anybody monitoring russias movements?
- Thread starter cyclingjames
- Start date
Help Support Homesteading & Country Living Forum:
Judging from the open publications in the Russian press is build offensive weapons. And an increase in the number of personnel such as the Airborne troops, tank, marines. As of the Russian segment of Wikipedia 3 Months disappear some previously available data on the composition and the deployment of Russian troops.
Same as Putins invasion of Georgia . Putin sent troops there and Russian Mothers will never know why their Son never came home . The Russian Goverment will just tell them powers in the West stirred up trouble and thier son died defending the Motherland .
For the time being he has the Russian public behind him and whipped into a Nationalist freenzy . That will only last so long then either they will oust him or he will subjagate them into helpless cannon fodder .
I doubt that even in Russian someone will prohibit local edition for the publication of congratulations and obituaries.
As far as I know, Russian troops serve as instructors to train new arrivals of Russian mercenaries, as well as functions of protective orders in respect of these same mercenaries. Their total number of blocking areas of the eastern provinces of 9 - 15 thousand people.
From Located in the vicinity of the contact line of the bulk of the Russian regular troops involved in the defensive squads. Otherwise, the mercenaries will not go on the attack, and will only be engaged in looting and drunkenness.training mission....helluwa lot of people do that training
http://censor.net.ua/photo_news/345..._rossiyiskogo_mayiora_vladimira_starkova_foto
this man is very lucky, and he does not realize it. It is my group get caught it at least put on a stake.
this man is very lucky, and he does not realize it. It is my group get caught it at least put on a stake.
Well unfortunately English is NOT my native language so I cannot help that some of my comments are not accepted?
That's why I continue to post from what other people think and write . I do offer my apologies for that?
So here is the next post;
Monsters of Ukraine: Made in the USA
We’re in the summer doldrums of the news cycle, a perfect time for our government and the media – or do I repeat myself? – to drop certain inconvenient stories down the Memory Hole. My job, of course, is to retrieve them….
Remember Ukraine? I seem to recall blaring headlines about a supposedly “imminent” and “massive” Russian invasion of that country: the Anglo-Saxon media was ablazewith a veritable countdown to D-Day and we were treated to ominous sightings of Russian troops and tanks gathering at the border, allegedly just awaiting the order from Putin to take Kiev. And it turns out there has been an invasion, of sorts – although it isn’t a Russian one. It’s the Kiev regime’s own foot-soldiers returning from the front and turning on their masters.
The war is going badly for the government of oligarch Petro Poroshenko. The east Ukrainians, who rose in revolt after the US-sponsored coup threw outdemocratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych, show no signs of giving up: they’ve repulsed the “anti-terrorist” campaign launched by Kiev, withstanding relentless bombardment of their cities and enduring many thousands of casualties, not to mention widespread destruction. Indeed, the brutal protracted war waged by Kiev against its own “citizens” has arguably steeled the rebels’ resolve and made any thought of reconciliation unthinkable.
As is usual with violent fanatics, the war aims of the Kiev coup leaders – to bring the eastern provinces back into the fold – have been rendered impossible by their methods and conduct. The de facto blockade imposed on the east has bound the separatists all the more tightly to Russia, and so economics as well as searing hatred of a government the easterners regard as “fascist” has sealed the country’s fate.
Unable to crack the rebels’ resolve, the “revolutionaries” who once gathered in the Maiden have begun to turn on each other. Poroshenko, fearful of the rising power of the far-right militias who make up the backbone of his makeshift army, has ordered their dissolution – and the rightists are resisting.
A standoff between the Right Sector militia and Ukrainian police the other day culminated in a pitched battle as the rightists attacked police positions inMukachevo, in western Ukraine, and took a six-year-old boy hostage. A dispute over control of the local cigarette smuggling operation had ended with two Right Sector thugs killed and seven others – it’s not clear which side they belonged to – injured. The rightists used grenade launchers to pulverize two police cars. Oh well, no worries, Washington willsend replacements…. for both the cars and the launchers.
The big problem for the Kiev regime is that Right Sector and allied far-rightist militias are the core of their military operation against the east. Right Sector provided themuscle of the Maiden revolution, standing in the front lines against the widely fearedBerkut special forces loyal to Yanukovych. If these thugs must be reined in, then the success of the “anti-terrorist” campaign is doubtful: yet Kiev is increasingly unwilling to pay the high price of appeasing their increasingly troublesome Praetorians.
The aftermath of the Mukachevo stand off was a clear victory for the rightists, who saw their leader, Dmytro Yarosh, a member of parliament, negotiatingwith the Interior Ministry – and Right Sector militia blocking the road from Kiev to the scene of the fighting. The result was an announcement from the Interior Ministry that the police chief of Mukachevo has been suspended, pending an “investigation” of the charges of aiding and abetting smuggling.
In short, Right Sector emerged victorious. Following up their victory, the group declared that a national referendum will be held – without gathering the required signatures, and under their sponsorship – on multiple questions, essentially demanding that their entire program for the nation be adopted. They call for a formal declaration of war against Russia, a complete blockade of the eastern provinces, martial law, and the legalization of their militias. Oh yes, and they also want the present government, up to and including Poroshenko, to be impeached.
Mired in debt, and rapidly sinking into an economic abyss, Ukraine is literally coming apart at the seams – and the ugly underside of the Maiden “revolution” is being exposed to the light of day. The most recent atrocity is the uncovering of a torture chamber used by members of the “Tornado” Battalion, another far-right grouping, in which militia members kidnapped, tortured, raped, and robbed citizens in the easternLuhansk region, where the government is fighting to retain some modicum of control. Eight members of the Tornado militia were recently arrested and are being held by military prosecutors in Kiev: the Tornado “volunteers,” who mostly consist of ex-convicts, defend their actions by claiming that this is just retaliation because they uncovered a smuggling operation run by local officials – who, they say, are collaborating with the rebels. They initially refused to lay down their arms and barricaded themselves into their camp.
The Aidar Battalion, also operating in eastern Ukraine, has been accused by Amnesty International of committing war crimes: that was in 2014, but the charges were largely ignored until the local governor began to complain. Aidar’s leader, member of parliament Serhiy Melnychuk, of the ultra-nationalist Radical Party, has been stripped of immunity from prosecution andcharged with kidnapping, issuing threats, and operating a criminal gang. Melnychuk, while admitting there was “some looting,” attributed the dissolution of the Aidar Battalion by authorities to “Russian propaganda” and revealed that some members are still operating independently in Luhansk.
Then there’s the openly neo-Nazi Azov Brigade, whose members sport fascist symbols from the World War II era, and whose leader, Andriy Biletsky, declares that the goal of his group is to “lead the White Races of the world in a struggle for their survival.” There was so much bad publicity surrounding the Azov Battalion that the US Congress unanimously passed legislationforbidding any aid to the group – a provision, as this piece by Joseph Epstein in the Daily Beast points out, that is essentially unenforceable:
“In an interview with The Daily Beast, Sgt. Ivan Kharkiv of the Azov battalion talks about his battalion’s experience with US trainers and US volunteers quite fondly, even mentioning US volunteers engineers and medics that are still currently assisting them. He also talks about the significant and active support from the Ukrainian diaspora in the US As for the training they have and continue to receive from numerous foreign armed forces. Kharkiv says ‘We must take knowledge from all armies… We pay for our mistakes with our lives.’
“Those US officials involved in the vetting process obviously have instructions to say that US forces are not training the Azov Battalion as such. They also say that Azov members are screened out, yet no one seems to know precisely how that’s done. In fact, given the way the Ukrainian government operates, it’s almost impossible.”
Yes, your tax dollars are going to arm, train, and feed neo-Nazis in Ukraine. That’s what we bought into when Washington decided to launch a regime change operationin that bedraggled corner of southeastern Europe. Your money is also going to prop up the country’s war-stricken economy – albeit not before corrupt government officials rake their cut off the top.
Dmytro Korchynsky, who heads a group of several far-right “volunteers” gathered together in “St. Mary’s Battalion,” declares his goal of organizing a “Christian Taliban” that will put Ukraine in the forefront of an effort to “lead the crusades,” adding: “ Our mission is not only to kick out the occupiers, but also revenge. Moscow must burn.”
That’s a goal American neocons and their liberal enablers can get behind, but Korchynsky’s invocation of the Taliban ought to make the rest of us step back from that precipice. For it was the US, in the throes of the last cold war, that coalesced, funded, trained, and armed what later became the Afghan Taliban – and we all know where that road led.
Once again, in our endless search for foreign monsters to destroy, we’re creating yet more foreign monsters who will provide the next excuse for future crusades. It’s a perpetual motion machine of foreign policy madness – and the War Party likes it that way.
Reprinted with permission from Antiwar.com.
That's why I continue to post from what other people think and write . I do offer my apologies for that?
So here is the next post;
Monsters of Ukraine: Made in the USA
We’re in the summer doldrums of the news cycle, a perfect time for our government and the media – or do I repeat myself? – to drop certain inconvenient stories down the Memory Hole. My job, of course, is to retrieve them….
Remember Ukraine? I seem to recall blaring headlines about a supposedly “imminent” and “massive” Russian invasion of that country: the Anglo-Saxon media was ablazewith a veritable countdown to D-Day and we were treated to ominous sightings of Russian troops and tanks gathering at the border, allegedly just awaiting the order from Putin to take Kiev. And it turns out there has been an invasion, of sorts – although it isn’t a Russian one. It’s the Kiev regime’s own foot-soldiers returning from the front and turning on their masters.
The war is going badly for the government of oligarch Petro Poroshenko. The east Ukrainians, who rose in revolt after the US-sponsored coup threw outdemocratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych, show no signs of giving up: they’ve repulsed the “anti-terrorist” campaign launched by Kiev, withstanding relentless bombardment of their cities and enduring many thousands of casualties, not to mention widespread destruction. Indeed, the brutal protracted war waged by Kiev against its own “citizens” has arguably steeled the rebels’ resolve and made any thought of reconciliation unthinkable.
As is usual with violent fanatics, the war aims of the Kiev coup leaders – to bring the eastern provinces back into the fold – have been rendered impossible by their methods and conduct. The de facto blockade imposed on the east has bound the separatists all the more tightly to Russia, and so economics as well as searing hatred of a government the easterners regard as “fascist” has sealed the country’s fate.
