Sauron Rules in Washington
Sauron
Rules in Washington
Paul
Craig Roberts
“The problem is that the world has
listened to Americans for far too bloody long.” — Dr. Julian Osborne,
from the 2000 film version of Nevil Shute’s 1957 book, On the Beach
A reader asked why neoconservatives
push toward nuclear war when there can be no winners. If all die, what is the
point?
The answer is that the
neoconservatives believe that the US can win at minimum and perhaps zero
damage.
Their insane plan is as follows:
Washington will ring Russia and China with anti-ballistic missile bases in
order to provide a shield against a retaliatory strike from Russia and China.
Moreover, these US anti-ABM bases also can deploy nuclear attack missiles
unknown to Russia and China, thus reducing the warning time to five minutes,
leaving Washington’s victims little or no time in which to make a decision.
The neoconservatives think that
Washington’s first strike will so badly damage the Russian and Chinese
retaliatory capabilities that both governments will surrender rather than
launch a response. The Russian and Chinese leaderships would conclude that
their diminished forces leave little chance that many of their ICBMs will be
able to get past Washington’s ABM shield, leaving the US largely intact. A
feeble retaliation by Russia and China would simply invite a second wave US
nuclear attack that would obliterate Russian and Chinese cities, killing
millions and leaving both countries in ruins.
In short, the American warmongers are
betting that the Russian and Chinese leaderships would submit rather than risk
total destruction.
There is no question that
neoconservatives are sufficiently evil to launch a preemptive nuclear attack,
but possibly the plan aims to put Russia and China into a situation in which
their leaders conclude that the deck is stacked against them and, therefore,
they must accept Washington’s hegemony.
To feel secure in its hegemony,
Washington would have to order Russia and China to disarm.
This plan is full of risks.
Miscalculations are a feature of war. It is reckless and irresponsible to risk
the life of the planet for nothing more than Washington’s hegemony.
The neoconservative plan puts Europe,
the UK, Japan, S. Korea, and Australia at high risk were Russia and China to
retaliate. Washington’s ABM shield cannot protect Europe from Russia’s nuclear
cruise missiles or from the Russian Air Force, so Europe would cease to exist. China’s response would hit Japan, S. Korea, and
Australia.
The Russian hope and that of all sane
people is that Washington’s vassals will understand that it is they that are at
risk, a risk from which they have nothing to gain and everything to lose,
repudiate their vassalage to Washington and remove the US bases. It must be
clear to European politicians that they are being dragged into conflict with
Russia. This week the NATO commander told the US Congress that he needed
funding for a larger military presence in Europe in order to counter “a
resurgent Russia.” https://www.rt.com/news/387063-nato-counter-resurgent-russia/
Let us examine what is meant by “a
resurgent Russia.” It means a Russia that is strong and confident enough to defend
its interests and those of its allies. In other words, Russia was able to block
Obama’s planned invasion of Syria and bombing of Iran and to enable the Syrian
armed forces to defeat the ISIS force sent by Obama and Hillary to overthrow
Assad.
Russia is “resurgent” because Russia
is able to block US unilateral actions against some other countries.
This capability flies in the face of
the neoconservative Wolfowitz doctrine, which says that the principal goal of
US foreign policy is to prevent the rise of any country that can serve as a
check on Washington’s unilateral action.
While the neocons were absorbed in
their “cakewalk” wars that have now lasted 16 years, Russia and China emerged
as checks on the unilateralism that Washington had enjoyed since the collapse
of the Soviet Union. What Washington is trying to do is to recapture its
ability to act worldwide without any constraint from any other country. This
requires Russia and China to stand down.
Are Russia and China going to stand
down? It is possible, but I would not bet the life of the planet on it. Both
governments have a moral conscience that is totally missing in Washington.
Neither government is intimidated by the Western propaganda. Russian Foreign
Minister Lavrov said yesterday that we hear endless hysterical charges against
Russia, but the charges are always vacant of any evidence. https://sputniknews.com/politics/201705041053274379-lavrov-russia-us-relations/
Conceiveably, Russia and China could
sacrifice their sovereignty for the sake of life on earth. But this same moral
conscience will propel them to oppose the evil that is Washington in order not
to succumb to evil themselves. Therefore, I think that the evil that rules in
Washington is leading the United States and its vassal states to total
destruction.
Having convinced the Russian and
Chinese leaderships that Washington intends to nuke their countries in a
surprise attack (see, for example, http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/04/us-forces-preparing-sudden-nuclear.html ), the question is how do Russia and China
respond? Do they sit there and await an attack, or do they preempt Washington’s
attack with an attack of their own?
What would you do? Would you preserve
your life by submitting to evil, or would you destroy the evil?
Writing truthfully results in my name
being put on lists (financed by who?) as a “Russian dupe/agent.” Actually, I am
an agent of all people who disapprove of Washington’s willingness to use
nuclear war in order to establish Washington’s hegemony over the world, but let
us understand what it means to be a “Russian agent.”
It means to respect international
law, which Washington does not. It means to respect life, which Washington does
not. It means to respect the national interests of other countries, which
Washington does not. It means to respond to provocations with diplomacy and
requests for cooperation, which Washington does not. But Russia does. Clearly,
a “Russian agent” is a moral person who wants to preserve life and the national
identity and dignity of other peoples.
It is Washington that wants to snuff
out human morality and become the master of the planet. As I have previously
written, Washington without any question is Sauron. The only important question
is whether there is sufficient good left in the world to resist and overcome
Washington’s evil.
A Note from the poster:
Vladimir Putin : “Publish A World Map And Mark All The U.S. Military Bases On It. You Will See The Difference Between Russia And The US”
Vladimir Putin : “Publish A World Map And Mark All The U.S. Military Bases On It. You Will See The Difference Between Russia And The US”
Prepper Fortress
This is the full transcript of Corriere della Sera’s interview with Vladimir Putin
Vladimir Putin pulls no punches in an interview with Corriere della Sera. See the full transcript below.
Luciano Fontana: I would like to start with a question concerning Russian-Italian relations. This relationship has always been close and privileged, both in the economic and political spheres. However, it has been somewhat marred by the crisis in Ukraine and the sanctions. Could the recent visit by Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi to Russia and your upcoming visit to Milan somehow change this trend, and if so, what is needed for that?
Vladimir Putin: First, I firmly believe that Russia was not responsible for the deterioration in relations between our country and the EU states. This was not our choice; it was dictated to us by our partners. It was not we who introduced restrictions on trade and economic activities. Rather, we were the target and we had to respond with retaliatory, protective measures.
But the relationship between Russia and Italy has, indeed, always been privileged, both in politics and the economy. For instance, in recent years, that is, in the last couple of years, trade between our countries increased eleven fold, from what I believe was $4.2 billion – we make calculations in US dollars – to over $48 billion, nearly $49 billion.
