Russia - USA Relations

The Saker interviews Paul Craig Roberts

The Saker: It has become rather obvious to many, if not most, people that the USA is not a democracy or a republic, but rather a plutocracy run by a small elite which some call “the 1%”. Others speak of the “deep state”. So my first question to you is the following. Could you please take the time to assess the influence and power of each of the following entities one by one. In particular, can you specify for each of the following whether it has a decision-making “top” position, or a decision-implementing “middle” position in the real structure of power (listed in no specific order)

Federal Reserve
Big Banking
Bilderberg
Council on Foreign Relations
Skull & Bones
CIA
Goldman Sachs and top banks
“Top 100 families” (Rothschild, Rockefeller, Dutch Royal Family, British Royal Family, etc.)
Israel Lobby
Freemasons and their lodges
Big Business: Big Oil, Military Industrial Complex, etc.
Other people or organizations not listed above?
Who, which group, what entity would you consider is really at the apex of power in the current US polity?

Paul Craig Roberts: The US is ruled by private interest groups and by the neoconservative ideology that History has chosen the US as the “exceptional and indispensable” country with the right and responsibility to impose its will on the world.

In my opinion the most powerful of the private interest groups are:
The Military/security Complex
The 4 or 5 mega-sized “banks too big to fail” and Wall Street
The Israel Lobby
Agribusiness
The Extractive industries (oil, mining, timber).

The interests of these interest groups coincide with those of the neoconservatives. The neoconservative ideology supports American financial and military-political imperialism or hegemony.

There is no independent American print or TV media. In the last years of the Clinton regime, 90% of the print and TV media was concentrated in 6 mega-companies. During the Bush regime, National Public Radio lost its independence. So the media functions as a Ministry of Propaganda.

Both political parties, Republicans and Democrats, are dependent on the same private interest groups for campaign funds, so both parties dance to the same masters. Jobs offshoring destroyed the manufacturing and industrial unions and deprived the Democrats of Labor Union political contributions. In those days, Democrats represented the working people and Republicans represented business.

The Federal Reserve is there for the banks, mainly the large ones.The Federal Reserve was created as lender of last resort to prevent banks from failing because of runs on the bank or withdrawal of deposits. The New York Fed, which conducts the financial interventions, has a board that consists of the executives of the big banks. The last three Federal Reserve chairmen have been Jews, and the current vice chairman is the former head of the Israeli central bank. Jews are prominent in the financial sector, for example, Goldman Sachs. In recent years, the US Treasury Secretaries and heads of the financial regulatory agencies have mainly been the bank executives responsible for the fraud and excessive debt leverage that set off the last financial crisis.

In the 21st century, the Federal Reserve and Treasury have served only the interests of the large banks. This has been at the expense of the economy and the population. For example, retired people have had no interest income for eight years in order that the financial institutions can borrow at zero costs and make money.

No matter how rich some families are, they cannot compete with powerful interest groups such as the military/security complex or Wall Street and the banks. Long established wealth can look after its interests, and some, such as the Rockefellers, have activist foundations that most likely work hand in hand with the National Endowment for Democracy to fund and encourage various pro-American non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in countries that the US wants to influence or overthrow, such as occurred in Ukraine. The NGOs are essentially US Fifth Columns and operate under such names as “human rights,” “democracy,” etc. A Chinese professor told me that the Rockefeller Foundation had created an American University in China and is used to organize various anti-regime Chinese. At one time, and perhaps still, there were hundreds of US and German financed NGOs in Russia, possibly as many as 1,000.

I don’t know if the Bilderbergs do the same. Possibly they are just very rich people and have their proteges in governments who try to protect their interests. I have never seen any signs of Bilderbergs or Masons or Rothchilds affecting congressional or executive branch decisions.

On the other hand, the Council for Foreign Relations is influential. The council consists of former government policy officials and academics involved in foreign policy and international relations. The council’s publication, Foreign Affairs, is the premier foreign policy forum. Some journalists are also members. When I was proposed for membership in the 1980s, I was blackballed.

Skull & Bones is a Yale University secret fraternity. A number of universities have such secret fraternities. For example, the University of Virginia has one, and the University of Georgia. These fraternities do not have secret governmental plots or ruling powers. Their influence would be limited to the personal influence of the members, who tend to be sons of elite families. In my opinion, these fraternities exist to convey elite status to members. They have no operational functions.