Unable to crack the rebels’ resolve, the “revolutionaries” who once gathered in the Maiden have begun to turn on each other. Poroshenko, fearful of the rising power of the far-right militias who make up the backbone of his makeshift army, has ordered their dissolution – and the rightists are resisting.
A standoff between the Right Sector militia and Ukrainian police the other day culminated in a pitched battle as the rightists attacked police positions inMukachevo, in western Ukraine, and took a six-year-old boy hostage. A dispute over control of the local cigarette smuggling operation had ended with two Right Sector thugs killed and seven others – it’s not clear which side they belonged to – injured. The rightists used grenade launchers to pulverize two police cars. Oh well, no worries, Washington willsend replacements…. for both the cars and the launchers.
The big problem for the Kiev regime is that Right Sector and allied far-rightist militias are the core of their military operation against the east. Right Sector provided themuscle of the Maiden revolution, standing in the front lines against the widely fearedBerkut special forces loyal to Yanukovych. If these thugs must be reined in, then the success of the “anti-terrorist” campaign is doubtful: yet Kiev is increasingly unwilling to pay the high price of appeasing their increasingly troublesome Praetorians.
The aftermath of the Mukachevo stand off was a clear victory for the rightists, who saw their leader, Dmytro Yarosh, a member of parliament, negotiatingwith the Interior Ministry – and Right Sector militia blocking the road from Kiev to the scene of the fighting. The result was an announcement from the Interior Ministry that the police chief of Mukachevo has been suspended, pending an “investigation” of the charges of aiding and abetting smuggling.
In short, Right Sector emerged victorious. Following up their victory, the group declared that a national referendum will be held – without gathering the required signatures, and under their sponsorship – on multiple questions, essentially demanding that their entire program for the nation be adopted. They call for a formal declaration of war against Russia, a complete blockade of the eastern provinces, martial law, and the legalization of their militias. Oh yes, and they also want the present government, up to and including Poroshenko, to be impeached.
Mired in debt, and rapidly sinking into an economic abyss, Ukraine is literally coming apart at the seams – and the ugly underside of the Maiden “revolution” is being exposed to the light of day. The most recent atrocity is the uncovering of a torture chamber used by members of the “Tornado” Battalion, another far-right grouping, in which militia members kidnapped, tortured, raped, and robbed citizens in the easternLuhansk region, where the government is fighting to retain some modicum of control. Eight members of the Tornado militia were recently arrested and are being held by military prosecutors in Kiev: the Tornado “volunteers,” who mostly consist of ex-convicts, defend their actions by claiming that this is just retaliation because they uncovered a smuggling operation run by local officials – who, they say, are collaborating with the rebels. They initially refused to lay down their arms and barricaded themselves into their camp.
The Aidar Battalion, also operating in eastern Ukraine, has been accused by Amnesty International of committing war crimes: that was in 2014, but the charges were largely ignored until the local governor began to complain. Aidar’s leader, member of parliament Serhiy Melnychuk, of the ultra-nationalist Radical Party, has been stripped of immunity from prosecution andcharged with kidnapping, issuing threats, and operating a criminal gang. Melnychuk, while admitting there was “some looting,” attributed the dissolution of the Aidar Battalion by authorities to “Russian propaganda” and revealed that some members are still operating independently in Luhansk.
Then there’s the openly neo-Nazi Azov Brigade, whose members sport fascist symbols from the World War II era, and whose leader, Andriy Biletsky, declares that the goal of his group is to “lead the White Races of the world in a struggle for their survival.” There was so much bad publicity surrounding the Azov Battalion that the US Congress unanimously passed legislationforbidding any aid to the group – a provision, as this piece by Joseph Epstein in the Daily Beast points out, that is essentially unenforceable:
“In an interview with The Daily Beast, Sgt. Ivan Kharkiv of the Azov battalion talks about his battalion’s experience with US trainers and US volunteers quite fondly, even mentioning US volunteers engineers and medics that are still currently assisting them. He also talks about the significant and active support from the Ukrainian diaspora in the US As for the training they have and continue to receive from numerous foreign armed forces. Kharkiv says ‘We must take knowledge from all armies… We pay for our mistakes with our lives.’
“Those US officials involved in the vetting process obviously have instructions to say that US forces are not training the Azov Battalion as such. They also say that Azov members are screened out, yet no one seems to know precisely how that’s done. In fact, given the way the Ukrainian government operates, it’s almost impossible.”
Yes, your tax dollars are going to arm, train, and feed neo-Nazis in Ukraine. That’s what we bought into when Washington decided to launch a regime change operationin that bedraggled corner of southeastern Europe. Your money is also going to prop up the country’s war-stricken economy – albeit not before corrupt government officials rake their cut off the top.
Dmytro Korchynsky, who heads a group of several far-right “volunteers” gathered together in “St. Mary’s Battalion,” declares his goal of organizing a “Christian Taliban” that will put Ukraine in the forefront of an effort to “lead the crusades,” adding: “ Our mission is not only to kick out the occupiers, but also revenge. Moscow must burn.”
That’s a goal American neocons and their liberal enablers can get behind, but Korchynsky’s invocation of the Taliban ought to make the rest of us step back from that precipice. For it was the US, in the throes of the last cold war, that coalesced, funded, trained, and armed what later became the Afghan Taliban – and we all know where that road led.
Once again, in our endless search for foreign monsters to destroy, we’re creating yet more foreign monsters who will provide the next excuse for future crusades. It’s a perpetual motion machine of foreign policy madness – and the War Party likes it that way.
Reprinted with permission from Antiwar.com.
Obama Should Release MH-17 Intel
MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: Releasing an Intelligence Report on Shoot-Down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17
It has been a year since the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine, resulting in the death of 298 passengers and crew. The initial response by the US government supported the contention that the likely perpetrators were anti-government forces in southeastern Ukraine (the customary media misnomer for them is “separatists”), and that they were possibly aided directly by Moscow.
On July 29, 2014, we Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) suggested that the United States Government report publicly what intelligence it actually had relating to the shoot-down lest the incident turn into another paroxysm of blaming Russia without cause. We are still waiting for that report.
Executive Summary
Tensions between the United States and Russia over Ukraine are fast reaching a danger point. A major contributing factor in the American public’s negative perception of Moscow is last year’s downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17.
A public report detailing the investigation of the incident by the Dutch Safety authorities is expected by October but the draft is reportedly already in the hands of the United States government. There is speculation that the report will dovetail with media and leaked government sources that have placed primary blame on the ethnic Russian Ukrainians in southeastern Ukraine opposed to the government put in place after the Western-engineered coup of Feb. 22, 2014, in Kiev.
As the relationship with Moscow is of critical importance, if only because Russia has the military might to destroy the US, careful calibration of the relationship is essential. If the United States signs on to a conclusion that implicates Russia without any solid intelligence to support that contention it will further damage an already fractious bilateral relationship, almost certainly unnecessarily. It is our opinion that a proper investigation of the downing would involve exploring every possibility to determine how the evidence holds up.
Currently, the only thing the American public and worldwide audiences know for sure is that the plane was shot down. But the shoot-down might have been accidental, carried out by any one of a number of parties. Or it might have been orchestrated by anti-government forces, with Moscow either conniving in some way in that action or not. It is also possible that the downing was deliberately carried out by the Kiev government or one of Ukraine’s powerful oligarchs to implicate the anti-Kiev forces and Russia in this mass murder. And finally, though less likely, it might even be that based on the available intelligence it is impossible to determine who did it.
In light of the high stakes involved both in terms of our extremely important relationship with Russia as well as in establishing a trustworthy narrative that does credit to the White House, the failure of the Administration to issue a coordinated intelligence assessment summarizing what evidence exists to determine who was responsible is therefore puzzling. If the United States government knows who carried out the attack on the plane it should produce the evidence. If it does not know, it should say so.
In what follows, we former intelligence professionals with a cumulative total of some 360 years in various parts of US intelligence provide our perspective on the issue and request for a second time that the intelligence over the downing be made public to counter the fuzzy and flimsy evidence that has over the past year been served up – some of it based on “social media.”
The Russian Dimension
It would not be the first time for a tragic incident to be exploited for propaganda reasons with potentially grave consequences. We refer to the behavior of the Reagan administration in the immediate aftermath of the shoot-down of Korean Airlines Flight 007 over Siberia on August 30, 1983.
Hours after the tragic shoot-down on August 30, 1983, the Reagan administration used its very accomplished propaganda machine to manage a narrative emphasizing Soviet culpability for deliberately killing all 269 people aboard KAL-007 in full knowledge that it was a civilian airliner. In reality, the airliner had been shot down after it strayed hundreds of miles off course and penetrated Russia’s airspace over sensitive military facilities in Kamchatka and Sakhalin Island. The Soviet pilot tried to signal the plane to land, but the KAL pilots did not respond to the repeated warnings. Amid confusion about the plane’s identity – a US spy plane had been in the vicinity hours earlier – Soviet ground control ordered the pilot to fire.
The Soviets soon realized they had made a horrendous mistake. US intelligence also knew from sensitive intercepts that the tragedy had resulted from a blunder, not from a willful act of murder (much as on July 3, 1988, the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian civilian airliner over the Persian Gulf, killing 290 people, an act which President Ronald Reagan dismissively explained as an “understandable accident”).
The story of KAL-007 should come to mind when considering the fate of MH-17. There might be legitimate reasons for opposing the increasingly authoritarian government of President Vladimir Putin, but exploiting a tragedy does not equate to constructive statecraft for dealing with an adversary.
At a minimum, the White House and State Department one year ago displayed unseemly haste in deciding to be first out of the starting gate with a narrative implicating Russia, at least indirectly – a narrative that may not be based on fact. That twelve months have passed and there has been no effort made to either correct or amplify the record is unacceptable.
MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: Releasing an Intelligence Report on Shoot-Down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17
It has been a year since the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine, resulting in the death of 298 passengers and crew. The initial response by the US government supported the contention that the likely perpetrators were anti-government forces in southeastern Ukraine (the customary media misnomer for them is “separatists”), and that they were possibly aided directly by Moscow.
On July 29, 2014, we Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) suggested that the United States Government report publicly what intelligence it actually had relating to the shoot-down lest the incident turn into another paroxysm of blaming Russia without cause. We are still waiting for that report.
Executive Summary
Tensions between the United States and Russia over Ukraine are fast reaching a danger point. A major contributing factor in the American public’s negative perception of Moscow is last year’s downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17.
