The pat answer to why there’s a problem in Ukraine is basically that Putin is an expansionist megalomaniac who wants to be President of Russia for life, wants to reassemble the Soviet Union and wants to have statues of himself erected all over Russia like Stalin did. Seriously, I have heard all of those reasons in the mainstream media. Problem is, even if all of that were true, it doesn’t actually explain the crisis in Ukraine, because the US started that one plain and simple. (If you want proof, check out my post and podcast: Exposing the Shadow Government in Ukraine (and the US?))
Even if we hadn’t started it and Putin did actually start it because he’s a megalomaniacal tyrant, why does the United States care about it at all much less care about it more than Europe does??? The EU is going kicking and screaming down the path of hostility with Russia and we’re egging them on at every step. Within minutes of the downing of flight MH17, the US governmental-media continuum made it crystal clear: “Now the EU MUST join the US in sanctioning Russia.” And so they have.
But again I ask, why do we care so much? It’s not like they’re threatening to spread communism – after all, We’re All Socialists Now! It’s gotta to be more in the lines of realpolitik or some other vague or cronyistic “American interest,” but what specifically? I can think of several reasons the western power elite might want to beat Russia back with a stick right now, each of which I will cover on the show this Saturday (regular time 3PM-6PM ET on WSB.)
To get you primed, I am posting below a few good articles that give some background on the situation and some clips I’m going to play on the show to help explain why I think the military industrial complex (which I always go out of my way to specifically define as primarily the finance, energy and defense industries – like the WSJ inadvertently does in the headline below), and specifically US oil and gas companies, might be behind this.
Here is Hillary Clinton within hours of the downing of flight MH17 laying out the three things she expects the tragedy to accomplish, including that the EU move away from energy dependence on Russia.
And here is Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland early this year reporting to the executives from Chevron and Exxon (competitors?), while still complaining of Ukrainian jetlag, that she just got back from trying to shape the direction of Ukraine, that over the years “we” (meaning you and I) have spent $5 billion in Ukraine to steer it toward Europe generally and the IMF specifically (!) and thanking profusely these energy giants for all their help in this regard, in standing shoulder to shoulder with “us,” and in praise of their continued efforts to make Ukraine a hospitable place for giant American oil companies. (Well, that last point is not a direct quote, but in the last minute or two of the video that’s the definite impression one gets!)
There are other possible explanations for our belligerent behavior toward Russia, including: the new anti-dollar movement among the BRICS nations led by none other than Putin’s Russia; there’s also the very long term plan of what the New World Order should look like (Zbigniew Brzezinski recently said we must move toward a bipolar world of the US and China with Russia playing catch-up); perhaps it’s the old Report from Iron Mountain plan, ie, Big Government needs Big Enemies to justify its existence and maintain consent of the governed. This is a big nut to crack and there’s lots to talk about, so it’s a good thing we have 3 hours!
Here are the articles…
Is Putin Worse Than Stalin? by Pat Buchanan
In one of Stockman’s articles above, he alludes to how Secretary of State James Baker in 1990 promised Gorbachev that if Russia let East Germany reunite with West Germany and be a part of NATO, the west would not expand NATO a “single inch” to the east. Since that time, the west has expanded NATO to include the exact countries that Gorbachev was worried about. The implication is that if anyone has been expansionist, it has been the west. Here are the post-promise members of NATO…
|12 March 1999||Czech Republic||Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991 as part of Czechoslovakia.|
|Hungary||Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991.|
|Poland||Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1990.|
|29 March 2004||Bulgaria||Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991.|
|Estonia||Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991 as part of the Soviet Union.|
|Latvia||Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991 as part of the Soviet Union.|
|Lithuania||Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991 as part of the Soviet Union.|
|Romania||Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991.|
|Slovakia||Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991 as part of Czechoslovakia.|
|Slovenia||Previously part of Yugoslavia 1945–1991 (Non-aligned)|
|1 April 2009||Albania||Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1968.|
|Croatia||Previously part of Yugoslavia 1945–1991 (Non-aligned)|
For more on the expansion of NATO…
And in case you’re wondering why there’s a cartoon manatee at the top of this post, click through to watch this CNN video, Chris Cuomo loses it on RT host Peter Lavelle, then come back here and watch the youtube video below. The last two minutes of Cuomo’s “interview” reminds me of an old Dr. Katz skit. It’s a little out there, but tell me if you get it (you can start at 0:29):