America’s military operations in Afghanistan are in a shambles. Simply put, Washington and its NATO allies should fold tent and clear the field, pronto. But there is still time to fix eight years of wrongs to save Afghanistan from the Taliban and al-Qaeda, as well as promote regional and global security. Washington must abandon its ridiculous agenda to westernize and colonize Afghanistan and its people. Obama has a stark choice – get down and dirty to win or witness the American empire die on the wastelands of the Afghan-Pakistan border.
Afghanistan doesn’t need western democracy, it needs security. The recent failed presidential election says it all – Afghanistan is a corrupt and failed state and attempts to create democratic institutions is a waste of time (and the same applies to the questioned legitimacy of American puppets like Karzai). Washington’s democracy project must be cast aside and empower those in Afghanistan who can take on the Taliban-al-Qaeda insurgency.
The American-led occupation of Afghanistan is nothing less than arrogant and a willful disinterest in history. The fact is that the Afghans can take care of themselves and wait out any occupier – consider the experiences of the Mongols, British and Soviets. No occupying power has been able to meaningfully change the nature of Afghan society. However, working with the dynamics of Afghan institutions and values has yielded results.
This strategy is not without holding one’s nose. There are people and groups who can do battle against the insurgency and win – in fact they have a track record of doing this. Remember the Northern Alliance? These are the same folks who fought the Soviets and won (and even took on and defeated the Taliban when given support in 2001-2002). The Northern Alliance is not interested in democracy and many of its members are accused of war crimes. There are at least 20 tribal leaders willing to be armed and provided financial assistance by the west to take on the Taliban – they should be given this opportunity. Let the Afghans determine their own future (and that future is not necessarily a threat to the US and its allies).
Obama should also tell the Pakistanis to get lost until they get real about the threat of the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Washington’s new multi-billion dollar loan to Pakistan smells really bad – it smacks of the same old rewarding of bad behavior when it comes to the Pakistani security forces.
For too long Pakistan has played a two-faced game. It supports terrorist groups that promote its aims to control the fate of Afghanistan, while at the same time continuing to string Washington along claiming the opposite. This double game must come to an end. At the end of day the very problems being played out in Pakistan have everything to do with what is wrong in Afghanistan.
Obama must decide between so-called values and security. Washington’s colonial project in Afghanistan is a complete failure. Democracy in this case does not create security. If we want to get rid of the bad guys, then we must work with some of the other bad guys we don’t like. Once that happens then the US and its friends should get out of Afghanistan as soon as possible. Let the Afghans settle their own scores later.
Is this an amoral, cynical, and inhumane assessment of the Afghan case? Yes, it is indeed. But it is the best case scenario.
I must say the media storm surrounding British journalist Robert Fisk’s claim that key members of the international financial and monetary community are secretly preparing to dump the dollar anytime soon is rather naive. Of course another internationally accepted monetary unit of exchange is very necessary, but it won’t and can’t happen any time soon. The fact is the world is in a “dollar trap.” This means those with huge sums of dollars – including China, Russia, India and Brazil – can only lose in the short and medium term if the dollar is abandoned.
It is understandable that Fisk focuses on the impact that shorting the dollar would have on the Middle East and global energy markets, however the implications of dumping the dollar are far more profound. Fisk is right in claiming the Middle East will remain the target of outside influences due to its energy wealth if the dollar is replace in energy transactions. However, let’s remember that the global market is not only about oil. What is at stake is the nature of the international trading order that should be truly fair and not only dominated by the West.
One of the truly amazing imbalances the global economy faces today is the ability of the US to print dollars with impunity. No other country can do this today. In many ways it is because the US prints money at will that the world today is experiencing a financial crisis. This must change if the world is to avoid another such crisis, let alone recover from the present one.
Fisk’s claim that there is a hidden conspiracy against the dollar is a total non-starter. Ever since the start of the global financial crisis many countries have questioned the dollar’s continued supremacy – as they should. And it needs to be pointed out that the US is very aware of the anxiety many in the world community have regarding the dollar.
The American greenback is not on its deathbed, but its days of global hegemony are clearly coming to an end. We should welcome this. Everyone must pay their way, including Americans. Alleged backroom discussions cannot change this reality.
25 October, 2009, 03:48
Peter, -- how can America pay it's own way? We don't have a job.
14 October, 2009, 21:18
It will take time for countries to switch from the dollar. But I disagree when you're saying Fisk is being naive.
Actually, Obama and his Wall Street advisors are being naive. I agree, endlessly printing money will only bring down the global economy. Then again, do you really expect Obama to fire Bernanke, Geithner? And to publically admit that everything he's done so far is a failure?
10 October, 2009, 17:25
It would be totally pointless for me to go with comparison of specific achievements made by different nations. Firstly, because I firmly believe that it is particular people who generate ideas, make discoveries, or pushing technological progress. And not groups of people or, especially, countries. Secondly, I am far from the idea that one country has everything and others has nothing. And thirdly, and the most importantly, my life taught me that nationality, race, gender, color of eyes or hair, or other features which make us being different has nothing to do with the capabilities of particular human beings.
So, when I "called names" in my previous post, it was more for entertainment rather than expressing my real beliefs. But, in the essence , my message was simple -- I, personally, do not see any other country (or group of countries) who could match the Might of the United States within next quarter of the century. No matter how much noise is created around them these days. Not, because, they have some mental barrier to do so, but because they have to walk a long and not easy road to be where the States are today. And they should have the appropriate conditions for the progress. Even, Europe, Japan, or China with all their current achievements.
Why is would be not easy from them to do? Lets see...
Serbian Nikola Tesla was a key person behind that revolution in electricity and radio which made the world as we know it today.
Bulgarian Atanasoff built the first digital computer.
Russian Igor Sikorsky created first helicopter and made the first mass-production helicopter.
German W. von Braun designed and built the rocket which delivered the first man to the Moon.
Feng-hsiung Hsu - a Chinese researcher in IBM developed the Deep Blue algorithm, which beat World Chess Champion Garry Kasparov.
Australian Rodney A. Brooks is a head of the world most advanced research group in the field of the computer-based Artificial Intelligence.
... I could continue this almost endless list...
Guess, what is common between all of them. All of them are Americans! And this is the key, why other countries would have to work very hard to be on the same level with the US. America during all its existence attracted and still attracts the best minds from around the globe. And it will continue to do so. This is the magic of this land...
10 October, 2009, 16:04
yes, it'll take time to switch over. But, it's also amazing how the MSM continues to try and discredit Fisk. Why would somebody try to set him up with a rumour to destroy the markets? Why would an experienced journalist like Fisk allow himself to be set up?
09 October, 2009, 22:42
@Peter and all,
Sorry for posting twice. Just tought it did not work 1st time.
@Bogdanov,
Allow me to disagree on a few points:
Quote: “I would like to know who are the challengers? I mean technologically. Lazy Europe? Aging Japan? Or Russia who is like a fly struggling to relinquish itself from the spider net of the bureaucracy? Other members of BRIC? With all that hype around BRIC these days, realistically, only China can approach the US in some near future. I do not see this happening, though, at least, within next 20 years or so.”
Challenger #1. China:
For all I know I heard that just very recently (I heard it on the news few weeks ago) China just passed the US as economy #1; correct me if I’m wrong, and I could be. If I’m wrong, then it’s just a matter of time: I mean China’s being growing something like 10% anually for the last 25/30 years, and remember this is 10% growth in a country of 1.3 billion people. Second, this famous Apple laptop you’re talking about: maybe designed in US, but by who is the question? I bet you by 1st or 2nd generation Asian (most probably Chinese) immigrants. And the real important question: where is this laptop produced?.. I think you know the answer too.
Third, Europe may look lazy (as a whole) when compared to the mindless “just do it” Americans, but these same in a hurry Americans look like slow motion movie when compared to East Asia. I’ve personally seen how Chinese work 2 or even 3 jobs, 16h work day. And while Americans make fun of European lunch breaks of 1h (or even 2h in France), they can be just as good a joke for the Chinese workers who normally have 15 min: and if Chinese immigrants are a good orientation point, then this is the way they spend their 15 min lunch break – 5 min eating your sandwich as fast as possible and 10 min sleeping on your work place.. becase keeping 2/3 jobs is rather heavy.