A public report detailing the investigation of the incident by the Dutch Safety authorities is expected by October but the draft is reportedly already in the hands of the United States government. There is speculation that the report will dovetail with media and leaked government sources that have placed primary blame on the ethnic Russian Ukrainians in southeastern Ukraine opposed to the government put in place after the Western-engineered coup of Feb. 22, 2014, in Kiev.
As the relationship with Moscow is of critical importance, if only because Russia has the military might to destroy the US, careful calibration of the relationship is essential. If the United States signs on to a conclusion that implicates Russia without any solid intelligence to support that contention it will further damage an already fractious bilateral relationship, almost certainly unnecessarily. It is our opinion that a proper investigation of the downing would involve exploring every possibility to determine how the evidence holds up.
Currently, the only thing the American public and worldwide audiences know for sure is that the plane was shot down. But the shoot-down might have been accidental, carried out by any one of a number of parties. Or it might have been orchestrated by anti-government forces, with Moscow either conniving in some way in that action or not. It is also possible that the downing was deliberately carried out by the Kiev government or one of Ukraine’s powerful oligarchs to implicate the anti-Kiev forces and Russia in this mass murder. And finally, though less likely, it might even be that based on the available intelligence it is impossible to determine who did it.
In light of the high stakes involved both in terms of our extremely important relationship with Russia as well as in establishing a trustworthy narrative that does credit to the White House, the failure of the Administration to issue a coordinated intelligence assessment summarizing what evidence exists to determine who was responsible is therefore puzzling. If the United States government knows who carried out the attack on the plane it should produce the evidence. If it does not know, it should say so.
In what follows, we former intelligence professionals with a cumulative total of some 360 years in various parts of US intelligence provide our perspective on the issue and request for a second time that the intelligence over the downing be made public to counter the fuzzy and flimsy evidence that has over the past year been served up – some of it based on “social media.”
The Russian Dimension
It would not be the first time for a tragic incident to be exploited for propaganda reasons with potentially grave consequences. We refer to the behavior of the Reagan administration in the immediate aftermath of the shoot-down of Korean Airlines Flight 007 over Siberia on August 30, 1983.
Hours after the tragic shoot-down on August 30, 1983, the Reagan administration used its very accomplished propaganda machine to manage a narrative emphasizing Soviet culpability for deliberately killing all 269 people aboard KAL-007 in full knowledge that it was a civilian airliner. In reality, the airliner had been shot down after it strayed hundreds of miles off course and penetrated Russia’s airspace over sensitive military facilities in Kamchatka and Sakhalin Island. The Soviet pilot tried to signal the plane to land, but the KAL pilots did not respond to the repeated warnings. Amid confusion about the plane’s identity – a US spy plane had been in the vicinity hours earlier – Soviet ground control ordered the pilot to fire.
The Soviets soon realized they had made a horrendous mistake. US intelligence also knew from sensitive intercepts that the tragedy had resulted from a blunder, not from a willful act of murder (much as on July 3, 1988, the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian civilian airliner over the Persian Gulf, killing 290 people, an act which President Ronald Reagan dismissively explained as an “understandable accident”).
The story of KAL-007 should come to mind when considering the fate of MH-17. There might be legitimate reasons for opposing the increasingly authoritarian government of President Vladimir Putin, but exploiting a tragedy does not equate to constructive statecraft for dealing with an adversary.
At a minimum, the White House and State Department one year ago displayed unseemly haste in deciding to be first out of the starting gate with a narrative implicating Russia, at least indirectly – a narrative that may not be based on fact. That twelve months have passed and there has been no effort made to either correct or amplify the record is unacceptable.
Part 2;
Someone Is Lying
Both Russia and Ukraine deny any active role in the MH-17 shoot down. So do the anti-coup forces in southeastern Ukraine. Someone knows something and is lying to conceal a role in the incident. From the US perspective what happened needs to be clarified and become a matter of public record. No other nation has the resources that the US had to come up with an evidence-based answer; and intelligence collection and analysis are the tools that must be used. The information released to date does not bear close scrutiny; it does not permit an informed judgment as to who is lying about the shoot-down of Flight 17.
One year ago today, National Intelligence Director James Clapper authorized a background briefing including some sketchy talking points in a very short “Government Assessment” for selected mainstream journalists. It was just five days after the shoot-down and two days after Secretary of State Kerry pointed the finger of blame at anti-coup Ukrainians and Russia. Understandably, corroboration was being sought.
Like Kerry’s presentations on the Sunday talk shows of July 20, 2014, however, much of the “Government Assessment” was derived from postings on “social media.” The July 22, 2014 briefing addressed, inconclusively, the key issue of who fired the Buk anti-aircraft missile widely believed to have downed the airliner on July 17, 2014.
No update to that five-day-after “Government Assessment” has been provided over the past year. Are we asked to believe that one year later the intelligence community still cannot adduce evidence that goes beyond insinuation regarding the Buk missile?
The July 22, 2014 briefing also suggested that the missile might have been fired by a Ukrainian “defector.” Has there been no clarification on that point? It is, frankly, very hard for us to believe that the US intelligence community has been unable to expand its understanding of these key issues over the past year.
To be sure, there has long been a tendency in Washington to “fix the intelligence around the policy,” to quote the Downing Street memo relating to the inglorious start of the Iraq War. More recently, we note the claim repeatedly made by Secretary of State John Kerry on August 30, 2013, that “we know” the regime of Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical incidents near Damascus nine days before.
In that case, Kerry also cited a “Government Assessment” to support his charges. We saw the introduction of this unique genre of “assessment,” instead of the normally required “Intelligence Assessment,” as evidence that honest intelligence analysts were refusing to go along with the preferred narrative. In fact, Kerry’s accusations turned out to have been based on false and even fabricated intelligence provided by opponents of the Syrian government.
Choosing to Reveal the Truth
If the White House has concrete, probative intelligence regarding MH-17, we strongly suggest that the time is right to approve it for release before the “blame Russia” narrative becomes completely dominant. The American people are perfectly capable of judging for themselves what took place but they need to have all the information presented without bias and without any attempt to evade unpleasant conclusions. And it should be done even given the risk of compromising “sources and methods,” as the broader issue of war or peace with Russia is something that should be of paramount concern to every American.
What is needed is an Interagency Intelligence Assessment – the mechanism used in the past to present significant findings. We are hearing indirectly from some of our former colleagues that the draft Dutch report contradicts some of the real intelligence that has been collected. Resorting to another “Government (not Intelligence) Assessment” to sidestep the accountability issue is not appropriate and is itself an insult to the integrity and professionalism of the intelligence community.
Mr. President, we believe you need to seek out honest intelligence analysts now and hear them out, particularly if they are challenging or even opposing the prevailing groupthink narrative. They might well convince you to take steps to deal more forthrightly with the shoot-down of MH-17 and minimize the risk that relations with Russia might degenerate into a replay of the Cold War with the threat of escalation into thermonuclear conflict. In all candor, we suspect that at least some of your advisers fail to appreciate the enormity of that danger.
The courtesy of a reply is requested.
For the Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity:
William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)
Thomas Drake, former Senior Executive, National Security Agency
Philip Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.)
Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)
Larry Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)
John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer
Karen Kwiatkowski, former Lt. Col., US Air Force (ret.), at Office of Secretary of Defense watching the manufacture of lies on Iraq, 2001-2003
Edward Loomis, NSA, Cryptologic Computer Scientist (ret.)
David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)
Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)
Elizabeth Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East (ret.)
Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (Ret.)
Coleen Rowley, Division Counsel & Special Agent, FBI (ret.)
Peter Van Buren, US Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret.) (associate VIPS)
Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA
Ann Wright, Col., US Army (ret.); Foreign Service Officer (resigned)
Someone Is Lying
Both Russia and Ukraine deny any active role in the MH-17 shoot down. So do the anti-coup forces in southeastern Ukraine. Someone knows something and is lying to conceal a role in the incident. From the US perspective what happened needs to be clarified and become a matter of public record. No other nation has the resources that the US had to come up with an evidence-based answer; and intelligence collection and analysis are the tools that must be used. The information released to date does not bear close scrutiny; it does not permit an informed judgment as to who is lying about the shoot-down of Flight 17.
One year ago today, National Intelligence Director James Clapper authorized a background briefing including some sketchy talking points in a very short “Government Assessment” for selected mainstream journalists. It was just five days after the shoot-down and two days after Secretary of State Kerry pointed the finger of blame at anti-coup Ukrainians and Russia. Understandably, corroboration was being sought.
Like Kerry’s presentations on the Sunday talk shows of July 20, 2014, however, much of the “Government Assessment” was derived from postings on “social media.” The July 22, 2014 briefing addressed, inconclusively, the key issue of who fired the Buk anti-aircraft missile widely believed to have downed the airliner on July 17, 2014.
No update to that five-day-after “Government Assessment” has been provided over the past year. Are we asked to believe that one year later the intelligence community still cannot adduce evidence that goes beyond insinuation regarding the Buk missile?
The July 22, 2014 briefing also suggested that the missile might have been fired by a Ukrainian “defector.” Has there been no clarification on that point? It is, frankly, very hard for us to believe that the US intelligence community has been unable to expand its understanding of these key issues over the past year.
To be sure, there has long been a tendency in Washington to “fix the intelligence around the policy,” to quote the Downing Street memo relating to the inglorious start of the Iraq War. More recently, we note the claim repeatedly made by Secretary of State John Kerry on August 30, 2013, that “we know” the regime of Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical incidents near Damascus nine days before.
In that case, Kerry also cited a “Government Assessment” to support his charges. We saw the introduction of this unique genre of “assessment,” instead of the normally required “Intelligence Assessment,” as evidence that honest intelligence analysts were refusing to go along with the preferred narrative. In fact, Kerry’s accusations turned out to have been based on false and even fabricated intelligence provided by opponents of the Syrian government.
Choosing to Reveal the Truth
If the White House has concrete, probative intelligence regarding MH-17, we strongly suggest that the time is right to approve it for release before the “blame Russia” narrative becomes completely dominant. The American people are perfectly capable of judging for themselves what took place but they need to have all the information presented without bias and without any attempt to evade unpleasant conclusions. And it should be done even given the risk of compromising “sources and methods,” as the broader issue of war or peace with Russia is something that should be of paramount concern to every American.
What is needed is an Interagency Intelligence Assessment – the mechanism used in the past to present significant findings. We are hearing indirectly from some of our former colleagues that the draft Dutch report contradicts some of the real intelligence that has been collected. Resorting to another “Government (not Intelligence) Assessment” to sidestep the accountability issue is not appropriate and is itself an insult to the integrity and professionalism of the intelligence community.