The Saker: What about individuals? Who are, in your opinion, the most powerful people in the USA today? Who takes the final, top level, strategic decision?

Paul Craig Roberts: There really are no people powerful in themselves. Powerful people are ones that powerful interest groups are behind. Ever since Secretary of Defense William Perry privatized so much of the military in 1991, the military/security complex has been extremely powerful, and its power is further amplified by its ability to finance political campaigns and by the fact that it is a source of employment in many states. Essentially Pentagon expenditures are controlled by defense contractors.

The Saker: I have always believed that in international terms, organizations such as NATO, the EU or all the others are only a front, and that the real alliance which controls the planet are the ECHELON countries: US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand aka “AUSCANNZUKUS” (they are also referred to as the “Anglosphere” or the “Five Eyes”) with the US and the UK are the senior partners while Canada, Australia and New Zealand are the junior partners here. Is this model correct?

Paul Craig Roberts: NATO was a US creation allegedly to protect Europe from a Soviet invasion. Its purpose expired in 1991. Today NATO provides cover for US aggression and provides mercenary forces for the American Empire. Britain, Canada, Australia, are simply US vassal states just as are Germany, France, Italy, Japan and the rest. There are no partners; just vassals. It is Washington’s empire, no one else’s.

The US favors the EU, because it is easier to control than the individual countries.

The Saker: It is often said that Israel controls the USA. Chomsky, and others, say that it is the USA which controls Israel. How would you characterize the relationship between Israel and the USA – does the dog wag the tail or does the tail wag the dog? Would you say that the Israel Lobby is in total control of the USA or are there still other forces capable of saying “no” to the Israel Lobby and impose their own agenda?

Paul Craig Roberts: I have never seen any evidence that the US controls Israel. All the evidence is that Israel controls the US, but only its MidEast policy. In recent years, Israel or the Israel Lobby, has been able to control or block academic appointments in the US and tenure for professors considered to be critics of Israel. Israel has successfully reached into both Catholic and State universities to block tenure and appointments. Israel can also block some presidential appointments and has vast influence over the print and TV media. The Israel Lobby also has plenty of money for political campaign funds and never fails to unseat US Representatives and Senators considered critical of Israel. The Israel lobby was able to reach into the black congressional district of Cynthia McKinney, a black woman, and defeat her reelection. As Admiral Tom Moorer, Chief of Naval Operations and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said: “No American President can stand up to Israel.” Adm. Moorer could not even get an official investigation of Israel’s deadly attack on the USS Liberty in 1967.

Anyone who criticizes Israeli policies even in a helpful way is labeled an “anti-Semite.”

In American politics, media, and universities, this is a death-dealing blow. You might as well get hit with a hellfire missile.

The Saker: Which of the 12 entities of power which I listed above have, in your opinion, played a key role in the planning and execution of the 9/11 “false flag” operation? After all, it is hard to imagine that this was planned and prepared between the inauguration of GW Bush and September 11th – it must have been prepared during the years of the Clinton Administration. Is it not true the the Oklahoma City bombing was a rehearsal for 9/11?

Paul Craig Roberts: In my opinion 9/11 was the product of the neoconservatives, many of whom are Jewish allied with Israel, Dick Cheney, and Israel. Its purpose was to provide “the new Pearl Harbor” that the neoconservatives said was necessary to launch their wars of conquest in the Middle East. I don’t know how far back it was planned, but Silverstein was obviously part of it and he had not had the WTC for very long before 9/11.

As for the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, US Air Force General Partin, the Air Force’s munitions expert, prepared an expert report proving beyond all doubt that the building blew up from the inside out and that the truck bomb was cover. Congress and the media ignored his report. The patsy, McVeigh, was already set up, and that was the only story allowed.

The Saker: Do you think that the people who run the USA today realize that they are on a collision course with Russia which could lead to thermonuclear war? If yes, why would they take such a risk? Do they really believe that at the last moment Russian will “blink” and back down, or do they actually believe that they can win a nuclear war? Are they not afraid that in a nuclear conflagration with Russia they will lose everything they have, including their power and even their lives?