It all comes down to mentality/character if you will – the thing no banker or other force in the world can temper with simply because it takes many, many centuries (more like millenia I think..) to build. The reason why 300 spartans can stop a whole army; 600 gorkhahari (gurkas in English) can fight only with knives to a standstill the British (losing 500 in the process) army advancing in Nepal from colonised India; the reason why Obilich is a national hero in a neighbouring Balkan country; the reason why Yugoslavia (and let’s be fair – only Serbia in fact) kept resisting German ocupation during the entire WWII, while much bigger France and Poland were subdued in only 2 weeks. But it is history that is so useful because by lookine at it, you can predict/simply see the future. It was not then surprising that this same Yugoslavia resisted Stalin too – the only ones having the courage to do it against the new strong of the day. And then guess who again was the only one in the whole of E. Europe resisting the new strong of the day in the 90s, after the break up of the USSR. I can give examples like that till I drop: hisroty is full of them. Japan, just another example I can’t resist: while whole of Asia was colonised by the strong of the day at the time, Japan wasn’t – it proved to be such a strong culture that few W. European apetites were cut short there. Even at the time few of these wanna be colonisers predicted that with Western technology Japan will be dangerously powerful. Now about China: this is the country that inveted many a thing and one of them is the 1st central bank; now if you look a bit into Chinese mentality/culture you’ll see they’re not only capable of working 16h a day, but also are very fond of money and this is very old and traditional and even communism couldn’t change that. Yes, China is much more prepared to run a successful capitalist economy that the US simply because it’s in their culture: It’s cultural for them to work a lot, to save (not to get into debt), to own rather than to work for others, to invest, to have strong family unit, to respect their elders, to do everything to give their children the best education possible. Also, China was an empire in the past and empires are built by aggressive cultures. Now, when you take all this into account you see which way the winds blow.
Challenger #2. “Aging Japan”
Remember Asian cultures respect their elders.
These same Aging Japanese are the ones that have automated their production lines seven times more than #2 in the world – the US. I guess they’re just too tired to do the work themselves . I see this as the average Japanese worker engaged in production as being 7 times more productive than his American counterpart.. . And Japan has a population only twice smaller than the US. I guess becase of same situation small England was able to colonise huge India once upon a time. And you know what is the economic realationship between Coloniser and Colonised? The Coloniser imports raw materials from the colony and exports back to the colony ready products; with relationship to the US and Japan today, just check who’s exporting raw materials and importing ready goods.
Challenger #3. “Lazy Europe”
Even the EU of old (the 15 member EC) had already a bigger economy than the US. They came up with “it’s not really a country” to keep officially the US as #1 economy in the world: this only comes to show you that the war is fought especailly fiercely on the psychological level.
Simple Question Bogdanov: why are rich Americans then driving expensive cars produced in “Lazy Europe” or “Aging Japan”?.. My 3-year-old answer would be: because it takes time and wisdom to make something good rather than to.. “just do it.” I know this is not exacly the same answer as 007 as to why the American car industry is not doing so well, but I don’t believe all can be blamed on the overvalued dollar.
@Bianca,
As usual I’m impressed. First time I had the urge to actually print something. I think you’ve gone one step further than even very complicated (for me) 007.
For my part I can just confirm 1st hand the pressure on Bulgaria. You can see it on the news, in politics, by what is being said, by what isn’t being said.. . Media has turned all powerful in this county, making sure we’re a good tentacle host. Changing gouvernments if necessary, I might add, to make sure the desired outcome.
I’ve recently changed jobs. While searching I’ve come across an offer on an official job site: work in the US embassy, personal assistant to ambassador. Simply read the Bulgarian press and report to the ambassador.
09 October, 2009, 02:00
I have the same uneasy feeling that 007 is chronicling. We all see the tentacles, and all see the transformation that US and UK have gone through --- killing off their real economy and supplanted it with a financial/military tentacles. Those tentacles feed then the domestic economies. No wonder that 70% of US economy is consumption! Most people never asked the simple question: if our economy is based on our spending the money, how is this money earned and where is it coming from?
Some questions are asked wrong. I do not think that the creditor nations do not wish to dump dollar simply because their own dollar savings would be slashed. That is only the stated reason. Many of these countries would probably do it in a heart-beat, as they still have reserves that are not dollar-tied. Many of them sit on physical gold reserves as well. And those who happen to have energy resources, will always have income, even by giving coupons to bankrupt nations to purchase it with in exchange for something else!
The big advantage of cutting one's losses early is the prevention of future losses. Another benefit would be the freedom of action that such clean break will bring about. But there is --- a but. Once upon a time it was technologically advanced Germany that was reduced to rubble, and the world had to come up with a plan to rebuild it. It was not a charity, but a realization that population that had the know-how, and was used to civilized way of living --- cannot be returned to the pre-modern ages without causing another major upheaval.
Now, without a war, population of many Western countries is used to living standards that cannot be crashed without potentially planet-destroying consequences. I just cannot imagine an American without a comfort of a shower, and the ease of supermarket. While Europe has been tightening belt for a while, they still enjoy living standards that cannot be shattered without consequences. And who do you think will be blamed? Of course, China, Russia, etc. Populations would fall for demagogues, and the consequences could be grave.
It is therefore logical that the air of the non-existent consumer economy will be let out slowly. This is a plan, anyway. So, now the creditors will have to become the hand that feeds, with some caveats. But what happens when the hand that feeds gets bitten?
Since the populace in Western countries does not really know who feeds them, it is utterly natural that they still demand that more soldiers be sent to Afghanistan, and keep indefinite occupation of Iraq, and continue the pursuit of many other large, small and tiny geopolitical projects as if there is no tomorrow and money is no object? What then? Bankers win, again, because the creditors are stuck with the mess.
This is where we are. It is a high stakes game, because the bankers assets are fluid and they are all over the globe. They can always leave London if it turns into Detroit. They will move to where the prosperity is, provided that they will worm their way again into controlling some country's money. And they will be in business again. They just jump from one host body into another.
But now, the creditor nations and other producing nations, have a decision to make. How to prevent the crash landing of advanced economies if they insist on rebuilding their tentacles with creditor/producer nations? If this continues, the tentacles may even get hooked into these creditor/producing nations?
The dilemma is palpable. The tentacle rebuilding is enabled by weaker countries, hoping to feed off the tentacles themselves.
If I were to guess, the creditor/producing nations will not dump the dollar, but will diversify --- everything from increased domestic spending and barter-like bilateral trade, to rapid investments in southeast Asia, Africa, Latin America and the down-and-out South-Eastern Europe.
This will create pressure on the banking tentacles to try to cover their flanks on too many fronts. They will respond by trying to push their host nations (US and Europeans) into some more wars of choice, as wars are disruptive to world-wide trade and investments. Not only that, wars create divisions among various creditor/producing states, as their popular sentiments may be at odds in new conflicts. That would be the way to stem the strategy of diversification. That would again strengthen dollar and euro, as the perceived countries with military upper hand. In fear, many a country may choose to offer its body as a host to tentacles.
Now, of course, you will say that this has already happened. In Iraq, Afghanistan and now Pakistan. The populace in the Western countries is so exhausted, that it even did not notice the creeping occupation of Pakistan. With MILLIONS of refugees, and the President, former Mr. 10% whose ship has finally come in --- Pakistan is ripe for a complete takeover.
Of course, this has already been happening. But the diversification strategy --- once the idea of Saddam Hussein --- is now a legitimate tool in international trade and finance.
Yet, so much is not clear. The position of Europe is very precarious. Euro was created as a competitor, but may have ended up being just a dollar derivative. While it is holding up well in the general chaos and fear of dollar future, it is not an independent currency. One of the strategies that creditors/producers can devise is a selective engagement with European countries. But the push for Lisbon, and bludgeoning Ireland, will result in one Foreign Policy of the EU.
Does it mean that the behind the scene bankers won in Europe? Who knows. Countries that produce and export will have different interests from those that do not. This is a contradiction that may finally break up Europe, in spite of the Irish vote.
If Europe continues to drift geopolitically, it will economically sink. If it puts itself in the role of the flag-bearer of the bankers in foreign policy, it may sink even faster. As of now, Germany has given some clear signals that it is not about to sacrifice its interests for the sake of being a flag-bearer of EU anti-Russian noises. The Opel deal, Nord Stream and others, are signs of new thinking in terms of relations with creditor/producer nations.
The Nabucco pipeline has been delayed for two years. One clear example of US not being able to pursue geopolitics on too many fronts. And a recognition that the Central Asian energy cannot be easily unlocked without major geopolitical concessions. But the pressure on Bulgaria and Serbia is still high, as these geopolitical instruments do not cost money. But the problem is, one cannot just hector, put pressure and dictate. At some point, some nations will take a stock in their own geopolitical investment, and conclude that there is no prospect to earn a return.