Mr. President, we believe you need to seek out honest intelligence analysts now and hear them out, particularly if they are challenging or even opposing the prevailing groupthink narrative. They might well convince you to take steps to deal more forthrightly with the shoot-down of MH-17 and minimize the risk that relations with Russia might degenerate into a replay of the Cold War with the threat of escalation into thermonuclear conflict. In all candor, we suspect that at least some of your advisers fail to appreciate the enormity of that danger.
The courtesy of a reply is requested.
For the Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity:
William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)
Thomas Drake, former Senior Executive, National Security Agency
Philip Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.)
Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)
Larry Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)
John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer
Karen Kwiatkowski, former Lt. Col., US Air Force (ret.), at Office of Secretary of Defense watching the manufacture of lies on Iraq, 2001-2003
Edward Loomis, NSA, Cryptologic Computer Scientist (ret.)
David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)
Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)
Elizabeth Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East (ret.)
Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (Ret.)
Coleen Rowley, Division Counsel & Special Agent, FBI (ret.)
Peter Van Buren, US Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret.) (associate VIPS)
Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA
Ann Wright, Col., US Army (ret.); Foreign Service Officer (resigned)
How about this one ??;
MH17: The Blaming Putin Game Goes On
written by philip giraldi
tuesday july 14, 2015dismissal of Russia as “a gas station masquerading as a country.”
One should legitimately be concerned over Russian President Vladimir Putin’s inflicting damage on his country’s fledgling democracy through fraud, corruption, media clampdowns and exploitation of a malleable legal system. One might also object to exactly how Russia asserted its interests using force against neighboring states Georgia and Ukraine. But that does not change the bottom line, which continues to be that functional relations between Moscow and Washington are a sine qua non. Russia’s domestic politics are none of our business and the alleged grievances of Georgia and Ukraine are undeniably a lot less purely attributable to Russian actions than the White House and Congress would have us believe, with US interference in both countries clearly a major contributing factor to the resulting instability.
Assuming that one accepts that lessening bilateral tension over the Ukraine is a desirable objective, the White House might soon have a good opportunity to demonstrate that it is willing to deal fairly with the Russian leadership in Moscow. The Dutch Government’s Safety Board will in October make public its long awaited report detailing its assessment of last year’s downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH-17 over Ukraine. The investigation was conducted with the cooperation of the Ukrainian and Malaysian authorities, but did not include a thorough survey of the crash site, which was and still is considered too dangerous. According to leaks of its conclusions, the report will admit that there is no conclusive evidence regarding who is responsible for the shoot down but it will nevertheless make a circumstantial case that the pro-Russian separatists are the most likely suspects in spite of the fact that there is no hard technical or intelligence related evidence supporting that judgment. Blaming the separatists will, by implication, also blame Moscow.
At this point, the United States, which together with other interested parties has been reviewing a copy of the report in draft, does not intend to present its own findings but will instead go along with the Dutch conclusions. Among former intelligence, military and Foreign Service officers there has been considerable discussion of the significance of Washington’s standing on the sidelines regarding the findings. To be sure, there are a number of rumors and allegations circulating relating to what is actually known or not know about the shoot down.
According to some sources, the US intelligence community disagrees over the likelihood of the alleged Russian role and has suggested as much privately to the Dutch. Some analysts who have looked at all the considerable body of information that has been collected relating to the downing actually believe that the most likely candidate might well be the then governor of the Dnipropetrovsk Oblast Ihor Kolomoisky, an oligarch billionaire who is an Israeli-Ukrainian dual national. Kolomoisky is known to employ Israeli mercenaries as advisers and has personally organized and paid for militias fighting the Russian separatists. He would have been strongly motivated to create an incident that could plausibly be blamed on the Russians or their surrogates and he had the means to do so. The government in Kiev acting independently also had the resources and motive to shoot down the plane and blame it on Moscow.
The dominant narrative that is still circulating widely suggests that either a direct or enabling Russian role is a given based on the claimed origin of the Buk missile, technical analysis of the plume and trajectory, and the military units that were known to be in place or moving at the time. And there was also the apparent separatist bragging on communications intercepts about shooting down a transport plane. This was the explanation that surfaced shortly after the downing, that was heavily promoted by the Ukrainian government and the media and that has been much favored by the international punditry ever since.
The third option of how to explain the shoot down is, of course, the Dutch approach: we think it was the Russians but we can’t prove it. That is an easy choice to make as it really says nothing, which is possibly why it is being favored by the White House.
But if it is actually true that there has been considerable dissent on the findings, the tacit acceptance of a possibly unreliable and essentially unsustainable report by the White House will have significant impact on relations with Russia. It constitutes a disturbing rejection of possibly accurate intelligence analysis in favor of a politically safe alternative explanation. It recalls the politicization of intelligence that included Robert Gates’ Soviet assessments of the 1980s, John McLaughlin’s tergiversation regarding Iraq, and, most recently, Michael Morell’s over the top hyping of the threat posed by political Islam. It is a return to a Manichean view of the world as “them” and “us” with the implication that intelligence professionals are willing to restrain their dissent on an important issue if it serves to advance the current war of words with Russia.
To be sure, deep sixing intelligence assessments that contradict policies that the White House is intent on pursuing anyway buys congenial access to the President and his advisers but it comes at the cost of diminishing the ability of the intelligence community to provide objective and reliable information in a timely fashion, which is at least in theory why it exists at all. Producing honest intelligence will, on the contrary, strengthen both the reputations and credibility of all involved.
If Russia is indeed to blame for the airplane shoot down it should be held accountable, but it is up to the US government to put its cards on the table and be clear about what it does and does not know. The original claims that Russia was involved were based on snap judgments based on bits of information that had been obtained immediately after the event, little of which has been subsequently corroborated through either satellite imagery or electronic and signal intercepts. Since that time the German BND intelligence service has expressed its doubts that the missile used in the shoot down could have been supplied by Russia and has also claimed that photos provided by the Ukrainian government as part of the investigation had been “doctored.” There have also been reports regarding a Ukrainian fighter plane being in the area of the airliner as well as the nearby presence of Ukrainian ground to air missile units. Reported conversations among separatist claiming credit were eventuallydetermined to be composite fakes produced by the Ukrainian intelligence services. Presumably US intelligence has also taken a long and hard look at all the evidence or lack thereof but it is being quiet regarding what it has determined.
It is important to get this right because the potential damage goes far beyond the role of intelligence or even who might have been responsible for the downing of an airliner one year ago. As the relationship with Russia is of critical importance and should be regarded as the number one national security issue for the United States, it is essential that the Dutch conclusions be aggressively challenged if there is even the slightest possibility that Russia is blameless.
One does not have to be a fan of Vladimir Putin to appreciate that the nearly continuous efforts being promoted within mostly neoconservative circles to both delegitimize and confront him and his regime do not serve any conceivable American national interest. In an Independence Day phone call to President Obama, President Putin called for a working relationship with the United States based on “equality and respect,” which should, under the circumstances, be a given. Americans have been lied into intervention and war more than once over the past fifteen years and it should be clear to all that any contrived crisis based on an erroneous conclusion regarding a shot down airliner that develops into an armed conflict with Russia will have unimaginable consequences. A skeptical American public and international community must demand that any MH-17 report should reflect a full assessment, to include any dissent from its conclusions registered by the United States intelligence community. Any information at variance with the conventional view, particularly anything that suggests that there might be other interested parties who had both the means and compelling interest to shoot down a civilian airliner, must become a part of the discussion.
Reprinted with author's permission from Unz.com.
MH17: The Blaming Putin Game Goes On
written by philip giraldi
tuesday july 14, 2015dismissal of Russia as “a gas station masquerading as a country.”
One should legitimately be concerned over Russian President Vladimir Putin’s inflicting damage on his country’s fledgling democracy through fraud, corruption, media clampdowns and exploitation of a malleable legal system. One might also object to exactly how Russia asserted its interests using force against neighboring states Georgia and Ukraine. But that does not change the bottom line, which continues to be that functional relations between Moscow and Washington are a sine qua non. Russia’s domestic politics are none of our business and the alleged grievances of Georgia and Ukraine are undeniably a lot less purely attributable to Russian actions than the White House and Congress would have us believe, with US interference in both countries clearly a major contributing factor to the resulting instability.
Assuming that one accepts that lessening bilateral tension over the Ukraine is a desirable objective, the White House might soon have a good opportunity to demonstrate that it is willing to deal fairly with the Russian leadership in Moscow. The Dutch Government’s Safety Board will in October make public its long awaited report detailing its assessment of last year’s downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH-17 over Ukraine. The investigation was conducted with the cooperation of the Ukrainian and Malaysian authorities, but did not include a thorough survey of the crash site, which was and still is considered too dangerous. According to leaks of its conclusions, the report will admit that there is no conclusive evidence regarding who is responsible for the shoot down but it will nevertheless make a circumstantial case that the pro-Russian separatists are the most likely suspects in spite of the fact that there is no hard technical or intelligence related evidence supporting that judgment. Blaming the separatists will, by implication, also blame Moscow.
At this point, the United States, which together with other interested parties has been reviewing a copy of the report in draft, does not intend to present its own findings but will instead go along with the Dutch conclusions. Among former intelligence, military and Foreign Service officers there has been considerable discussion of the significance of Washington’s standing on the sidelines regarding the findings. To be sure, there are a number of rumors and allegations circulating relating to what is actually known or not know about the shoot down.
According to some sources, the US intelligence community disagrees over the likelihood of the alleged Russian role and has suggested as much privately to the Dutch. Some analysts who have looked at all the considerable body of information that has been collected relating to the downing actually believe that the most likely candidate might well be the then governor of the Dnipropetrovsk Oblast Ihor Kolomoisky, an oligarch billionaire who is an Israeli-Ukrainian dual national. Kolomoisky is known to employ Israeli mercenaries as advisers and has personally organized and paid for militias fighting the Russian separatists. He would have been strongly motivated to create an incident that could plausibly be blamed on the Russians or their surrogates and he had the means to do so. The government in Kiev acting independently also had the resources and motive to shoot down the plane and blame it on Moscow.
The dominant narrative that is still circulating widely suggests that either a direct or enabling Russian role is a given based on the claimed origin of the Buk missile, technical analysis of the plume and trajectory, and the military units that were known to be in place or moving at the time. And there was also the apparent separatist bragging on communications intercepts about shooting down a transport plane. This was the explanation that surfaced shortly after the downing, that was heavily promoted by the Ukrainian government and the media and that has been much favored by the international punditry ever since.
