paulitician
Platinum Member
- Oct 7, 2011
- 38,401
- 4,163
- 1,130
Ron Paul Institute: Russia-US Relations: Inevitable Clash...
- Thread starter paulitician
- Start date
- Sep 16, 2012
- 67,178
- 63,044
- 3,605
Thoughts;
4 min. in, the guy in the lower left, the ex-CIA, makes a distinction between strategic interests and economic interests (i.e. political interests), essentially saying the establishment has no long term strategic vision. I don't think that is an accurate statement.
He is right though, the West is lying about what it is doing, as opposed to what it says it is doing.
When he talked about Martha Raddatz distorting reality of what is going on over there in the debate, this is what he was talking about.
How A Presidential Debate Moderator Distorted Syrian Reality
The guy in the upper left, from the Brookings institute, is a shill for the establishment. He is full of shit. Everything he says can be discounted. That think tank is connected with the establishment and the CFR.
It matters not what Assad did or didn't do. If America entered into a full blown civil revolt, what wouldn't give the Chinese or the Russians any legitimate right to fund insurgent groups or operate militarily in our borders.
Further on, the ex-CIA agent is absolutely correct. Going back to the Bush admin., the secret ops of both America and Britain were responsible for trying to destabilize not only Syria, but the entire Middle East. It is part of the Greater Middle East strategy (the one presented by Condolezza Rice) that eventually led to the Arab Spring in many of the nations in the Middle East. They want to redraw all the borders to make the region more stable, and to make shipping energy to Europe more monopolized and more profitable for the West.
Good blog on this; chycho: Target is Still Iran: Clear Cutting the Middle East and the Coming Blood Bath (Mapping World War III)
This would, of course, cut into China and Russia's piece of the action and compromise their national security.
I was surprised at how measured and sober the Oxford Academic's analysis of the situation was, good on him.
I found it a bit disingenuous how they separated long term economic interests with strategic interests. Personally, I believe they are the same. Any political scientist worth their salt knows this, it is a axiomatic, established going back centuries.
4 min. in, the guy in the lower left, the ex-CIA, makes a distinction between strategic interests and economic interests (i.e. political interests), essentially saying the establishment has no long term strategic vision. I don't think that is an accurate statement.
He is right though, the West is lying about what it is doing, as opposed to what it says it is doing.
When he talked about Martha Raddatz distorting reality of what is going on over there in the debate, this is what he was talking about.
How A Presidential Debate Moderator Distorted Syrian Reality
The guy in the upper left, from the Brookings institute, is a shill for the establishment. He is full of shit. Everything he says can be discounted. That think tank is connected with the establishment and the CFR.
It matters not what Assad did or didn't do. If America entered into a full blown civil revolt, what wouldn't give the Chinese or the Russians any legitimate right to fund insurgent groups or operate militarily in our borders.
Further on, the ex-CIA agent is absolutely correct. Going back to the Bush admin., the secret ops of both America and Britain were responsible for trying to destabilize not only Syria, but the entire Middle East. It is part of the Greater Middle East strategy (the one presented by Condolezza Rice) that eventually led to the Arab Spring in many of the nations in the Middle East. They want to redraw all the borders to make the region more stable, and to make shipping energy to Europe more monopolized and more profitable for the West.
Good blog on this; chycho: Target is Still Iran: Clear Cutting the Middle East and the Coming Blood Bath (Mapping World War III)
This would, of course, cut into China and Russia's piece of the action and compromise their national security.
I was surprised at how measured and sober the Oxford Academic's analysis of the situation was, good on him.
I found it a bit disingenuous how they separated long term economic interests with strategic interests. Personally, I believe they are the same. Any political scientist worth their salt knows this, it is a axiomatic, established going back centuries.
owebo
Gold Member
One correction I would make.....
Russia-Obama relations....
I don't thinkmthempeoplemofmrussia have a problem with us non-democrat Americans.....
- Sep 16, 2012
- 67,178
- 63,044
- 3,605
Then you aren't aware that the neo-cons of the CFR don't take a substantially different foreign policy position than Hillary. Why do you think they are voting for her?
The whole Project for a New Middle East speech was introduced by Condoleezza Rice and the Bush Administration. I just don't think they ever envisioned Russia having the power, or the will to give a shit. Pay special attention to Rice's comment to CBS in that last video.
Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a “New Middle East”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/plans-...e-east-the-project-for-a-new-middle-east/3882
All this talk about freedom and democracy. . . . hmmmmm, yeah, I'm sure, just look at Jordan and Saudi Arabia.
However, if you are talking about the "PEOPLE" of any nation, no, the particular people of any nation don't have problems with the particular people of any other nation. It is the propaganda that makes them hate, that is the only thing.
The ordinary American has more in common with the ordinary Russian, than they do with their leaders. Obama has more in common with Putin, and Putin has more in common with Obama, than either has in common with either of their people's.
paulitician
Platinum Member
- Oct 7, 2011
- 38,401
- 4,163
- 1,130
- Thread starter
- #5
paulitician
Platinum Member
- Oct 7, 2011
- 38,401
- 4,163
- 1,130
- Thread starter
- #6
Putin has tried to inform. I give him credit for that. In this video, he tries to get through to a Western Media Puppet.
'Who's the aggressor in the world?'...
'Who's the aggressor in the world?'...
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Caught On Camera: Black Man RANDOMLY Attacks White Server — And Just Walks Away- Started by YoursTruly
- Replies: 0
-
-
Dem Official caught admitting who was acting President for Biden: Jill Biden’s top advisor.- Started by Nostra
- Replies: 8
-
-
Illegal kills a woman and the judge gives him community service- Started by EvilCat Breath
- Replies: 4