And this is where the changes will slowly emerge. Not as a bombastic secret meetings, but as a thousands little moves and in many little places. This is more oriental style; less wars and gradual adjustment. Provided that cowboy mentality can be kept in check.
08 October, 2009, 21:25
The United States government is bankrupt, not just morally but financially as well. The only option left to keep things afloat is to print enormous amounts of money out of thin air. The 2009 budget deficit is estimated to be around $2 TRILLION and the national debt is now reaching towards $12 TRILLION. Add in unfunded liabilities for Medicare and Social Security and the government owes about $120 TRILLION, yet brings in only about $2 trillion each year in revenue. This is like owing $200,000 on a house and making $3,640 per year at your job! You will never be able to pay it off.
It took nearly 200-years for the money supply to go from $0 to $800 billion, but in just the past year it is estimated to have more than doubled! This level of monetary expansion is absolutely insane, unsustainable and without historic precedence.
08 October, 2009, 18:28
Peter,
You say : ‘I must say the media storm surrounding British journalist Robert Fisk’s claim that key members of the international financial and monetary community are secretly preparing to dump the dollar anytime soon is rather naive. Of course another internationally accepted monetary unit of exchange is very necessary, but it won’t and can’t happen any time soon. The fact is the world is in a “dollar trap.” This means those with huge sums of dollars – including China, Russia, India and Brazil – can only lose in the short and medium term if the dollar is abandoned.’
I watched Robert Fisk on RT today and he said exactly this: that this is planned not for ‘anytime soon’ but to happen in nine years (he said ‘nine’). He did put forward same arguments as you why it can’t happen now; namely, the huge reserves of dollars in the BRICs, Japan and some Arab states; also he mentioned fear of US reaction directed at those states as a factor.
“Fisk’s claim that there is a hidden conspiracy against the dollar is a total non-starter.” As said, basically from this interview I’ve heard today Fisk agrees with you – that this is to happen in some time and not immediately. And if you replace “a hidden conspiracy” with simply “a move”, you’ll see that “is nothing new” fits better than “is a total non-starter.” So I couldn’t agree more with “The American greenback is not on its deathbed, but its days of global hegemony are clearly coming to an end.” And this is good news for ordinary Americans and ordinary American businesses too, not just for the rest of the world; it’s bad news strictly for the ‘empire builders’ who have taken hostage first their own people and then the rest of us. But as I’ve heard the saying goes “Power corupts, and total power corupts totally.” I want to live in a strong state too, but definitely not in one that controls/wants to the rest of the world..now or in the future.
BR
Aleks
08 October, 2009, 18:08
"The American greenback is not on its deathbed, but its days of global hegemony are clearly coming to an end." Peter, I don't know how it looks like from Russia or other places, but, from my corner of the world it doesn't seem like this. The rate of innovations is not slowing down. By the way, somewhere on this site, I saw the picture of Medvedev have Apple laptop on his table. Which was invented and designed here, in this very place. I still see very capable individuals (all ages) around who do not have any plans to leave this country and as such still will be a driving force of the US economy in the foreseeable future.
Now. Firstly, the current recession in the States is not the first one during its history. And, surely, this is not the last one. So far, the country recovered every time. As I see it the situation today, the US has all necessary capabilities to recover again. (Especially, because I am here. At least, for now. :-) Americans just need to realize that their salvation is in their own hands, stop whining, panicking, and pointing out to each other and the government, get out of the line for free soup, and start taking care of themselves.
Secondly, I would like to know who are the challengers? I mean technologically. Lazy Europe? Aging Japan? Or Russia who is like a fly struggling to relinquish itself from the spider net of the bureaucracy? Other members of BRIC? With all that hype around BRIC these days, realistically, only China can approach the US in some near future. I do not see this happening, though, at least, within next 20 years or so.
08 October, 2009, 16:29
Yeah but what’s the geo-political scheme behind all of this there is no way Britain and the US will allow any other country to have equal footing in the economic and political sphere they have done overthrown governments, went to war with them and used subversive tactics to control competing nations that pose a serious economic and geo-political rival.
They did this with Russia twice in 1917 and 89 and Germany during WW1 and WW2.
The force that controls the US like Britain is not a static one limited to one or even a few of the most powerful nations on the planet.
They control international currency and trading standards and control much of the vast oil and gas as well as a virtual monopoly in gold reserves and diamond trade.
If I was Russia I would think 3 times and carefully evaluate any advice and joint policy and having a joint one world currency under the mandate of the IMF is not one of them.
Remember Rothschild of London opened a foundation grooming the future leadership of Russia to replace Putin, Medvedev and there successors after he put there font man in jail Khoderkovsky and dismantled there oil company Yukos.
Although I think he still has substantial shares in LukeOil.
08 October, 2009, 10:01
Peter,
You say : ‘I must say the media storm surrounding British journalist Robert Fisk’s claim that key members of the international financial and monetary community are secretly preparing to dump the dollar anytime soon is rather naive. Of course another internationally accepted monetary unit of exchange is very necessary, but it won’t and can’t happen any time soon. The fact is the world is in a “dollar trap.” This means those with huge sums of dollars – including China, Russia, India and Brazil – can only lose in the short and medium term if the dollar is abandoned.’
I watched Robert Fisk on RT today and he said exactly this: that this is planned not for ‘anytime soon’ but to happen in nine years (he said ‘nine’). He did put forward same arguments as you why it can’t happen now; namely, the huge reserves of dollars in the BRICs, Japan and some Arab states; also he mentioned fear of US reaction directed at those states as a factor.
“Fisk’s claim that there is a hidden conspiracy against the dollar is a total non-starter.” As said, basically from this interview I’ve heard today Fisk agrees with you – that this is to happen in some time and not immediately. And if you replace “a hidden conspiracy” with simply “a move”, you’ll see that “is nothing new” fits better than “is a total non-starter.” So I couldn’t agree more with “The American greenback is not on its deathbed, but its days of global hegemony are clearly coming to an end.” And this is good news for ordinary Americans and ordinary American businesses too, not just for the rest of the world; it’s bad news strictly for the ‘empire builders’ who have taken hostage first their own people and then the rest of us. But as I’ve heard the saying goes “Power corrupts, and total power corrupts totally.” I want to live in a strong state too, but definitely not in one that controls/wants to the rest of the world..now or in the future.
BR
Aleks
08 October, 2009, 05:31
Its so complex its enough to make any ones head spin, but I’m not so sure, this thing is a system with all sorts of nasty feedback loops.
I really don’t know why it has to be a secret and applauded or denied, if I was Obama, I would be saying, lets get another global currency ready and all sorted out soon, and no, not the Euro, an honest global currency.
One-way to think about how a global currency works is that its like a fisherman casting out fishing lines into other economies.
It’s so powerful that the head can become completely disconnected from the body of the local economy, and this is why countries that control the global currency tend to become all bank and no industry.
The reason is that the real economy of a global currency is remote.
So if the diamond mines that they bought simply by printing money (nice when you don’t have to work for a living hey) are now doing well in Africa, the head is happy and the currency remains strong, at the cost of local industry that cant compete because remote industries make the global currency too strong for local industry to survive… so now you know why the USA’s car industry never stood a chance, not because of bad management as espoused by bankers, but because the Dollar will never weaken to allow local industry to compete.
The bankers hold the dollar high, and break all purchasing parity rules.
Of course that will come back and bite you, but the bankers don’t care, they’ll just move to their office in China, or the nice hotel they bought in Dubai.
As long the bankers are going to be ok, they make a quick buck now and who cares about the future, it’s nothing that a war won’t sort out, oh and sorry about that inflation diseased pension.
So you can think of it as an octopus will tentacles siphoning on other countries, which those countries feel as a hidden tax, and now you know why Africa just wont start as well.
The trouble with the simple trade model is that when the Dollar does start losing hegemony, to whatever, be that Venezuela trading goods for oil, or South Africa taking Yuan loans against gold surety, the dollar tentacles start breaking off.
So I don’t think a new global currency needs to even attack the dollar directly, as countries start to free up their economies to try do things like give people a better salary than 50 Dollars a month, the tentacles start breaking, and remember that the body of the global currency is not a real economy.
A huge problem because the rich west is no so rich when the tentacles start breaking off.