The third option of how to explain the shoot down is, of course, the Dutch approach: we think it was the Russians but we can’t prove it. That is an easy choice to make as it really says nothing, which is possibly why it is being favored by the White House.
But if it is actually true that there has been considerable dissent on the findings, the tacit acceptance of a possibly unreliable and essentially unsustainable report by the White House will have significant impact on relations with Russia. It constitutes a disturbing rejection of possibly accurate intelligence analysis in favor of a politically safe alternative explanation. It recalls the politicization of intelligence that included Robert Gates’ Soviet assessments of the 1980s, John McLaughlin’s tergiversation regarding Iraq, and, most recently, Michael Morell’s over the top hyping of the threat posed by political Islam. It is a return to a Manichean view of the world as “them” and “us” with the implication that intelligence professionals are willing to restrain their dissent on an important issue if it serves to advance the current war of words with Russia.
To be sure, deep sixing intelligence assessments that contradict policies that the White House is intent on pursuing anyway buys congenial access to the President and his advisers but it comes at the cost of diminishing the ability of the intelligence community to provide objective and reliable information in a timely fashion, which is at least in theory why it exists at all. Producing honest intelligence will, on the contrary, strengthen both the reputations and credibility of all involved.
If Russia is indeed to blame for the airplane shoot down it should be held accountable, but it is up to the US government to put its cards on the table and be clear about what it does and does not know. The original claims that Russia was involved were based on snap judgments based on bits of information that had been obtained immediately after the event, little of which has been subsequently corroborated through either satellite imagery or electronic and signal intercepts. Since that time the German BND intelligence service has expressed its doubts that the missile used in the shoot down could have been supplied by Russia and has also claimed that photos provided by the Ukrainian government as part of the investigation had been “doctored.” There have also been reports regarding a Ukrainian fighter plane being in the area of the airliner as well as the nearby presence of Ukrainian ground to air missile units. Reported conversations among separatist claiming credit were eventuallydetermined to be composite fakes produced by the Ukrainian intelligence services. Presumably US intelligence has also taken a long and hard look at all the evidence or lack thereof but it is being quiet regarding what it has determined.
It is important to get this right because the potential damage goes far beyond the role of intelligence or even who might have been responsible for the downing of an airliner one year ago. As the relationship with Russia is of critical importance and should be regarded as the number one national security issue for the United States, it is essential that the Dutch conclusions be aggressively challenged if there is even the slightest possibility that Russia is blameless.
One does not have to be a fan of Vladimir Putin to appreciate that the nearly continuous efforts being promoted within mostly neoconservative circles to both delegitimize and confront him and his regime do not serve any conceivable American national interest. In an Independence Day phone call to President Obama, President Putin called for a working relationship with the United States based on “equality and respect,” which should, under the circumstances, be a given. Americans have been lied into intervention and war more than once over the past fifteen years and it should be clear to all that any contrived crisis based on an erroneous conclusion regarding a shot down airliner that develops into an armed conflict with Russia will have unimaginable consequences. A skeptical American public and international community must demand that any MH-17 report should reflect a full assessment, to include any dissent from its conclusions registered by the United States intelligence community. Any information at variance with the conventional view, particularly anything that suggests that there might be other interested parties who had both the means and compelling interest to shoot down a civilian airliner, must become a part of the discussion.
Reprinted with author's permission from Unz.com.
Also consider this;
The EU and the US are the ones who created the chaos in Ukraine, said Daniel McAdams, of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity. The countries on the EU periphery like Hungary have to take on the burden receiving thousands of refugees, he added.
Ukraine's President Petro Poroshenko has called for a crackdown on paramilitary units working in the country, saying no political force should have armed squads at its disposal. The statement came after a violent stand-off in the western town of Mukachevo, between far-right extremists from the Right Sector group and the police.
RT: What is the Right Sector to Ukraine, do you think? And what’s the Western attitude now to the radical groups in Ukraine?
Daniel McAdams: I think the Right Sector, and I don’t want to overemphasize this, but I think the Right Sector troops are to Ukraine what Al-Qaeda is in Syria. They’ve been necessary and they’ve been supported by the US and the EU because they are the best fighters. We just saw [yesterday] that a tank battalion in the regular Ukrainian army made a video saying “we’re not going to fight anymore.”You’ve had problems with morale in the conscripted Ukrainian army. They don’t want to be there, they would rather be home.
The Right Sector is an ideological army like Al-Qaeda. Therefore they are motivated for other reasons to fight. Therefore, it would be very difficult to rein in groups like this. They were extremely useful in ratcheting up the violence for the Maidan. As a matter of fact, you needed to have that for the revolution to get off the ground. However, now you’re facing a Frankenstein monster that has been created by the US and by the EU, and they don’t know what to do about it.
In western Ukraine in the USSR you’ve seen a lot of extreme right groups, as well as in the western Ukraine. There were always skinhead demonstrations and these people are always active. They came to prominence in Maidan but they have been around for a number of years.
People in the West have started to believe their own propaganda. Any mention of neo-Nazis, extreme right wing, this is all just ‘Putin’s propaganda’. So therefore they have not considered this a possibility. US Congress has finally seen that there is a group called Right Sector that is putting SS stickers on their hats and logos on their hats and therefore is a danger.
RT: With the situation in Ukraine growing increasingly volatile. How much of a concern is this for EU countries?
Daniel McAdams: I think you have to make the distinction. We’ve learned over the last couple of weeks, and in particularly the last couple of days how the interior of the EU feels about its periphery. Look at the way that Greece has been treated these past few days. Hungary has also been on the same short end of the stick. Hungary has been complaining for a while that because of EU participation in the US regime change operations in Syria they have to receive thousands of Syrian refugees. When they attempted to close their border, at least control some of this, they were criticized and attacked by the EU.
On the same front the center of the EU and the US are the ones who stirred up the trouble in Ukraine. They are the ones who have created this chaos. Countries like Hungary and Slovakia on the periphery are once again taking the brunt of the interventionist policies of the US and the EU, and they are being told to shut up and take it. Let’s not forget that in Mukachevo there is a 10 percent Hungarian minority and a similar Slovak minority - we’re talking about thousands of people who are under threat.
RT: Is it going to be possible for President Poroshenko to disarm the Right Sector, and other paramilitary groups?
DM: Let’s not forget over the past how many months the US has been training a lot of these groups, not specifically the Right Sector, of course, but so concerned was the US Congress that recently they had to pass a law forbidding any money for training from going to train the Right Sector. If there was no possibility of that happening Congress wouldn’t have felt the need to chime in.
So on the one hand, the US is training a lot of these groups that are outside of the regular army. And now the President of Ukraine who has relied on these groups, because they have been the most effective fighters in the east particularly. He has relied on them, and now he claims that he is going to try to crack down on them. Well, good luck on that.
RT: The Ukrainian leadership has promised closer integration with the EU. Could the rise of extremist groups compromise that?
DM: I think it might be a one-sided love affair. Increasingly it looks like the EU was looking at Ukraine and wondering what the heck they’ve gotten into. Greece looks like Switzerland when you take a look at Ukraine’s economic problems. You got to add to that the enormous cultural problems, ethnic problems, an active civil war going on. I think we saw last week even one EU official, when he was courted by Ukrainian officials, said: “Let’s put this talk about an agreement on hold for a while.” They are finally realizing what they have gotten themselves into.
Reprinted with permission from RT. Video here.
The EU and the US are the ones who created the chaos in Ukraine, said Daniel McAdams, of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity. The countries on the EU periphery like Hungary have to take on the burden receiving thousands of refugees, he added.
Ukraine's President Petro Poroshenko has called for a crackdown on paramilitary units working in the country, saying no political force should have armed squads at its disposal. The statement came after a violent stand-off in the western town of Mukachevo, between far-right extremists from the Right Sector group and the police.
RT: What is the Right Sector to Ukraine, do you think? And what’s the Western attitude now to the radical groups in Ukraine?
Daniel McAdams: I think the Right Sector, and I don’t want to overemphasize this, but I think the Right Sector troops are to Ukraine what Al-Qaeda is in Syria. They’ve been necessary and they’ve been supported by the US and the EU because they are the best fighters. We just saw [yesterday] that a tank battalion in the regular Ukrainian army made a video saying “we’re not going to fight anymore.”You’ve had problems with morale in the conscripted Ukrainian army. They don’t want to be there, they would rather be home.
The Right Sector is an ideological army like Al-Qaeda. Therefore they are motivated for other reasons to fight. Therefore, it would be very difficult to rein in groups like this. They were extremely useful in ratcheting up the violence for the Maidan. As a matter of fact, you needed to have that for the revolution to get off the ground. However, now you’re facing a Frankenstein monster that has been created by the US and by the EU, and they don’t know what to do about it.
In western Ukraine in the USSR you’ve seen a lot of extreme right groups, as well as in the western Ukraine. There were always skinhead demonstrations and these people are always active. They came to prominence in Maidan but they have been around for a number of years.
People in the West have started to believe their own propaganda. Any mention of neo-Nazis, extreme right wing, this is all just ‘Putin’s propaganda’. So therefore they have not considered this a possibility. US Congress has finally seen that there is a group called Right Sector that is putting SS stickers on their hats and logos on their hats and therefore is a danger.
RT: With the situation in Ukraine growing increasingly volatile. How much of a concern is this for EU countries?
Daniel McAdams: I think you have to make the distinction. We’ve learned over the last couple of weeks, and in particularly the last couple of days how the interior of the EU feels about its periphery. Look at the way that Greece has been treated these past few days. Hungary has also been on the same short end of the stick. Hungary has been complaining for a while that because of EU participation in the US regime change operations in Syria they have to receive thousands of Syrian refugees. When they attempted to close their border, at least control some of this, they were criticized and attacked by the EU.
On the same front the center of the EU and the US are the ones who stirred up the trouble in Ukraine. They are the ones who have created this chaos. Countries like Hungary and Slovakia on the periphery are once again taking the brunt of the interventionist policies of the US and the EU, and they are being told to shut up and take it. Let’s not forget that in Mukachevo there is a 10 percent Hungarian minority and a similar Slovak minority - we’re talking about thousands of people who are under threat.
RT: Is it going to be possible for President Poroshenko to disarm the Right Sector, and other paramilitary groups?