Paul Craig Roberts: I am as puzzled as much as you. I think Washington is lost in hubris and arrogance and
is more or less insane. Also, there is belief that the US can win a nuclear war with Russia. There was an article in Foreign Affairs around 2005 or 2006 in which this conclusion was reached. The belief in the winnability of nuclear war has been boosted by faith in ABM defenses. The argument is that the US can hit Russia so hard in a preemptive first strike that Russia would not retaliate in fear of a second blow.

The Saker: How do you assess the current health of the Empire? For many years we have seen clear signs of decline, but there is still not visible collapse. Do you believe that such a collapse is inevitable and, if not, how could it be prevented? Will we see the day when the US Dollar suddenly become worthless or will another mechanism precipitate the collapse of this Empire?

Paul Craig Roberts: The US economy is hollowed out. There has been no real median family income growth for decades. Alan Greenspan as Fed Chairman used an expansion of consumer credit to take the place of the missing growth in consumer income, but the population is now too indebted to take on more. So there is nothing to drive the economy. So many manufacturing and tradable professional service jobs such as software engineering have been moved offshore that the middle class has shrunk. University graduates cannot get jobs that support an independent existence. So they can’t form households, buy houses, appliances and home furnishings. The government produces low inflation measures by not measuring inflation and low unemployment rates by not measuring unemployment. The financial markets are rigged, and gold is driven down despite rising demand by selling uncovered shorts in the futures market. It is a house of cards that has stood longer than I thought possible. Apparently, the house of cards can stand until the rest of the world ceases to hold the US dollar as reserves.

Possibly the empire has put too much stress on Europe by involving Europe in a conflict with Russia. If Germany, for example, were to pull out of NATO, the empire would collapse, or if Russia can find the wits to finance Greece, Italy, and Spain in exchange for them leaving the Euro and EU, the empire would suffer a fatal blow.

Alternatively, Russia might tell Europe that Russia has no alternative but to target European capitals with nuclear weapons now that Europe has joined the US in conducting war against Russia.

The Saker: Russia and China have done something unique in history and they have gone beyond the traditional model of forming an alliance: they have agreed to become interdependent – one could say that they have agreed to a symbiotic relationship. Do you believe that those in charge of the Empire have understood the tectonic change which has just happen or are they simply going into deep denial because reality scares them too much?

Paul Craig Roberts: Stephen Cohen says that there is simply no foreign policy discussion. There is no debate. I think the empire thinks that it can destabilize Russia and China and that is one reason Washington has color revolutions working in Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan. As Washington is determined to prevent the rise of other powers and is lost in hubris and arrogance, Washington probably believes that it will succeed. After all, History chose Washington.

The Saker: In your opinion, do presidential elections still matter and, if yes, what is your best hope for 2016? I am personally very afraid of Hillary Clinton whom I see as an exceptionally dangerous and outright evil person, but with the current Neocon influence inside the Republican, can we really hope for a non-Neocon candidate to win the GOP nomination?

Paul Craig Roberts: The only way a presidential election could matter would be if the elected president had behind him a strong movement. Without a movement, the president has no independent power and no one to appoint who will do his bidding. Presidents are captives. Reagan had something of a movement, just enough that we were able to cure stagflation despite Wall Street’s opposition and we were able to end the cold war despite the opposition of the CIA and the military/security complex. Plus Reagan was very old and came from a long time ago. He assumed the office of the president was powerful and acted that way.

The Saker: What about the armed forces? Can you imagine a Chairman of the JCS saying “no, Mr President, that is crazy, we will not do this” or do you expect the generals to obey any order, including one starting a nuclear war against Russia? Do you have any hope that the US military could step in and stop the “crazies” currently in power in the White House and Congress?

Paul Craig Roberts: The US military is a creature of the armaments industries. The whole purpose of making general is to be qualified to be a consultant to the “defense” industry, or to become an executive or on the board of a “defense” contractor. The military serves as the source of retirement careers when the generals make the big money. The US military is totally corrupt. Read Andrew Cockburn’s book, Kill Chain.

The Saker: If the USA is really deliberately going down the path towards war with Russia – what should Russia do? Should Russia back down and accept to be subjugated as a preferable option to a thermonuclear war, or should Russia resist and thereby accept the possibility of a thermonuclear war? Do you believe that a very deliberate and strong show of strength on the part of Russia could deter a US attack?

Paul Craig Roberts: I have often wondered about this. I can’t say that I know. I think Putin is humane enough to surrender rather than to be part of the destruction of the world, but Putin has to answer to others inside Russia and I doubt the nationalists would stand for surrender.