Don’t kid yourself, these bankers have made an almighty mess of this planet, and they know, they are the dollars worst enemy now, they the ones killing it.
The thing is that the Dollar doesn’t really belong to the USA, those tentacles don’t all go back to the USA, Europe/UK also sucks on the world through the Dollar tentacles, and as the USA takes the health care siphons back that I imagine Europe owns and this battle rages on, so the banks milk the dollar and promote the Euro.
I think that’s the whole banker plan, to replace the Dollar with the Euro anyway, and what’s upsetting them is that China, Russia and the USA are now saying, but why should we let you bankers run it again, after all, you just broke the whole planet.
What I think the article is getting wrong is that it assumes the USA is the Dollar, when in fact the USA is probably working with Russia and China to stop Euro hegemony, which are the same bankers that own the Dollar.
Not simple at all… and I think this 10 year plan to a new world currency is a fairy tale, if we don’t put something together very soon, this planet is going to war, which will reset dollar debt and leave the Euro as the new global currency… which is the bankers plan, exactly what they did in WWII.
08 October, 2009, 03:40
The first thing that countries like Russia, China, India and Brazil should do is to get rid of inferiority complex and stop relying on somebody when it comes to stability of their own currencies. They need to grow up, just like Russians did when they had finally realized that foreigners were not going to build democracy for them and that foreign economic or political models were not necessarily good for them.
The new government of Japan (yet another major US dept holder) made it clear that they were not going to make their country's future dependent on US dollar and I think it's a good example for others to follow.
08 October, 2009, 01:42
I have read Robert Fisk's article and what he has come out with is of no great surprise to me, in fact my personal reaction to it was, "it's a little bit to late now, if the governments he speaks of had taken that initiative 6 months ago, then yes there was hope".
The reality is that all the money that was thrown into black holes to attempt to repair the international economy and markets, instead of using it to create a new sounder international economy steering away from the US$ as the worlds reserve currency has placed us in a situation not known before and no precedents in economic history in which to look back upon for guidance.
We are now seeing the consequences of those moves of 6 months ago. The truth of the reality of the US$ in the international markets has hit worldwide governments hard and fast. Governments holding US$ treasuries and bonds are well aware of the situation and as has been seen in the past months have been getting rid of these bonds as fast as they can. I agree the sudden devaluation of the US$ is a no, no, for holders of such bonds, but sometimes a small loss is better than a total loss when governments make decisions to move away from the US$ as the international reserve currency.
The time to mend the situation is now over and many countries in the world are now moving away from the US$. They are decoupling their economies from the international financial system, as we know it, and moving closer to doing trade in commodities in their own currencies. Therefore at some point in the future these economies may well decide to create a virtual currency solely for the purpose of trading. Brazil, Russia, India and China with the EU as the engineer for example. Already South American countries have already created their own form of the IMF to help poorer countries in South America without the crippling rent added to loans as what the IMF actually has done for many years. Even Iran has decided to trade its dollars in for Euros as it has seen their reserves dwindle at an increasing rate due to the rapid devaluation of the US$, and pricing their commodities in Euros.
The international economy is in the phase of geopolitical dislocation and this dislocation may well be the way forward to international economic recovery. It is uncharted seas.
Certain countries in Europe are moving to desperation methods to keep their economies afloat. Higher taxation, raising the age for old age pensions, all in a desperate move too pursue an economic recovery of a failed international economic system.
Centuries ago people fled their countries of origin due to persecution of one form or another and set sail in leaky wooden ships voyaging into uncharted seas to find a place where they could live in peace, freedom and prosperity. In my view that is what is happening in the world economy now.
Welcome to my new program, “CrossTalk.” Our aim is to really tackle the most important issues of the day – with all opinions and viewpoints given a fair hearing. The program includes me as anchor and the same “IMHO” and “In Context” team, with the addition of Russian television personality Yelena Khanga providing background and facts about what we need to know to understand the stories shaping our world.
Please give the program a watch – your feedback means a lot to us.
Best,
Peter Lavelle
08 October, 2009, 16:16
Peter, I liked the second program ("Iran: Testing wills") better than the first one.
On the positive side:
(+) Technically much better.
(+) Static locations of all guests (including remote ones). No winds and car traffic behind their backs. :-)
(+) No raging debates. No entertainment. Exchange of opinions in the civilized way.
(+) Guest from Iran talking about Iran. I am tied to see and hear pro-Washington "Iranians". If fact, all my attention was on that guest -- the voice of real Iran.
(+) You often in the picture. Firstly, this centers the program. Secondly, I normally, tune in just to hear you and not somebody else.
(+) I liked working tandem Peter-Yelena
Still, I have some problems with the program:
(-) You interrupting speakers or rushing them.
(-) Again, too many guests limit time for each of them and they cannot express their opinions fully.
(-) Not enough video of country leaders. I prefer to hear the original information and not only interpretations. Like that "wiping out Israel..." which the whole US policy against Iran is based on.
(-) It would be good to have a pro-Russian guest on-board -- I am curious to hear the opinion of Russians about the issues. (Surely, as a moderator you cannot be in that role).
Anyway, Peter. From my taste, your program is better than anything available on the American TV today.
07 October, 2009, 20:36
Good show Peter!
Yes, RT needed “Cross Talk.” I have only good things to say about it and ‘yes’, it makes RT a more complete experiece.
Good job.
BR,
Aleks
Ps. I reserve the right to give a critical remark here and there later..
07 October, 2009, 13:59
@Marzipan6
06 October, 2009, 11:03
"I would like to amplify a little Giustino’s observation that many of the members of the Soviet destruction battalions of 1941 who carried out Stalin’s scorched earth policy in Estonia were ethnic Estonians. More than half of its personnel are acknowledged to have been Russians from across the border. Of the remainder, many were Estonians with a prior criminal record – thieves, murderers, brawlers, people with a grudge against society. Many others were Communist collaborators, who likewise had a grudge against society and who used Communist dogma to “get even” with accomplished and educated members of society whom they envied."
And who do you think the Communists recruited in Russia most of the fighters that took part in the “Russian revolution” were released from the prisons by the Communists who Trotsky, Lenin, Bela Kun had been imprisoned as well as Stalin under the Tsar.
And were they really ethnic Russians?
The Marxist terrorist that took over Russia as Winston Churchill put it in his famous Feb. 8, 1920 Illustrated Sunday Herald article
"In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Khazars is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed, the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combating Counter-Revolution has been taken by Khazars, and in some notable cases by Khazarses.
"The same evil prominence was obtained by Khazars in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially in Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people.
"...The fact that in many cases Khazar interests and Khazar places of worship are excepted by the Bolsheviks from their universal hostility has tended more and more to associate the Khazar race in Russia with villainies which are now being perpetrated...Needless to say, the most intense passions of revenge have been excited in the breasts of the Russian people." (End quote from Churchill).
You also forgot to mention the head of the NKVD was not Russian (Georgian Khazar Beria) as well as most of the top tear of the Communist branches of government.
And I mentioned before the two main Khazar organisations that were at the forefront in Estonia of its takeover and who financed it and became the leadership of the country post WW2 like the other Soviet satellite states.
The same pattern happen in Hungry with Bela Kun in his short rule in Hungry and I don’t think there were many Russians involved there.
I like that rationale the Communist collaborators in Estonia were not really Estonians but the Russian Communists where recruited in the ranks under the leadership of people like Trotsky and his group who held the reigns of power and destiny of Russia who would create the future leadership of Russia clearly should there contempt of Russia in there statements and actions.
Trotsky said of Russia
" - We should turn Her (Russia) into a desert populated with white N????rs We will impose upon them such a tyranny that was never dreamt by the most hideous despots of the East. The peculiar trait of that tyranny is that it will be enacted from the left. Rather than the right and it will be red rather than white in color. Its color will be red literally because we would spill such torrents of blood that will pale all human losses of the capitalist wars and make (the survivors) shudder. The largest overseas banks will cooperate with us most closely. If we win the Revolution and squash Russia, on the funeral pyres of its remains we will strengthen the power of Zhazarism and become a power the whole world would drop in the face of on its knees. We will show (to the world) what the real power means. By way of terror and blood baths we will bring Russian intelligentsia into the state of total stupor, to idiocy, to the animal state of being...And so far our young men dressed in leather - the sons of watch repair men from Odessa and Orsha, Gomel and Vinnitza - oh, how beautifully, how brilliantly do they master hatred of everything Russian! With what a great delight do they physically destroy Russian intelligentsia - officers, engineers, teachers, priests, generals, agronomists, academicians, writers!"