DM: Let’s not forget over the past how many months the US has been training a lot of these groups, not specifically the Right Sector, of course, but so concerned was the US Congress that recently they had to pass a law forbidding any money for training from going to train the Right Sector. If there was no possibility of that happening Congress wouldn’t have felt the need to chime in.
So on the one hand, the US is training a lot of these groups that are outside of the regular army. And now the President of Ukraine who has relied on these groups, because they have been the most effective fighters in the east particularly. He has relied on them, and now he claims that he is going to try to crack down on them. Well, good luck on that.
RT: The Ukrainian leadership has promised closer integration with the EU. Could the rise of extremist groups compromise that?
DM: I think it might be a one-sided love affair. Increasingly it looks like the EU was looking at Ukraine and wondering what the heck they’ve gotten into. Greece looks like Switzerland when you take a look at Ukraine’s economic problems. You got to add to that the enormous cultural problems, ethnic problems, an active civil war going on. I think we saw last week even one EU official, when he was courted by Ukrainian officials, said: “Let’s put this talk about an agreement on hold for a while.” They are finally realizing what they have gotten themselves into.
Reprinted with permission from RT. Video here.
It will help you translate.google ...
In point of fact: Because writing is seen a complete misunderstanding of our existing situation. It's fantastic what the horror stories about the right sector. In fact, the right sector is not the most radical structure. Rights-sector pay so much attention only because of the fact that this organization has the official status and is public. In fact there are far more astronomical Number of radical structures that have no status, are not political activities and whose sole purpose is to counter the Russian occupation in the open invasion. I can only say that these methods of countering the majority is not only contrary to any international conventions but also the worldview of human civilization.
and yet you told us that you came from US,have your family there and left US after 1979...this in February
and the reason russia invaded Ukraine was to get total control over the steel works there and create a puppet-nation under kremlins rule
and the reason russia invaded Ukraine was to get total control over the steel works there and create a puppet-nation under kremlins rule
Well I still have not seen a massive invasion from Russia to get the steelworks and am still waiting for further actions?
I had several reasons to leave the US and if my family wants to stay that's their liberty, but they do support me in my reasons for leaving and building a better live for me and my current family.
I must say its a relieve not to get anymore stupid comments from the other US "patriots" on my own comments?
Even with my family still there I do believe that americans will get their "come-up" in the very near future and their "God" person will not be there to safe them from all the destruction and murder they created around the world?
Specially if they vote Hillary in, their country will be destroyed and they are stupid enough to do just that ??
But I guess its Europe first up for destruction and am glad I'm out of there also, the whole world has gone totally corrupt and I'm not sorry for trying to safe my own hide and my kids future, whatever will be left for them !!
But I feel sorry for Anaconda as he will be in the middle of things to come, better get out while you can??
I hope you all are ready for the "coming events" to start the end of september?? There's still time to join me ?? HaHa.
I had several reasons to leave the US and if my family wants to stay that's their liberty, but they do support me in my reasons for leaving and building a better live for me and my current family.
I must say its a relieve not to get anymore stupid comments from the other US "patriots" on my own comments?
Even with my family still there I do believe that americans will get their "come-up" in the very near future and their "God" person will not be there to safe them from all the destruction and murder they created around the world?
Specially if they vote Hillary in, their country will be destroyed and they are stupid enough to do just that ??
But I guess its Europe first up for destruction and am glad I'm out of there also, the whole world has gone totally corrupt and I'm not sorry for trying to safe my own hide and my kids future, whatever will be left for them !!
But I feel sorry for Anaconda as he will be in the middle of things to come, better get out while you can??
I hope you all are ready for the "coming events" to start the end of september?? There's still time to join me ?? HaHa.
Fact Checking Scoundrel Media Lies
On April 29, Times editors headlined "Not Getting Through to Mr, Putin," saying:
US and EU imposed sanctions followed "Russia's involvement" with Eastern Ukrainian anti-Kiev activists. Times editors quoted Washington and Brussels. They lied calling it "indisputable."
Times editors call sanctions "justified." They accused Putin of "bluster."
He "demonstative(ly) disdain(s)" four-party "Geneva agreement" terms "along with the aggressive behavior of Russian troops massed on Ukraine's borders and the continued occupation of administrative and security buildings in southeastern Ukrainian cities by Moscow-directed secessionists," they said.
"(T)argeted penalties are not likely to change Russia's behavior."
Times editors urge tougher ones. "(T)here will be…costs" otherwise…"Europe and America (must) join in a unified response."
"(A) weak and fragmented response would call into question a longstanding trans-Atlantic commitment to protect international law and democratic values against the kind of aggression Mr. Putin is engaging in."
"The misrepresentations of the US media in dealing with the Ukraine crisis have been spectacular, reaching and perhaps surpassing their performance during the 50-year-long Cold War era, with the notion of 'objectivity' buried beneath a landslide of biased tone and word usage, rewritten or suppressed history, use of selective evidence, and double-standards."
Their detailed, documented analysis provides proof positive. Media scoundrels regurgitate official Big Lies. Truth is a powerful disinfectant. Burying it is prioritized.
It bears repeating what previous articles stressed. So-called New York Times news fit to print isn't fit to read. It's rubbish.
It's ideologically driven. It's one-sided. It's over-the-top. It's hypocritical garbage.
It violates fundamental journalistic principles. Truth-telling matters most. It's nowhere in sight. Bad fiction substitutes
Fact: Sanctions imposed are illegitimate.
Fact: They have no legal standing.
Fact: They violate international law.
Fact: Russia alone abides by four-party agreement terms responsibly.
Fact: Washington, rogue EU partners and Kiev putschists systematically violated them.
Fact: No Russian hoards threaten Ukraine.
Fact: Anti-Kiev activists act on their own volition.
Fact: No evidence shows Russian involvement.
Fact: UN Charter provisions support all people's self-determination rights.
Fact: US and rogue EU states deplore international law and democratic values.
Fact: Lawless aggression is longstanding US/EU policy.
Fact: Putin champions peace and stability.
Fact: He deplores violence in all forms.
Fact: He denounces aggression.
Fact: He speaks out forthrightly against it.
Fact: Times editors lied claiming otherwise.
Putin "poses" "danger," they said. They urged "rein(ing) him in."
"His authoritarian behavior at home, his disdain for the Geneva agreement and, most recently, the capture of a European military observer mission in Slavyansk" demand tough measures against him, they said.
Crisis conditions will worsen "unless the West is prepared to unite behind serious economic sanctions that hurt Russia's financial, energy and military sectors."
Fact: So-called military observers were exposed as NATO spies.
Fact: Putin responsibly challenges Washington's hegemonic ambitions.
Fact: He's humanity's best hope to curtail it.
Fact: He deserves worldwide praise.
Fact: He warrants universal support.
Fact: He forthrightly observes Geneva terms.
Fact: No evidence suggests otherwise.
Fact: Russian democracy shames America's sham version.
Fact: Putin heads a free and open society.
Fact: Obama heads a ruthless homeland police state apparatus.
Fact: US freedom is endangered.
Fact: It's being systematically destroyed.
Fact : Full-blown tyranny is a hair's breadth away.
Fact: Permanent war is official US policy.
Fact: Unchallenged global dominance is sought.
Fact: One country after another is ravaged and destroyed to achieve it.
Fact: Don't expect Times editors to explain.
Fact: Big Lies substitute for full and accurate reporting.
Fact: Regurgitating official Big Lies is longstanding Times policy.
Fact: Propaganda masquerades as real news and analysis.
Fact: Readers are systematically deceived.
Part 2 follows;
On April 29, Times editors headlined "Not Getting Through to Mr, Putin," saying:
US and EU imposed sanctions followed "Russia's involvement" with Eastern Ukrainian anti-Kiev activists. Times editors quoted Washington and Brussels. They lied calling it "indisputable."
Times editors call sanctions "justified." They accused Putin of "bluster."
He "demonstative(ly) disdain(s)" four-party "Geneva agreement" terms "along with the aggressive behavior of Russian troops massed on Ukraine's borders and the continued occupation of administrative and security buildings in southeastern Ukrainian cities by Moscow-directed secessionists," they said.
"(T)argeted penalties are not likely to change Russia's behavior."
Times editors urge tougher ones. "(T)here will be…costs" otherwise…"Europe and America (must) join in a unified response."
"(A) weak and fragmented response would call into question a longstanding trans-Atlantic commitment to protect international law and democratic values against the kind of aggression Mr. Putin is engaging in."
"The misrepresentations of the US media in dealing with the Ukraine crisis have been spectacular, reaching and perhaps surpassing their performance during the 50-year-long Cold War era, with the notion of 'objectivity' buried beneath a landslide of biased tone and word usage, rewritten or suppressed history, use of selective evidence, and double-standards."
Their detailed, documented analysis provides proof positive. Media scoundrels regurgitate official Big Lies. Truth is a powerful disinfectant. Burying it is prioritized.
It bears repeating what previous articles stressed. So-called New York Times news fit to print isn't fit to read. It's rubbish.
It's ideologically driven. It's one-sided. It's over-the-top. It's hypocritical garbage.
It violates fundamental journalistic principles. Truth-telling matters most. It's nowhere in sight. Bad fiction substitutes
Fact: Sanctions imposed are illegitimate.
Fact: They have no legal standing.
Fact: They violate international law.
Fact: Russia alone abides by four-party agreement terms responsibly.
Fact: Washington, rogue EU partners and Kiev putschists systematically violated them.
Fact: No Russian hoards threaten Ukraine.
Fact: Anti-Kiev activists act on their own volition.
Fact: No evidence shows Russian involvement.
Fact: UN Charter provisions support all people's self-determination rights.
Fact: US and rogue EU states deplore international law and democratic values.
Fact: Lawless aggression is longstanding US/EU policy.
Fact: Putin champions peace and stability.
Fact: He deplores violence in all forms.
Fact: He denounces aggression.
Fact: He speaks out forthrightly against it.
Fact: Times editors lied claiming otherwise.
Putin "poses" "danger," they said. They urged "rein(ing) him in."
"His authoritarian behavior at home, his disdain for the Geneva agreement and, most recently, the capture of a European military observer mission in Slavyansk" demand tough measures against him, they said.
Crisis conditions will worsen "unless the West is prepared to unite behind serious economic sanctions that hurt Russia's financial, energy and military sectors."
Fact: So-called military observers were exposed as NATO spies.
Fact: Putin responsibly challenges Washington's hegemonic ambitions.
Fact: He's humanity's best hope to curtail it.
