I wonder if we would still have wars if the first ones to be drafted were the sons and daughters of our lawmakers - from the President right down to the lowest Congressman...
Posted on 12/10/2015 9:06:18 PM PST by amorphous
War Is On The Horizon: Is It Too Late To Stop It?
Paul Craig Roberts
One lesson from military history is that once mobilization for war begins, it takes on a momentum of its own and is uncontrollable.
This might be what is occuring unrecognized before our eyes.
In his September 28 speech at the 70th Anniversity of the United Nations, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that Russia can no longer tolerate the state of affairs in the world. Two days later at the invitation of the Syrian government Russia began war against ISIS.
Russia was quickly successful in destroying ISIS arms depots and helping the Syrian army to roll back ISIS gains. Russia also destroyed thousands of oil tankers, the contents of which were financing ISIS by transporting stolen Syrian oil to Turkey where it is sold to the family of the current gangster who rules Turkey.
Washington was caught off guard by Russia's decisiveness. Fearful that the quick success of such decisive action by Russia would discourage Washington's NATO vassals from continuing to support Washington's war against Assad and Washington's use of its puppet government in Kiev to pressure Russia, Washington arranged for Turkey to shoot down a Russian fighter-bomber despite the agreement between Russia and NATO that there would be no air-to-air encounters in Russia's area of air operation in Syria.
Although denying all responsibility, Washington used Russia's low key response to the attack, for which Turkey did not apologize, to reassure Europe that Russia is a paper tiger. The Western presstitutes trumpeted: "Russia A Paper Tiger." http://www.wsj.com/articles/turkey-shoots-down-a-paper-tiger-1448406008
The Russian government's low key response to the provocation was used by Washington to reassure Europe that there is no risk in continuing to pressure Russia in the Middle East, Ukraine, Georgia, Montenegro, and elsewhere. Washington's attack on Assad's military is being used to reinforce the belief that is being inculcated in European governments that Russia's responsible behavior to avoid war is a sign of fear and weakness.
It is unclear to what extent the Russian and Chinese governments understand that their independent policies, reaffirmed by the Russian and Chinese presidents On September 28, are regarded by Washington as "existential threats" to US hegemony.
The basis of US foreign policy is the commitment to prevent the rise of powers capable of constraining Washington's unilateral action. The ability of Russia and China to do this makes them both a target.
Washington is not opposed to terrorism. Washington has been purposely creating terrorism for many years. Terrorism is a weapon that Washington intends to use to destabilize Russia and China by exporting it to the Muslim populations in Russia and China.
Washington is using Syria, as it used Ukraine, to demonstrate Russia's impotence to Europe— and to China, as an impotent Russia is less attractive to China as an ally.
For Russia, responsible response to provocation has become a liability, because it encourages more provocation.
In other words, Washington and the gullibility of its European vassals have put humanity in a very dangerous situation, as the only choices left to Russia and China are to accept American vassalage or to prepare for war.
Putin must be respected for putting more value on human life than do Washington and its European vassals and avoiding military responses to provocations. However, Russia must do something to make the NATO countries aware that there are serious costs of their accommodation of Washington's aggression against Russia. For example, the Russian government could decide that it makes no sense to sell energy to European countries that are in a de facto state of war against Russia. With winter upon us, the Russian government could announce that Russia does not sell energy to NATO member countries. Russia would lose the money, but that is cheaper than losing one's sovereignty or a war.
To end the conflict in Ukraine, or to escalate it to a level beyond Europe's willingness to participate, Russia could accept the requests of the breakaway provinces to be reunited with Russia. For Kiev to continue the conflict, Ukraine would have to attack Russia herself.
The Russian government has relied on responsible, non-provocative responses. Russia has taken the diplomatic approach, relying on European governments coming to their senses, realizing that their national interests diverge from Washington's, and ceasing to enable Washington's hegemonic policy. Russia's policy has failed. To repeat, Russia's low key, responsible responses have been used by Washington to paint Russia as a paper tiger that no one needs to fear.
We are left with the paradox that Russia's determination to avoid war is leading directly to war.