(Secrete Forces in History of Russia. U.K. Begunov 1995, p 148.
Definitely not an occupied government.
07 October, 2009, 12:32
Marzipan6,
you are proliferating your biased historionics in this space, as well. Remember, you are doing it again. Your hate of Russians in the guise of Estonian history experience has been debunked, over and over. Giustino is just repeating the cleaned up and beautified "history" of Estonia. Feel free to look up my reply to him, but stick with the original site. It is bad enough to pollute the original string. Your spamming needs answering --- with some real history. Your personal interpretations of it are justifying your hate speech against Russians. And, sorry, but somebody had to respond. Regardless of how you feel about WWII past, you have been allowed for much too long to glorify the Nazi exploits of Estonians in WWII, while blaming it on Russians. Your regret that Estonians fighting under Nazi flag did not kill more Russians in WWII --- speaks volumes about your selfrighteous lecturing on the horrors of wars and occuppations.
06 October, 2009, 14:29
Peter,
I watched the show, well done on your comment ‘Israel may be a democracy, but they are very violent’. Well done!
The Israeli and the Iranian spoke a lot of sense, but the Americans were saying nothing that made sense. I wish you had asked them how come Saudi Arabia, which is not a democracy, is allowed to purchase whatever weapons they want.
I just think next time be more direct with the thorny questions.
06 October, 2009, 14:27
@ Marzipan: Stalin was Georgian. Russians were all doing whetever the Georgian, Stalin, asked them to do. Lenin never wanted Stalin to take over, by the way
06 October, 2009, 11:03
I would like to amplify a little Giustino’s observation that many of the members of the Soviet destruction battalions of 1941 who carried out Stalin’s scorched earth policy in Estonia were ethnic Estonians. More than half of its personnel are acknowledged to have been Russians from across the border. Of the remainder, many were Estonians with a prior criminal record – thieves, murderers, brawlers, people with a grudge against society. Many others were Communist collaborators, who likewise had a grudge against society and who used Communist dogma to “get even” with accomplished and educated members of society whom they envied. And some others were people who participated because of Estonia’s deep-rooted historical animosity towards Germany.
As you can see, they were a mixed bunch of people. But they were there at the behest of Stalin, led by Russians and whether they knew it or not, in service of Moscow’s aim to enslave and thereafter to destroy Estonia. Certainly the atrocities that destruction battalions worked against Estonian civilians up and down the country makes the blood curdle.
05 October, 2009, 04:38
@Marzipan6
I know you posted this on this section by mistake so I'll only post it here instead of in the original article any response to this and I will post it in the original article.
That’s convenient isn't it that you would have no problem charging Russians with crimes and having a Russian motivation/attitude behind it but you don’t consider it irrelevant if the actual people who ordered it and where in charge were not even Russian. That the Soviet Union and Marxism was a Russian nationalist movement.
04 October, 2009, 23:51
JohnX asks whether I have details on the ethnic composition of the immediately pre-war Estonian government. I don’t, and I’ll tell you why: Estonians have never had a fixation with the ethnicity of people. Their concern is with culture, not ethnicity. Their culture is the only one in the world that actually nurtures their land, and in which they are at home and safe – all other cultures (and in their millennia-long history they have come across many) have shown interest only in using, abusing and destroying the land and its people. Therefore Estonians feel very defensive of their culture.
Ethnically Estonians are a mixed people, with several native sub-groups and a significant admixture of Swedish, German, Russian, Polish, Danish and other ethnicities. But their actual ethnicities become unimportant once they adopt the Estonian language and culture, and become part of the country’s cultural space. Judging a person’s ethnicity on the basis of their name is also quite unreliable. There are Estonians who have not had a foreign marriage into their family for longer than anyone can remember, but who still carry a foreign surname. And there are first-generation newcomers who speak with a strong foreign accent but who have a 100% Estonian surname, because they have legally adopted the name.
This may come as a surprise for people like Bianca, for example, who formulate involved theories about Estonians and their supposed attitudes and predispositions without the benefit of actually knowing any real live Estonians, and when an Estonian tells her that her theories are wrong she chooses to believe theories ahead of the realities. The problem is that there are only about a million Estonians, and there are many times more than that number of would-be dabblers in history who impute motives to them. Thus Estonians’ own authentic voice is not very strong.
Estonians have been persecuted for their ethnicity in their own homeland for centuries, and they have no appetite for inflicting the same misery on others. This is why they readily grant full citizenship according to standard international norms even to their one-time Russian oppressors. Russians who have learned the Estonian language and who wish to fit in with the country have no problems being accepted. I have personally met and spoken with an ethnic Russian member of the current Estonian parliament who was born in Russia, and the current Estonian President has Russian relatives.
03 October, 2009, 19:34
Peter, caught your first show today…
Particularly enjoyed the perplexed look on your face when the, “they can have nuclear weapons because they a democracy” came up ;)
Don’t forget that after the blog… a continuous CrossTalk feedback forum would be a nice place to chat generally about shows.
I thought it was too short… they were all just getting warmed up for war, and you had to end it, I think you need a sliding time slot, if its hot, you keep going.
Also, I think you have to master the leading question, and avoid host opinion… just political correctness, but most enjoyable anyway.
RT is fast becoming the only real news station on our 11 news channels.
Polite honesty is addictive… well done!
03 October, 2009, 16:38
Peter, just watched your first episode of crosstalk, and enjoyed it.
I believe a show with this format has been badly needed on RT for some time, lots of other news channels have similar format shows, which are popular: like inside story on al jazeera. Crosstalk fills this gap on RT.
May I suggest an online comment page for your show, where viewers can post questions/comments in realtime, or do you have a webpage for crosstalk for people to discuss it?
Btw, Peter, In Context will be sorely missed, I know you're a busy man, would be great if there was a 15 minute analays show with you also, sort of a restructured in context: as I remeber in context used to be 15 minutes analysis, and 15 minute interview. Now that Crosstalk is here, the interview on in context can be scrapped (like the missile shield in europe), but I believe you should not completly shelve your analysis show, just as Dmitry Rogozin said Russia has not shelved a military response to America's new proposed mobile missile defence shield!!
03 October, 2009, 13:47
Good show Peter, I agree 2 guests are enough unless the programme is made longer. The problem is half hour with 3 guest and Peters worthy contribution only gives time for "sound bite" analysis on complicated issues. Also I like good healthy debate I found the guests had almost the same opinion and were a bit tame for my liking.
01 October, 2009, 22:25
Just watched the show and liked it but due to time constraints it would have been better and went more smoothly if it was only 2 guests instead of 3 where they would have more time express there opinions better.
I rather the video segments as well didn’t have the crosstalk border above it cutting of about a quarter of the picture it is quite distracting.
There also were some minor technical difficulties but seeing how it is the first show it will probably be fixed by the next episode
01 October, 2009, 10:30
well, Peter and the whole team, really job well done, it wasnt your monologue, moderating 3 peeps with technical imperfections were still impressive, also timing seemed to be good for everyone, but all the issues to be talked over would take out the advertising out
01 October, 2009, 05:46
Peter, I thought, that was a good program (I watched it on the youtube). One thing, which normally gives that attracting power to any of your visual presentation, -- the pitch of your voice, which creates certain comfort and helps to percept better the information you provide. But, nothing you can do to fix that "problem", I guess. :-) So, from my perspective -- talk more. :-)
Also, Peter, where did you dig out the corp of this political dinosaur Donald Jensen from? He irritated me almost all your program? Or may be I was not attentive enough to his words, too prejudice, or just not in the mood. Sorry, Peter, but I am already so tied to hear these voices of political ghosts during several years watching American TV programs and listening political talk shows.
What I liked in your program:
a) The video clips with Medvedev, Putin, and Obama.
It seems nothing unusual with this -- everybody does it. But, it was not chaotic and random as they normally do on the US TV, with, seems, the only purpose -- to show that those people are still alive. On your program the clips provided with the contest which fitted well to the discussed topic. Basically, the words of the shown leaders where important and not only their "on-duty visual participation" on your program. Also, I liked that there were only few of those clips with really relevant people. Too many (clips and people) -- distract attention from a content.
What I didn't like:
a) The guests "working from home" (remote participants).