Fact: He deserves worldwide praise.
Fact: He warrants universal support.
Fact: He forthrightly observes Geneva terms.
Fact: No evidence suggests otherwise.
Fact: Russian democracy shames America's sham version.
Fact: Putin heads a free and open society.
Fact: Obama heads a ruthless homeland police state apparatus.
Fact: US freedom is endangered.
Fact: It's being systematically destroyed.
Fact : Full-blown tyranny is a hair's breadth away.
Fact: Permanent war is official US policy.
Fact: Unchallenged global dominance is sought.
Fact: One country after another is ravaged and destroyed to achieve it.
Fact: Don't expect Times editors to explain.
Fact: Big Lies substitute for full and accurate reporting.
Fact: Regurgitating official Big Lies is longstanding Times policy.
Fact: Propaganda masquerades as real news and analysis.
Fact: Readers are systematically deceived.
Part 2 follows;
Slawomir Sierakowski masquerades as a left-of-center political observer. His opinions reveal otherwise.
Times editors gave him featured op-ed space. On April 28, he headlined "Putin's Useful Idiots," saying:
"(M)any American and Western European intellectuals do all they can to minimize the dangerous aggression by Vladimir V. Putin."
Sierakowski turned truth on its head. He claimed putschist-run Ukraine represents "democracy." He called Russian truth-telling "propaganda."
He called neo-Nazi extremist Dmytro Yarosh legitimate because he's "deputy secretary of the National Security and Defense Council."
Sierakowski ignored his illegitimate appointment. He turned a blind eye to his open boast about "…fighting Jews and Russians till I die."
He lied claiming Yarosh pledged to "fight all instances of anti-Semitism, xenophobia and chauvinism." He ludicrously claimed "fascist phantoms in Ukraine."
He said independent "Western intellectuals" claiming otherwise support "not just with the autocrat in the Kremlin, but the legions of far-right parties across Europe that have come to Russia's defense…"
"Who says Russia needs propaganda," he asked? "It already has its useful idiots."
No self-respecting editors would touch Sierakowski's trash. Times editors featured it.
On April 28, neocon Washington Post editors headlined "Obama's half-measures give Vladimir Putin little to fear," saying:
His "assault on Ukraine has been relentless and increasingly reckless: Forces working with Russian personnel in eastern Ukraine are torturing and murdering opponents and holding international observers hostage."
"In contrast, President Obama's response has been slow and excruciatingly measured."
"New US sanctions announced Monday fall well short of the steps that senior officials threatened when the Russian offensive in eastern Ukraine began three weeks ago."
It bears repeating. No evidence whatever shows Russian Eastern Ukrainian involvement.
None suggests self-defense activists commit torture or murder. So-called "hostages" are NATO spies.
Putin "made a mockery of the administration's diplomacy, blatantly ignoring the agreement accepted by his foreign minister in Geneva 11 days ago," said WaPo editors.
False! Putin acted responsibly. Obama, rogue EU leaders and coup-appointed putschists violated Geneva terms straightaway.
WaPo editors lied saying "Russia invaded Ukraine." US supported fascist putschist claims were cited as evidence. None whatever exists.
Inventing them out of whole cloth doesn't wash. Nor claiming Crimean reunification with Russia represents "the first forcible change of borders in Europe since World War II."
Nearly 97% of Crimeans voted to do so. They did peacefully, fairly, openly and democratically. International law supports them.
Don't expect WaPo editors to explain. Or call US wars on humanity lawless aggression. Or forthrightly denounce them.
On April 29, Wall Street Journal editors headlined "From Kharkiv (aka Kharkov, Ukraine's second largest city) to Brussels," saying:
Obama's "penalties look robust by comparison to the European Union's latest sanctions list."
"The 15 persons now facing EU travel bans and asset freezes include no companies; a lot of provincial nobodies; and some obvious malefactors who should have been sanctioned months ago…"
"Events in Ukraine are moving fast, and the next time EU officials meet to make their token sanctions list there may be much less of Ukraine to pretend to care about."
Daily Journal Russia bashing twists fundamental truths irresponsibly. Propaganda bad enough to make PR wizards blush substitutes.
Other US media scoundrels operate the same way. Official Big Lies are regurgitated. They repeat ad nauseam.
They read like bad fiction. They mock legitimate journalism. They substitute for the real thing.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected].
His new book is titled "Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity."
http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.
Times editors gave him featured op-ed space. On April 28, he headlined "Putin's Useful Idiots," saying:
"(M)any American and Western European intellectuals do all they can to minimize the dangerous aggression by Vladimir V. Putin."
Sierakowski turned truth on its head. He claimed putschist-run Ukraine represents "democracy." He called Russian truth-telling "propaganda."
He called neo-Nazi extremist Dmytro Yarosh legitimate because he's "deputy secretary of the National Security and Defense Council."
Sierakowski ignored his illegitimate appointment. He turned a blind eye to his open boast about "…fighting Jews and Russians till I die."
He lied claiming Yarosh pledged to "fight all instances of anti-Semitism, xenophobia and chauvinism." He ludicrously claimed "fascist phantoms in Ukraine."
He said independent "Western intellectuals" claiming otherwise support "not just with the autocrat in the Kremlin, but the legions of far-right parties across Europe that have come to Russia's defense…"
"Who says Russia needs propaganda," he asked? "It already has its useful idiots."
No self-respecting editors would touch Sierakowski's trash. Times editors featured it.
On April 28, neocon Washington Post editors headlined "Obama's half-measures give Vladimir Putin little to fear," saying:
His "assault on Ukraine has been relentless and increasingly reckless: Forces working with Russian personnel in eastern Ukraine are torturing and murdering opponents and holding international observers hostage."
"In contrast, President Obama's response has been slow and excruciatingly measured."
"New US sanctions announced Monday fall well short of the steps that senior officials threatened when the Russian offensive in eastern Ukraine began three weeks ago."
It bears repeating. No evidence whatever shows Russian Eastern Ukrainian involvement.
None suggests self-defense activists commit torture or murder. So-called "hostages" are NATO spies.
Putin "made a mockery of the administration's diplomacy, blatantly ignoring the agreement accepted by his foreign minister in Geneva 11 days ago," said WaPo editors.
False! Putin acted responsibly. Obama, rogue EU leaders and coup-appointed putschists violated Geneva terms straightaway.
WaPo editors lied saying "Russia invaded Ukraine." US supported fascist putschist claims were cited as evidence. None whatever exists.
Inventing them out of whole cloth doesn't wash. Nor claiming Crimean reunification with Russia represents "the first forcible change of borders in Europe since World War II."
Nearly 97% of Crimeans voted to do so. They did peacefully, fairly, openly and democratically. International law supports them.
Don't expect WaPo editors to explain. Or call US wars on humanity lawless aggression. Or forthrightly denounce them.
On April 29, Wall Street Journal editors headlined "From Kharkiv (aka Kharkov, Ukraine's second largest city) to Brussels," saying:
Obama's "penalties look robust by comparison to the European Union's latest sanctions list."
"The 15 persons now facing EU travel bans and asset freezes include no companies; a lot of provincial nobodies; and some obvious malefactors who should have been sanctioned months ago…"
"Events in Ukraine are moving fast, and the next time EU officials meet to make their token sanctions list there may be much less of Ukraine to pretend to care about."
Daily Journal Russia bashing twists fundamental truths irresponsibly. Propaganda bad enough to make PR wizards blush substitutes.
Other US media scoundrels operate the same way. Official Big Lies are regurgitated. They repeat ad nauseam.
They read like bad fiction. They mock legitimate journalism. They substitute for the real thing.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected].
His new book is titled "Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity."
http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.
Frankly speaking not wait attempts ruska army offensive in my direction to advance to the territory of Russia and the Russian killing there, burn villages and cut their population. It will not be with classical war in the hope that the Russian generals and politicians in which Russia has a chance to win.
THE VERSION OF "INVASION"
Especially in the continuation of the theme of the forecast of the invasion.
It is important to consider a few points.
This situation with the current Russian opposition has almost no non-military solutions.
We at least since 2003, for a conflict. Tuzla, ignored the Russian threat and turned a blind eye to the collapse of our defense.
And, as part of the material and personnel.
The absurdity of the 450 generals at 120 thousand. Army just shouting about the need to do something.
And to blame as a frank renegade Yanukovych and his ilk, and Yushchenko and Tymoshenko Gritsenko.
All of them disorganized army, and the latter - a finger is not hit landing separatists for the very first gathering of Severodonetsk and urinals.
Now we have the same situation and with the same layout as then, but in a much worse situation.
The current government has played in the same game. Separatists in power feel at ease now, and those who are directly to blame for impotence tuzlovskogo conflict are negotiating in Minsk.
This is the same rake. Such actions will never lead to a non-military solution to the conflict.
This is a new starter on the old yeast. Thus, we only provoke Putin to the escalation of the conflict.
From the Rosii we have a government that ignores the foundations of international law.
They do not take into account the commitments made by Russia and the Soviet Union, the successor of which they themselves have announced.
How can we trust their signatures under the "Minsk" or something else, if they have already refused to sign near Helsinki, Budapest and dozens of other documents?
They just spit on these signatures, as it is now spit on all the signatures "Minsk".Obviously, to negotiate with them is useless!
Because of this we do and the calculation of the forecast. Moreover, this forecast do not just us. Western analysts have counted up to 40 battalion tactical groups aggressor on our border.
If someone carefully read the previous article, it was stated that there are two important aspects. First. Now it is not the most advantageous time to invade. Best time irretrievably lost.
Defence of Ukraine is now shown in a sane state, and an easy walk Russian will be gone.
This means that the enemy will get serious positional battles. His fantasies about 10-12 day operation to capture the Left Bank - absolutely unrealizable.
This means a protracted war. And the resources for such a war, Russia is almost there.
II. Resources for conducting the war, the Russian Federation reduced every day and there will come a time when the very meaning of a large-scale operation will be gone, because to be completely enclosed in a war and losing the rest.
We call it the "window of opportunity" and it will snap in late autumn. By that time, the Russian economy is simply not able to work for the war.
Some might say that we have no resources. I want to see this long-standing and inexorable rule: if there is a US weapons - there are American advisers, and if there are American advisers - there are American weapons.
A advisors have not only American and more! I will not argue that the US (and others) is already on the weapons storage depots with our side of the border, but on the perimeter of the Polish and the Romanian border is accurate.