Whether or not the Russian media, Russian people, and the entirety of the Russian government understand this, it must be obvious to the Russian military. All that Russian military leaders need to do is to look at the composition of the forces sent by NATO to "combat ISIS." As George Abert notes, the American, French, and British aircraft that have been deployed are jet fighters whose purpose is air-to-air combat, not ground attack. The jet fighters are not deployed to attack ISIS on the ground, but to threaten the Russian fighter-bombers that are attacking ISIS ground targets.
There is no doubt that Washington is driving the world toward Armageddon, and Europe is the enabler. Washington's bought-and-paid-for-puppets in Germany, France, and UK are either stupid, unconcerned, or powerless to escape from Washington's grip. Unless Russia can wake up Europe, war is inevitable.
Prudent people recognize that going to war is, in some cases, preferable to having a war come to you.
The current resident of the White House did not believe in going to war, so it quite certainly is coming to us...
I wonder if we would still have wars if the first ones to be drafted were the sons and daughters of our lawmakers - from the President right down to the lowest Congressman...
PCR went nuts a while ago. He should have stuck to economics - his column in Businessweek back in the day wasn’t bad. There is no mobilization anywhere in the West. The French Army is 1/7 of its WWI numbers. Military spending as a % of the world economy is at 100 year lows, and US spending is the lowest it’s been since WWII. PCR should have stuck to his knitting.
This is not the cold war Russia.
They are broke. They are going more broke with low oil prices.
Wars are very expensive.
For the most part their military is not very good. We see lots of new equipment in the media, but most of their stuff is old, broken, and they don’t have enough spare parts. They don’t have the professional military we do and their junior leaders and officers are still afraid to make decisions (a necessity in combat).
Just throwing that out there for your consideration.... your opinion may differ.
All the Infowars that one can stand
Pick up your phone, Alexwanrs to chat
He is one of Alex Jones’ go to guys
If you've kept up with your medieval history, you'll now that by tradition, the first to die in battle were the aristocrats. Nonetheless, they fought large numbers of battles, because war is the sport of the high-born. Of course, at the time, the spoils of war were considerable, and accrued most to those who distinguished themselves in battle.
That's what I think about it.
I think it will start with Turkey, though Iran certainly can't be ruled out. The thing that has me most worried are 60+ B61 nuclear bombs of ours sitting in Turkey. Turkey's F-16s can deliver these, plus we've moved moved F-15 fighters to Turkey - I'm guessing the F-15s can carry them as well.
So Russia has countered with S400 missiles putting the AFB in Turkey (housing these) within range. Putin must have his forces on short notice looking hard at aircraft formations leaving Turkey.
It wouldn't take much to set off the entire load of fireworks in this area of the world. Worse, we've got idiots like Erdogan, ISIS, and Obama playing with fire.
One other indicator for war that I see, the invasion of the west by men of fighting age in the hundreds of thousands. Germany just top 1 million immigrants - IIRC.
None of that conflicts with what was said in the article.
Agree. I feel our real enemy is Islam. The Soros funded liberal left seems to think conservatives are the enemy. And would rather side with invading Muslims, than with us, their own countrymen. How do you mix civil war with world war?
A non-mobilization is a mobilization nonetheless?
This is not the cold war USA anymore either.
They are broke. They are going more broke with low oil prices.
We're like $40 trillion in debt. Which country is 'more broke' ?
Wars are very expensive.
They also stimulate the economy.
For the most part their military is not very good.
Tell that to ISIS.
We see lots of new equipment in the media, but most of their stuff is old, broken, and they don’t have enough spare parts.
We're running out of bombs.
They don’t have the professional military we do and their junior leaders and officers are still afraid to make decisions (a necessity in combat).
Ours are worried about getting a run in their pantyhose.
Of course we would. But we would also have different lawmakers.
Is that like “not making a choice is making a choice”?
This isn't the 1940's. We've have power projection and preposition down to a science. ICBMs that can reach their designated target in less than 1 hour, along with everyone's silent service on standby.
Ditto.
We had a strike group "spinning up" and ready to go to rescue the Ambassador and 20 some CIA agents in Benghazi too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.