I never liked it, by the way. Neither in Russia nor in America. It makes program being "jerky" and lower quality -- those participants from the "outer worlds" seem never have enough time to talk due to bad connection, strong winds behind their backs, or something else. Besides, I don't know if those remote guests are fully dressed, which bothers me... :-) I would prefer if all your guests will be in the studio and talk with each other and with you face-to-face without fear being cut off. And have enough time to full express themselves. If you have to use remote guests keep them on camera all the time and be sure that the communication channel with them works perfectly. To create the illusion that they are in the studio.
b) The choice of guests to create a confrontation between them.
I never thought that this is good idea to build a political talk show based on the confrontation between its participants. Although, it is done almost in all cases in the US media when they discuss certain hot and controversial topic. When this happens I pay attention on the "fight" rather than on the contents. Ironically, but the "fighters" themselves after some time seem forget what they are trying to say and focusing more on crashing each other instead of communicating with the audience. Peter, you have a program divided on two parts. Use the first part to present, say, the pro-Iranian opinions and the second half -- anti-Iranian. I will figure out myself what to do with this and whom to follow.
01 October, 2009, 00:05
Hi Peter, I'm watching RT from
It's first day of broadcast especially your
Personal shows. I'm watching crosstalk
Right now, and I think it's absolutely
Fantastic!! The only similar concept
About a tv broadcast I can recall is
"crossfire" hosted at cnn many years
Ago. But yours is much better. I could
Say that it's crossfire+larry king live
Merged, but yours is better than each
Of these two. I only wish it wouldn't be
Once a week, but more often. Keep
Up the excellent work. I wish the best.
A fan from beautiful Greece
30 September, 2009, 21:22
Hi Peter,
I saw CrossTalk today and thought it was both very informative and well balanced. I was pleased to see that all your guests were given equal time to express their opinions. More importantly, I am very grateful for a TV debate show in which experts discuss issues in a civil manner as opposed to descending into chaotic argumentative shouting which only alienates viewers and results in no viewpoint being heard fairly. I look forward to watching the show progress and am sure that with the wide range of poltical hot potatoes out there, you will not be short of issues to discuss.
22 October, 2009, 21:15
@ from Poland,
“Most people understand that Poland is a pawn in American strategy and will be sacrificed when time will come.” – then why do it? Are you suicidal?..
I think then “most people” should elect themselves a government in Poland that thinks like them, because from what I see the current one does not represent these “most people.” Also I agree fully with this statement above as US government has already made it quite clear that in the case of any territorial disputes between Poland and Germany (and they’re more than likely as you know..), it will stand on German side.
Further, “Most people understand..” this, simply because it’s common sense: Polish have nothing to do with Americans, but have same Slavic origins with Russians and majority of rest of E. Europeans. No matter how much you deny it, origins have everything to do with politics, and the only time when Slav people as a whole will be doing well (instead of being pawns of this or that superpower..) is when the largest one of us – Russia (half of all Slavs) – stands firmly on its feet; what Anglo-American interest is doing today is exactly the same as what the Romans were doing with very divided German people during their time: namely, sending their emissaries there to make sure there’s always some kind of conflict..to make sure the Germans were permanently in a state of war with each other for god-knows what reason – this way they had no time to turn to Rome. Look at Slav world today: Poland vs Russia, Ukraine vs Russia, Croatia vs Serbia, Serbia vs Bulgaria, Bulgaria vs Macedonia and a mild Czech Rep. vs Slovakia. I mean how long are Polish people going to play this game?..
“..- after the breakup of soviet system "the west" was just much more attractive.” – Why?.. Because it was richer? The answer is ‘Yes.’ There’s absolutely no other reason but money and the hope of some of this western money.. – too bad we proved to be so materialistic, obviously half a century of socialism/communism did not affect us much. The East (Russia) was now offering far greater freedom, but nobody was listening: Russia disintegrated the USSR and nobody else, let that be remembered! Russian led USSR disintegrated the Warsaw pact and took its troops back from all over Eastern Europe, and that’s a fact too - without Russian led initiative there would have been no freedom in E. Europe (The ones who really resisted Stalin and the USSR after WW2 were long free already – and bombed in 99 for not giving away their freedom in the face of new ultimatum). What did the Anglo-American interest do in return? Reoccupied E. Europe, this time with its own troops, organizations, and plans.
“Poland is far too small and weak to be fully independent ..”
I disagree.
Examples proving you can be small, but independent: Switzerland, Yugoslavia (1945-1990), Finland (post WW2).
BR
Aleks
20 October, 2009, 16:55
Dear johnx,
I know about Brzezinski policy - it would be very difficult to classify him as a Pole, but he is certainly more American. Most of his strategy has no real impact on Polish security and its only role is to maintain USA supremacy on the cost from other countries - which is typical for any superpower (USSR did the same). Sometimes his policy even contradicts with Polish national interests - for example Poland had very good and long relationships with Cuba, Iraq and Iran (after the Islamic revolution) but those were sacrificed and not compensated by good relations with USA. This is why I am so sensitive about not building good relations on sacrifice of someone interests - the mistakes that happened in 90s like those should not happen again - and it applies both to Russia and USA.
Maybe You don't know that but in Poland there is very small sympathy for USA itself - with the exception of families that have relatives there. Most people understand that Poland is a pawn in American strategy and will be sacrificed when time will come. This confronts with strategy of our government which must balance between voices of Russophiles, Russophobes, Americanophiles, Americanophobes and newly established Europhiles and Europhobes - You cant just appease everyone.
Dear Pauline,
Poland is far too small and weak to be fully independent - after the breakup of soviet system "the west" was just much more attractive. Even after collapse of soviet economy Russia was still a major power in the region, and both government and people didn't want to fall into Russian sphere of influence again. The decision to integrate into NATO and EU was chosen from the start - there was no debate on that. Poland as a pawn between two powerful magnets had to choose. I think that for the time it was chosen well but now with slowly emerging EU as a another magnet, priorities should be revised.
20 October, 2009, 01:30
Hello From Poland:
What I want to ask you is why can't Poland actually be independent, including from so-called "west"? If you do not want to be a buffer state, like some ball in the air between hands, then really, really be independent! Do not allow NATO to take you over! Do not allow US missiles any more than Russian ones! Etc.
P.S. I think Polish people are great and I'd love to see your culture un Russianized BUT certainly not Americanized either. Please. Just POLISH would be so nice.
19 October, 2009, 23:25
@Bangdov
Poland does not need to be nuked and it is pretty ridicule to compare the situation of Poland or the Baltic States under the USSR to what there are now where no sovereign states including Russia and based on an imperial system. Although it did have a good educational system from what I understand.
If you’re arguing based on states geography, size, population, education, industrial capacity and natural resources that there are only a few countries able to exert independent policy I would agree.
I think these include of course the US and Britain, Israel, Iran, France, Germany ( I am not so sure after all post war allied laws are still in place in there), China, India although limited due to security, population and geographic location, Russia and Japan.
I think the next super power will be JAPAN.
“It is naive for Poles/Balts to assume that they could build their life without keeping Russia in the back of their mind all the time. They always have to remember if their actions will be approved by Russia or not. If they are careless with this -- they are asking for troubles. And that is the price they have to pay for being "independent" from Russia.”
I can’t tell if you’re a Russophile or a Russophobe.
@from Poland
What about Zbignew Brezinski?
Can't just ignore the fact that he and his family clan aligned with George Soros have been in positions of power and his accomplices like his front man Khalizad who oversaw the Afghan war operation as well as establishment of the Taliban now UN ambassador directing policy against Russia for the past 3 decades from Afghanistan to the Balkans, Caucasus, Europe, India, China, etc.
Events and strategy that directly correlate what he laid out in his 97 book The Grand Chessboard.
19 October, 2009, 23:00
Bogdanov, I enjoy reading your comments, but from time to time I have to object. Just off the top of my head..:
I would think 100 times before saying some country should be nuked, no matter how stupid its government may be acting; reasons:
- Because 99.99 % of people in this country are not the government
- Because it has such horrible consequences I’m not sure I want to inflict them even on my worst enemy (Please check some documentaries on Hiroshima and Nagasaki..)
- Because these consequences are so long-lasting and so grotesque that without being religious I actually believe these ready to use them are in fact ‘evil’
- Because it’s the best way to make an eternal enemy.. if your strike is limited..
- Because if you’re so free about use of nuclear weapons I see no difference between you and people, and governments you’re so much against (and I’m with you on the role Britain, the US, Balts, Polish and some Scandinavians have chosen to play in regards to Russia..)