You only need a reason, that it was in the hands of our soldiers. Once this happens, and, at least, the ground phase of the invasion would become meaningless.
Modern Western anti-tank weapon so effective that the West has long ceased to develop new tanks.
In Iraq, the Americans specifically sought out enemy tanks to burn.
Tellingly, the Iraqis have learned it very quickly and just throwing tanks and armored vehicles at the first sign of the beginning of the fight. Survive is the armor was possible, in - not.
As for the air, where Russian have an overwhelming advantage, I think they will, and they are an unpleasant surprise this little guess.
They know what it means to "Closed Skies". It will not be 220 aircraft the Air Force of Ukraine, but something else.
To do this is simply to take into account the fact that NATO do URO destroyers and cruisers, and what kind of aircraft being transferred to the borders of Ukraine and already - Russia.
That is, Russia is now chooses a bad or catastrophic scenario. Home invasion would mean the end of Russia as a geographical concept.
To understand the necessity of crushing the Russian Federation has come those who are able to change the political map of the world. Thus, the beginning of the invasion will be the last act of the play, which is very quickly over just a military solution of this node.
With the fall of Russia to end the war in Ukraine, but not only. During the year LIH die in Iraq there will be peace.
The same will happen in Syria and Yemen.
In addition, finally settles the confrontation between Palestine and Israel. All somehow tied to Russia, which has become a generator of terrorism in the world.
In short, for a year and a half it became all clear, all made their findings and look forward to Russia rash step, you can even say - lured to make this step most.
So Putin has a bad option - to see out the possibility of loss and catastrophic invasion - to launch an invasion.
As he frantically tries to demonstrate a willingness to sell the invasion and the situation as expensive as possible.
He needs to show his people the prize for which all this works. The trick is that buyers in the Putin item - no.
So what are waiting for developments. In any case, our win-win situation, I would like only a smaller number of our victims.
Especially in the continuation of the theme of the forecast of the invasion.
It is important to consider a few points.
This situation with the current Russian opposition has almost no non-military solutions.
We at least since 2003, for a conflict. Tuzla, ignored the Russian threat and turned a blind eye to the collapse of our defense.
And, as part of the material and personnel.
The absurdity of the 450 generals at 120 thousand. Army just shouting about the need to do something.
And to blame as a frank renegade Yanukovych and his ilk, and Yushchenko and Tymoshenko Gritsenko.
All of them disorganized army, and the latter - a finger is not hit landing separatists for the very first gathering of Severodonetsk and urinals.
Now we have the same situation and with the same layout as then, but in a much worse situation.
The current government has played in the same game. Separatists in power feel at ease now, and those who are directly to blame for impotence tuzlovskogo conflict are negotiating in Minsk.
This is the same rake. Such actions will never lead to a non-military solution to the conflict.
This is a new starter on the old yeast. Thus, we only provoke Putin to the escalation of the conflict.
From the Rosii we have a government that ignores the foundations of international law.
They do not take into account the commitments made by Russia and the Soviet Union, the successor of which they themselves have announced.
How can we trust their signatures under the "Minsk" or something else, if they have already refused to sign near Helsinki, Budapest and dozens of other documents?
They just spit on these signatures, as it is now spit on all the signatures "Minsk".Obviously, to negotiate with them is useless!
Because of this we do and the calculation of the forecast. Moreover, this forecast do not just us. Western analysts have counted up to 40 battalion tactical groups aggressor on our border.
If someone carefully read the previous article, it was stated that there are two important aspects. First. Now it is not the most advantageous time to invade. Best time irretrievably lost.
Defence of Ukraine is now shown in a sane state, and an easy walk Russian will be gone.
This means that the enemy will get serious positional battles. His fantasies about 10-12 day operation to capture the Left Bank - absolutely unrealizable.
This means a protracted war. And the resources for such a war, Russia is almost there.
II. Resources for conducting the war, the Russian Federation reduced every day and there will come a time when the very meaning of a large-scale operation will be gone, because to be completely enclosed in a war and losing the rest.
We call it the "window of opportunity" and it will snap in late autumn. By that time, the Russian economy is simply not able to work for the war.
Some might say that we have no resources. I want to see this long-standing and inexorable rule: if there is a US weapons - there are American advisers, and if there are American advisers - there are American weapons.
A advisors have not only American and more! I will not argue that the US (and others) is already on the weapons storage depots with our side of the border, but on the perimeter of the Polish and the Romanian border is accurate.
You only need a reason, that it was in the hands of our soldiers. Once this happens, and, at least, the ground phase of the invasion would become meaningless.
Modern Western anti-tank weapon so effective that the West has long ceased to develop new tanks.
In Iraq, the Americans specifically sought out enemy tanks to burn.
Tellingly, the Iraqis have learned it very quickly and just throwing tanks and armored vehicles at the first sign of the beginning of the fight. Survive is the armor was possible, in - not.
As for the air, where Russian have an overwhelming advantage, I think they will, and they are an unpleasant surprise this little guess.
They know what it means to "Closed Skies". It will not be 220 aircraft the Air Force of Ukraine, but something else.
To do this is simply to take into account the fact that NATO do URO destroyers and cruisers, and what kind of aircraft being transferred to the borders of Ukraine and already - Russia.
That is, Russia is now chooses a bad or catastrophic scenario. Home invasion would mean the end of Russia as a geographical concept.
To understand the necessity of crushing the Russian Federation has come those who are able to change the political map of the world. Thus, the beginning of the invasion will be the last act of the play, which is very quickly over just a military solution of this node.
With the fall of Russia to end the war in Ukraine, but not only. During the year LIH die in Iraq there will be peace.
The same will happen in Syria and Yemen.
In addition, finally settles the confrontation between Palestine and Israel. All somehow tied to Russia, which has become a generator of terrorism in the world.
In short, for a year and a half it became all clear, all made their findings and look forward to Russia rash step, you can even say - lured to make this step most.
So Putin has a bad option - to see out the possibility of loss and catastrophic invasion - to launch an invasion.
As he frantically tries to demonstrate a willingness to sell the invasion and the situation as expensive as possible.
He needs to show his people the prize for which all this works. The trick is that buyers in the Putin item - no.
So what are waiting for developments. In any case, our win-win situation, I would like only a smaller number of our victims.
Fact Checking Scoundrel Media Lies
On April 29, Times editors headlined "Not Getting Through to Mr, Putin," saying:
US and EU imposed sanctions followed "Russia's involvement" with Eastern Ukrainian anti-Kiev activists. Times editors quoted Washington and Brussels. They lied calling it "indisputable."
Times editors call sanctions "justified." They accused Putin of "bluster."
He "demonstative(ly) disdain(s)" four-party "Geneva agreement" terms "along with the aggressive behavior of Russian troops massed on Ukraine's borders and the continued occupation of administrative and security buildings in southeastern Ukrainian cities by Moscow-directed secessionists," they said.
"(T)argeted penalties are not likely to change Russia's behavior."
Times editors urge tougher ones. "(T)here will be…costs" otherwise…"Europe and America (must) join in a unified response."
"(A) weak and fragmented response would call into question a longstanding trans-Atlantic commitment to protect international law and democratic values against the kind of aggression Mr. Putin is engaging in."
"The misrepresentations of the US media in dealing with the Ukraine crisis have been spectacular, reaching and perhaps surpassing their performance during the 50-year-long Cold War era, with the notion of 'objectivity' buried beneath a landslide of biased tone and word usage, rewritten or suppressed history, use of selective evidence, and double-standards."
Their detailed, documented analysis provides proof positive. Media scoundrels regurgitate official Big Lies. Truth is a powerful disinfectant. Burying it is prioritized.
It bears repeating what previous articles stressed. So-called New York Times news fit to print isn't fit to read. It's rubbish.
It's ideologically driven. It's one-sided. It's over-the-top. It's hypocritical garbage.
It violates fundamental journalistic principles. Truth-telling matters most. It's nowhere in sight. Bad fiction substitutes
Fact: Sanctions imposed are illegitimate.
Fact: They have no legal standing.
Fact: They violate international law.
Fact: Russia alone abides by four-party agreement terms responsibly.
Fact: Washington, rogue EU partners and Kiev putschists systematically violated them.
Fact: No Russian hoards threaten Ukraine.
Fact: Anti-Kiev activists act on their own volition.
Fact: No evidence shows Russian involvement.
Fact: UN Charter provisions support all people's self-determination rights.
Fact: US and rogue EU states deplore international law and democratic values.
Fact: Lawless aggression is longstanding US/EU policy.
Fact: Putin champions peace and stability.
Fact: He deplores violence in all forms.
Fact: He denounces aggression.
Fact: He speaks out forthrightly against it.
Fact: Times editors lied claiming otherwise.
Putin "poses" "danger," they said. They urged "rein(ing) him in."
"His authoritarian behavior at home, his disdain for the Geneva agreement and, most recently, the capture of a European military observer mission in Slavyansk" demand tough measures against him, they said.
Crisis conditions will worsen "unless the West is prepared to unite behind serious economic sanctions that hurt Russia's financial, energy and military sectors."
Fact: So-called military observers were exposed as NATO spies.
Fact: Putin responsibly challenges Washington's hegemonic ambitions.
Fact: He's humanity's best hope to curtail it.
Fact: He deserves worldwide praise.
Fact: He warrants universal support.
Fact: He forthrightly observes Geneva terms.
Fact: No evidence suggests otherwise.
Fact: Russian democracy shames America's sham version.
Fact: Putin heads a free and open society.
Fact: Obama heads a ruthless homeland police state apparatus.
Fact: US freedom is endangered.
Fact: It's being systematically destroyed.
Fact : Full-blown tyranny is a hair's breadth away.
Fact: Permanent war is official US policy.
Fact: Unchallenged global dominance is sought.
Fact: One country after another is ravaged and destroyed to achieve it.
Fact: Don't expect Times editors to explain.
Fact: Big Lies substitute for full and accurate reporting.
Fact: Regurgitating official Big Lies is longstanding Times policy.
Fact: Propaganda masquerades as real news and analysis.
Fact: Readers are systematically deceived.
Part 2 follows;
Ironically you post a quote from malcom x of being cognizant of the media though here is the ironic part joe, you are posting of what you deem to be 'facts' from the media you are asking us to be aware of, are you the only one that has such insight in the media you know what the printed truth is? Very fascinating joe!
So joe, I will apply malcom x quote to your fact based epilogue here. E. H. Carr in 1961 once written 'inherent biases from the gathering of facts"
Last edited:
