
8 George Miller (D-CA)
9) Beto O’Rourke (D-TX)
10 Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA)
As on old saw goes, in war truth is the first casualty

What does the US government expect of Russia's Putin?  To shudder at the thought of US interventions in Ukraine? Have they ever considered escalation? What will be the response of the Russian government? Hasn't Russia been challenging US-NATO forces lately? Brinkmanship politics may just lead us to THE black swan event.


Saturday, November 15, 2014

Geopolitical Risk Theater Links: Obama’s Commitment to Asia, ISIS’s gold standard, Syrian Hero Boy a Fake, and more…


1 A submarine intrusion on Swedish waters has been validated, claims the Swedish government. Mystery mini-sub vindicates Swedish navy Financial Times Blog, November 14, 2014. Yet could the sighting have been instead the Nessie (Loch Ness Monster) gone astray? (pun intended)

2 Possibly stunned by the unfortunate encounter in the Black Sea, the US parades modern hardware : US Navy deploys laser weapon to Persian Gulf for first-ever combat mission RT.com November 14, 2014.

​Washington's allies in the Asia Pacific can transform the region into a better place if threats like ISIS, Ebola, and "aggressive Russia" are contained – and this can be done with America's leadership, US President Barack Obama told Australian students.
How valid is the POTUS commitment, when the US government has been fighting multiple wars around the world simultaneously?

4 More of Russia’s military caper; NATO Jets Intercept Russia Military Plane Over Baltics Bloomberg.com November 14, 2014


6 It’s ok for the US and allies to intervene in Ukraine politics but the same does not hold true for Putin: G20: David Cameron warns Russia of more Ukraine sanctions BBC.com November 15, 2014

7 Why the absence of the downing of MH17 in western media? Has it been because evidence have been turning against previous claims? : Russia claims this satellite image shows moment flight MH17 was shot down by fighter jet Mirror.co.uk November 14, 2014

8 More Big stick strategy by the Chinese government? :China's New Submarine-Hunting Ship Shows How Beijing Is Countering The US Pivot To The Pacific Business Insider November 13, 2014


...or has this been part of the CIA plot?

10 conflicting reports. Has the ISIS been in control or have they been losing, which to believe? : US Airstrikes Not Slowing ISIS Campaign in Iraq: Jane’s Antiwar.com November 15, 2014 or Isis: the Kurds strike back - Iraqi army retakes control of oil refinery town as Kurds stand firm against overstretched Islamic State Independent.co.uk November 15, 2014

11 ISIS gains new ally: AP sources: IS, al-Qaida reach accord in Syria November 14, 2014

12 French government in a quandary; to deliver or not to deliver on military hardware to Russia? :  France hits back after Russia warns of Mistral compensation Reuters.com November 14, 2014 

13 Propaganda to justify interventions? : Syria ‘Hero Boy’ Video Revealed to be Government Propaganda Lewrockwell.com November 14, 2014

Writes Daniel Adams
One problem: the whole thing was a fake. The Norweigan Film Institute, funded by the government of NATO-member Norway, chipped in $30,000 for the film to be produced in Malta and released publicly without informing viewers that it was not authentic footage.

The filmmakers made it clear to the Norwegian government in their funding application that they would not reveal that the footage was fake and authorities raised no objection to the operation.

The BBC wrote about how so many people were fooled by the film:

"So once the film was made, how did it go viral? “It was posted to our YouTube account a few weeks ago but the algorithm told us it was not going to trend,” Klevberg said. “So we deleted that and re-posted it.” The filmmakers say they added the word “hero” to the new headline and tried to send it out to people on Twitter to start a conversation."

By the time its in authenticity had been established, millions were outraged at the Assad government. Propaganda depends on framing the issue first. No one reads corrections once a false story is printed.