- Because there’s a huge, huge difference between talking of shooting somebody and actually doing it – the difference between talk and action is much greater when hundreds of thousands (to be conservative) are involved
I would reserve such weapons only for defense purposes: eg to strike back if I’m attacked first with them – we have to thank nukes for these now 64 years of relative world peace. Second, and the most positive I see in them, to use them for humanity’s common good – against external threat if one day. I’m against Obama’s recent talk of world free of nuclear weapons; it’s not the weapon that is the problem, it’s the one that chooses to use it.
BR,
Aleks
19 October, 2009, 16:45
"from Poland". You wrote: "I think now it is unique moment to rebuild good relations...". That is exactly what I am thinking about! So, at least, two of us have found common ground. :-)
19 October, 2009, 12:01
Well said Bogdanov. This is all correct but you also need to keep in mind that the polish present line is represented by the ultra stupid parties PO-PiS who unfortunately govern. At least 50% of poles do have positive opinion about Russia. The government however is stupid enough to think that once embraced by the Great Evil they are in position to create trouble for Russia. It is due to recognize the calm with which Russia is treating them despite provocations and obstacles they pose.
Poland and the Balts are the Evils’ Trojan Horses in Europe, still unable to recognize that the Great Evil cannot afford policy of confrontation and therefore has to find peace with Russia.
But the time will come.
19 October, 2009, 11:57
Hi Bogdanov,
If You check history Poland was not fully independent country 20/40/60 years ago - not in terms of military, economy, civic freedom and politics in the same spectrum as now. NATO is not the same as Warsaw Pact and EU is not Comecon. Both Poland and Baltic states should and can decide on their own what they want and pay consequences for that of course. I still didn`t read any concrete facts why Poland should deserve a nuke in the head - but assuming that You dont like our independence from Your country and prefer Poland as a CIS or RBU member, then know that Polish authorities are much concerned what Russia has to say (which for me is too paranoid). Poland didnt build nuclear power plants, because Russian goverment occused those plans as a step for building atomic weapons (sure!) and it might anger Russia. Poland does not host any NATO forces on its territory because it might anger Russia. Poland is not a member of NATO nuclear sharing program because it might anger Russia. Almost everything is taken into account from russian side much more that it is needed in my opinion - I would change policy of polish goverment in relations to Russia, but not resign from overall "go west" policy for sake of good relations if this will be the price of them.
On the other side Russia is also far too paranoid on its security and schizophrenic about its shrinking sphere of influence, which was ultimately lost after the Cold War - a fact that russian goverment wants to forget. Any kind of revival for those structures will be on the expense of those countries that are now independent. I think no nation has right in the modern world to declare any third nation a part of their sphere of interest - this includes both Russia and USA. Poland and Batlic states are not russian property or any other - those countries are on their own to decide where they want to go.
You can completely diss me as a russophobe, but I think this maybe far from truth - mostly Poles including myself have very high level of sympathy for Russians and many aspects of russian culture and great achievements of it. This was stormed by nationalist sentiments after Warsaw Pact dissolution, as those sentiments where incubated for the sake of good relations inside the soviet block not only in Poland. I dont have this kind of sentiment myself - I know that the only guarantee of having a border on Odra river was a soviet presence nearby. I know that millions RKKA troops died in Poland fighting Germans - and that without Stalin objections to Roosevelt there would be no Poland at all. Those facts are omitted because they do not fit to stereotypes, but gladly they are slowly swimming up after the tiring flood of polish messianism in the 90s.
I think now it is unique moment to rebuild good relations - Poland and Russia do not have any territorial disputes nor ambitions towards each other. Polish-russian both business and cultural exchange is going well. But those relations cannot be build healthy on the expenses from one or both sides.
19 October, 2009, 05:15
"from Poland". You are asking why Poland deserves a nuke? Because, Poles are asking for it. I wouldn't give such valuable stuff (a nuke) for free to anyone. But, I am very kind person, and my heart melts from compassion when somebody is begging very much about it...
Now, regarding "independent" Poland. It is independent now as much as it was 20, 40, 60, ... years ago. No more, no less. Let me explain you why.
Lets imagine a situation, that you are the computer nerd (not like Bill Gates, though, but relatively young and poor) and it happened that your neighbor is Mike Tyson. In this situation, the last thing you want to do in your pathetic life is to create any conditions which will disturb Mike. Say, generating noise in the middle of the night (party with other nerds), or bringing barking dogs (to protect yourself from Mike), or spitting on or trashing Mike's property, or giving him lectures about freedom and democracy. Because, what may happen next -- you may find yourself being just a wet spot on the wall of your house.
From the other hand, if your friend is Mohamed Ali, then you, probably, would have a chance to look straight in Mike's eyes. Sometimes. Or even open your mouth. But, this is only with the conditions that Ali is right behind your back and you have worked out your portion of the friendship with him. With Ali as your friend, you could afford to unload the part of your brain from constant thoughts about Mike. But then, immediately, you have to occupy it with the thoughts about Ali.
Long story short, my point is -- you are not completely free to determine your lifestyle in this world. You always have to remember about your neighbors, friends, and enemies. And the smaller you are the bigger part of your brain should be devoted for this purpose. You always have to think and remember about Mike's or Ali's opinions before you make any move and always be sure that at least one of them is happy with you. The situation is pretty much the same between Russia and Poland (By the way, Baltic States are also in the same weight category with Poland). It is naive for Poles/Balts to assume that they could build their life without keeping Russia in the back of their mind all the time. They always have to remember if their actions will be approved by Russia or not. If they are careless with this -- they are asking for troubles. And that is the price they have to pay for being "independent" from Russia.
By the way, may be you are a good guy. I don't know. I hope, though. And if so, please, convince your government to use brain when they are building their relationships with Russia. This is for your sake. Not mine. At the end, Russia is not your enemy. But, you could make it be one.
18 October, 2009, 21:39
Bogdanov, I did not say that Iran had bloody hands. I said that Americas operations in Afghanistan will be forced to come to an end. As not only US troops but all the troops from NATO. Meaning that they will have to leave as what they are doing is not sustainable. I mentioned Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran, that, the US and its allies, should keep their hands off and leave them alone.
I am very much on the side of Iran, as I see the western countries bludgeoning them with threats and sanctions over their nuclear program which has already been proved is for peaceful purposes. Iran has attacked no one, but the US and their allies have. Iraq and Afghanistan.
Iran stands in a peculiar position, with Iraq on one side and Afghanistan on the other, both under US led occupation, both unstable. The weapons Iran has managed to create for self defense also come under scrutiny by these occupying powers. It is perfectly clear that the US and its NATO allies wish to subjugate Iran politically and economically.
Concerning my statement that Mr Medvedev said quite bluntly.... This I must apologise for It was not Mr Medvedev, But Nikolay Petrushev, secretary of the Russian Security Council, in an interview with the Russian newspaper Izvestia. "Russia to broaden nuclear strike". dated 14th oct. Mr Medvedev please accept my apology. Given the strange situation Russia finds itself in with US and its NATO allies wishing to place missiles near its borders, with the missiles aimed at Russia, it is of no surprise to me that Russia gives such a response. I see Russia as a peaceful country minding its own business getting on with economic realities and not going into aggressive wars with anyone, as the US is doing.
NATO should have been disbanded years ago, when the reasons it was created for disappeared some years ago. The EU had decided to create the EU Defense Force for its defense and no more. This was cried down by Britain and the US.
In 2010 there will be a crossroads for the EU, concerning the US wars led in Iraq, Afghanistan and US led belligerence against Iran and the present wold economic situation. The EU holds huge reserves of dollars. The dollar is still plunging and it may reach the levels 1 Euro = $2. This would suffocate the EU economy. Most countries in the world are selling their dollar reserves for Euro holdings. In 2010 the EU will have to confront the US with this situation and use its economic clout to band together with other countries to make the much needed basket of currencies to repair the world economy. If not and they stay with a sinking dollar then the EU will find itself in a situation where it could disintegrate and become an appendage of the USA.
Latin America plans US dollar replacement in 2010. Nine countries have agreed on using a new intra-regional trading currency. It is called the SUCRE. It is named after Jose Antonio de Sucre who fought for Spain's independence alongside Simon Bolivar. The countries involved are, Cuba, Dominica, Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Honduras, Saint Vincent, Antigua, Bolivia and Bermuda. That is according to Presstv.ir.
Bogdanov, I do enjoy your posts they are very much to the point and sometimes amusing. You are a good writer.
Starlight.
18 October, 2009, 17:23
And why do You think so Bogdanov that Poland deserves a nuke? Only because it choose to be independet from the likes of You?
17 October, 2009, 20:53
starlight.
Why makes you believe that Iran has "bloody hands"? We haven't seen any evidence of that yet? From the other hand the United States and Britain seems sinking in the blood... Also, when I am comparing speeches of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadi Nejad with many of Western top politicians, I sadly conclude that it is the Western countries (their governments) which are in the state of insanity.
You said: "Mr Medvedev has stated quite bluntly...".
It was a "cry of desperation" in the attempt to conduct the message the deaf (the West). The reason why Russians did it, because the NATO countries behave like a swarm of snakes, which from one hand seems like backing from the original plan of attack, but, at the same time, preparing for the next unexpected and poisonous strike. As I said already many times -- Americans and some Europeans are not trustworthy and Russians should stop being so naive about NATO's real intentions. Therefore, I do not agree with Medvedev, that Russians should reserve rights to use nuclear capabilities. Instead, in response to every new NATO's move in the Eastern direction, Russians should respond with installation of new nuclear-based system on the Western boarders and make those systems ready-to-combat and at any second. And not reserve rights, but, just use them if necessary. For example, Poland, clearly deserves at least one such "mushroom". May be then they wake up from that hypnosis the West put them in. They are lucky, that I am not Russian President -- they would quickly get what they are asking for.
16 October, 2009, 18:43
Peter, America's operations in Afghanistan will be forced to come to an end, and no matter who is left to rule Afghanistan. I believe it will be a bloodbath. As not only US troops but all the troops from NATO countries who are present. Not only Afghanistan but also Iraq, not withstanding, hands off Iran, leave them alone.
Recently I read a report on RT, in which Mr Medvedev has stated quite bluntly that Russia would use nuclear weapons if pushed into a corner. The present world situation combined with the world economic situation and western countries persisting in trying to bring a failed economic situation back to life, is heading to a world confrontation. Which leaves a question. Which side do you want to be on?
Having followed much of this, for a long time now, its politics and economics are leading to disaster. "You can lead a horse to water, but you'll never make him drink. You can lead a man to slaughter, but you'll never make him think."
For everyone go to http:/www.leap2020.eu/ and read GEAB No 38.
14 October, 2009, 23:27
Russia’s going East, or making some major steps in this direction if I have to be more exact – wow! It’s all over the news these days. And I also like the timing chosen: the message to the West seems to be ‘we’ve waited long enough for your good will, now you’re late and we’ve gone East.’
And not only East, but all, East, South and North, look like ways leading to the future for Russia; the West is the past. Now I believe also that going externally to the East, will help Russia do something about its own, internal, huge East – and this should be considered the most important goal I believe.
China is by far the most important country to be engaged by Russia and the relationship can be both long-lasting and mutually beneficial if done with mutual respect – I believe both sides are well capable of that; both should be however well aware of external provocations. Next, India should be brought into the same relationship with both Russia and China: here China and India have to work hard to repair some damaged trust due to China being somewhat aggressive towards India (as seeing it as its major competitor in Asia I guess..). I see these three (with China playing the central role) as coming into an almost EU type relationship in the future: with post Soviet space republics, Mongolia, Nepal, Iran, Turkey.. also joining at some stage. One desirable side effect of such scenario will be very positive influence on Pakistan and Afghanistan. But if anything like that is to happen, I think structure should be closer to that of the Suisse regions/cantons rather than to that of the EU of today.
BR
Aleks
14 October, 2009, 21:13
Good points re: Afghanistan.
14 October, 2009, 18:47
I like your programs and comment just briliant
13 October, 2009, 00:29
@007
Unfortunately I agree. I can feel this “big bang” coming with my skin now for years, and this is the main reason why I’ve come home (to my native Bulgaria); home I think is where we need to be in critical times. I could feel it even before, but what came as my final and Big wake up call was the bombing of Yugoslavia exactly 10 years ago – this is when I came to the conclusion that either sanity has left this earth or some very urgent factors were behind this aggression: either way, the ship is sinking and we ought to be thinking of our own, individual salvation. As I don’t have too much belief in our leaders’ ability to cope, arranging some small, self-sustainable farm (+other facilities) in a home region (isolation is also very necessary) seems like a good idea to me.., as you’ve suggested.
Yes, I know.., but it has also been said that when surrounded by crazy people the one that is not, in fact looks like the crazy one. I think most people on this forum know what I’m talking about, and what seems really stupid to me is to put my head in the sand just to be part of the crowd: I owe it to my kid at least not to.
What I’m afraid of? Short list is:
1.That the current economic crisis is just a hickup before the real deal..
2.The US debt.
3.A possible single terror act with a WMD that will be the end of the world as we know it (there’s more WMDs and more people ready to use them today than at any time in history..)
4.A possible real global conflict. (danger spots, created almost..on purpose, at this point in time would be: Pakistan-India, Israel-Iran, Russia-Ukraine ..)
5.Global Climate Change due to human and Natural causes (I’m afraid with consequences much exceeding what we’re ready to cope with..)
6.Geometric progression/growth of global population
7.Aggression due to ending global resources (water, food, land, oil, metals..)
8.Globalization (I’m not sure the ones promoting it realize the dangers.., just blinded by shot-term profits.. – unless short-term is all we have left..)
9. Exactly this: that when I take into consideration points 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 it seems to me everything is short-term planned these days. But Why?.. If I’m to believe in a conspiracy theory, then I’ll say our great leaders know something we don’t. If I’m more down to earth, I’ll say our great leaders are themselves setting the time bomb ready to go off in the very near future, simply by seeing just the short-term. Either way we’re cooked: this or max the next generation.
BR
Aleks
11 October, 2009, 23:16
You are correcti nyour assessment of using the Northern Alliance.
11 October, 2009, 15:03
Bogdanov, we’ve thread jumped, but I’ll just say one more thing and hopefully our leaders pick up on it, this idea of a “no/all country” global currency can be used to take the entire world green.
But my reason for wanting to do that is very different to the current bankers idea.
This “global warming” thing is also a scam, and if you research the Clean Development Mechanism, you’ll see it.
Basically the bankers print some money, do some project that is really not economically feasible, but it saves carbon.
This carbon credit saving is then priced at something like $30 dollars a ton “saved” and sold to polluting nations (the ones making the goods) who will be otherwise fined.
It doesn’t actually reduce carbon, what it is, is another siphon that sucks on developing countries, its really just another slave tax, working through a carbon credit exchange, that bankers will make a profit on.
The system itself cannot work on a global scale because those costs will simply reflect in the price of goods… zero sum game actually.
But if this technology were applied to thousands of self sustaining green villages, applying solar, biogas, etc, each of which has a small transparent democratic bank, it does many things, it takes the pressure off dwindling oil, gas and fish stock.
It allows the world to move to a one-child policy so we get back some nature and our kids see wild animals again.
But most importantly, and it’s the thing that any plan must implement, it builds communities because this is the real problem, this banking system has broken down society and even it cant run without it.
Getting people closer to nature will also create food security and reduce unemployment, and in a way its a social contract, you bankers keep the big cities, use it to drive your oil empires, but give us our planet back, and make happy people.
Its abundantly clear that this system cant look after its people now, but its also abundantly clear that its breeding “bankers”, a whole generation of lost souls.
When I read this thread, Afghanistan is as clear as mud, if they said that Obama’s generals were smoking the poppies, I’d get more of a Eureka, but what worries me more is that highly intelligent people are saying, “if we pay those guys to kill those guys, we win”, carry on with that thought, soon your suburb will also be a chess pawn in this bankers game.
I think that even after the war these bankers create, its still not going to work, the only thing I’m sure of is that the world is now fighting the wrong war.
Here’s my prediction, if they start this war, the terrorism veil will come down, the system will unravel completely, billions of people will start starving everywhere, and they’ll have to have another war, and another war… like Einstein said, the war after this one will be fought with sticks and stones.
And that’s my final word… probably a good idea to get a job on a farm now because I cant see any good coming out of where this world is going.
If there are any sane leaders out there, don’t let the bankers do this… fix it.
11 October, 2009, 14:27
Gene Hopkins, the evil is still an evil no matter who the president is and whether he got Noble or not.
I recognize Obama has said few good things during the campaign but he already forgot great part of that. For example Guantanamo was to be closed within 100 days.
Obama like Bush is fishing for wars and conflicts outside US borders. To gove peace price for that is a misunderstanding.