In my opinion, I think Putin should focus on Europe and make Europe aware that Russia expects an American attack and will have no choice except to wipe out Europe in response. Putin should encourage Europe to break off from NATO in order to prevent World War 3.

Putin should also make sure China understands that China represents the same perceived threat to the US as Russia and that the two countries need to stand together. Perhaps if Russia and China were to maintain their forces on a nuclear alert, not the top one, but an elevated one that conveyed recognition of the American threat and conveyed this threat to the world, the US could be isolated.

Perhaps if the Indian press, the Japanese Press, the French and German press, the UK press, the Chinese and Russian press began reporting that Russia and China wonder if they will receive a pre-emptive nuclear attack from Washington the result would be to prevent the attack.

As far as I can tell from my many media interviews with the Russian media, there is no Russian awareness of the Wolfowitz Doctrine. Russians think that there is some kind of misunderstanding about Russian intentions. The Russian media does not understand that Russia is unacceptable, because Russia is not a US vassal. Russians believe all the Western bullshit about “freedom and democracy” and believe that they are short on both but making progress. In other words, Russians have no idea that they are targeted for destruction.

The Saker: What are, in your opinion, the roots of the hatred of so many members of the US elites for Russia? Is that just a leftover from the Cold War, or is there another reason for the almost universal russophobia amongst US elites? Even during the Cold War, it was unclear whether the US was anti-Communist or anti-Russian? Is there something in the Russian culture, nation or civilization which triggers that hostility and, if yes, what is it?

Paul Craig Roberts: The hostility toward Russia goes back to the Wolfowttz Doctrine:

“Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.”

While the US was focused on its MidEast wars, Putin restored Russia and blocked Washington’s planned invasion of Syria and bombing of Iran. The “first objective” of the neocon doctrine was breached. Russia had to be brought into line. That is the origin of Washington’s attack on Russia. The dependent and captive US and European media simply repeats “the Russian Threat” to the public, which is insouciant and otherwise uninformed.

The offense of Russian culture is also there–Christian morals, respect for law and humanity, diplomacy in place of coercion, traditional social mores–but these are in the background. Russia is hated because Russia (and China) is a check on Washington’s unilateral uni-power. This check is what will lead to war.

If the Russians and Chinese do not expect a pre-emptive nuclear attack from Washington, they will be destroyed.

George1 wrote:Russia Will Work With Any Elected US President - Putin

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/politics/20150418/1021065730.html#ixzz3Xeu9F5zS

Should be "will try to work with any elected US president". But all runner ups are all simply Russian bashers besides maybe Ron Paul whom is the only level headed one I can see. Rest are trying to make the senators all happy.

franco wrote:Has anyone else heard of these?

No... but although consulates are not embassies, why not pull an Assange instead of getting caught?

I hadn't heard anything about it.

from google, Slate posted this article

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/05/05/tunisia_davis_former_fbi_agent_drove_up_to_nsa_and_cia_gates_made_violent.html

from USA today

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/05/05/fbi-cia-threat/26907837/

There needs to be a unified thread for news and what not.

http://sputniknews.com/military/20150527/1022594585.html

USA bitching about Russias snap drills saying they shouldnt have them and be more transparent. F them.

George1 wrote:Kremlin hopes Russian-American relations not to be sacrificed to US presidential race

The president’s press secretary said the solution of many global problems was impossible without Russian-US cooperation

MOSCOW, June 5 /TASS/. Kremlin hopes that contenders in the US presidential race will be more regardful of Russian-American relations, which used to be sacrificed to US election campaigns so many times in the past, Russian president’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists.

"It is regretful that over the entire period of modern history the bilateral Russian-American relations have been sacrificed to the altar of election campaigns so many times and have been used as an instrument of those campaigns," the Kremlin spokesman said adding that every time that practice had inflicted damage to the Russia-US relations.

"We hope that our bilateral relations will be sacrificed to a lesser degree during the forthcoming election campaign, which is gaining momentum in the United States," Peskov said when asked to comment on Kremlin’s reaction to the harsh and critical remarks of the Republican Party’s candidates about Russia and its president.

"Putin has said more than once that he is absolutely calm about being criticized if this criticism is tactful and decent; if it does not go beyond the reach of reason and if it is not insulting and ill-natured," Peskov said calling Putin’s stance as a normal human attitude to criticism.

The president’s press secretary also said the solution of many global problems was impossible without Russian-US cooperation. "Moscow has always stood for good and mutually beneficial relations based on respect for reciprocal interests," Peskov said noting that Russia was constantly underlying its stance at all levels - from expert to the top one.

"We still believe that it is impossible to resolve many global problems without cooperation and interaction between Russia and the United States," Peskov concluded.

Lol...Hillary Clinton will be president there is no hope for peace, it never stood a chance.

Someone told me when i said that russia isnt close to usa that i am wrong and by contrary russia and usa actually are very close and only fools believe that russia and usa hate eachother. Is this person wrong? What do you believe about usa russia relations?

well russians don't hate americans . But everytime muricans behave as if they are exceptional   . Jerks



you have not introduced yourself yet victor . Where are you from ?

Americans are indoctrinated since their childhood with Patriotism nonsense a blind patriotism where little kids are thought that their country is "god blessed" and they teach kids from a very young age to salute to US flag and "god bless america" crap like a mantra, while their entire society is controlled by private corporations and banks that drive the media constant fear mongering of evil russians, Hollywood has a basic dogma to use whereever they can the evil Ivan as a stereotype while the constant stereotype is americans do no wrong and are knights in shining armor. Russias do not have such demonisation of americans, russians always where really bad when it came to propaganda and media is actually not state owned except of few channels while big majority are either not even russian or just plain out foreign stuff. Over 700 NGO's are constantly undermining russia, its politics and russian view off themselfs with russophobia, like George Soros who financed books for schools where US presidents were the main issue not russian or common history.

Kyo wrote:The Saker interviews Paul Craig Roberts

The Saker:  It has become rather obvious to many, if not most, people that the USA is not a democracy or a republic, but rather a plutocracy run by a small elite which some call “the 1%”.  Others speak of the “deep state”.  So my first question to you is the following.  Could you please take the time to assess the influence and power of each of the following entities one by one.  In particular, can you specify for each of the following whether it has a decision-making “top” position, or a decision-implementing “middle” position in the real structure of power (listed in no specific order)

Federal Reserve
Big Banking
Bilderberg
Council on Foreign Relations
Skull & Bones
CIA
Goldman Sachs and top banks
“Top 100 families” (Rothschild, Rockefeller, Dutch Royal Family, British Royal Family, etc.)
Israel Lobby
Freemasons and their lodges
Big Business: Big Oil, Military Industrial Complex, etc.
Other people or organizations not listed above?
Who, which group, what entity would you consider is really at the apex of power in the current US polity?

Paul Craig Roberts: The US is ruled by private interest groups and by the neoconservative ideology that History has chosen the US as the “exceptional and indispensable” country with the right and responsibility to impose its will on the world.

In my opinion the most powerful of the private interest groups are:
The Military/security Complex
The 4 or 5 mega-sized “banks too big to fail” and Wall Street
The Israel Lobby
Agribusiness
The Extractive industries (oil, mining, timber).

The interests of these interest groups coincide with those of the neoconservatives. The neoconservative ideology supports American financial and military-political imperialism or hegemony.

There is no independent American print or TV media.  In the last years of the Clinton regime, 90% of the print and TV media was concentrated in 6 mega-companies.  During the Bush regime, National Public Radio lost its independence.  So the media functions as a Ministry of Propaganda.

Both political parties, Republicans and Democrats, are dependent on the same private interest groups for campaign funds, so both parties dance to the same masters.  Jobs offshoring destroyed the manufacturing and industrial unions and deprived the Democrats of Labor Union political contributions. In those days, Democrats represented the working people and Republicans represented business.

The Federal Reserve is there for the banks, mainly the large ones.The Federal Reserve was created as lender of last resort to prevent banks from failing because of runs on the bank or withdrawal of deposits.  The New York Fed, which conducts the financial interventions, has a board that consists of the executives of the big banks.  The last  three Federal Reserve chairmen have been Jews, and the current vice chairman is the former head of the Israeli central bank. Jews are prominent in the financial sector, for example, Goldman Sachs.  In recent years, the US Treasury Secretaries and heads of the financial regulatory agencies have mainly been the bank executives responsible for the fraud and excessive debt leverage that set off the last financial crisis.

In the 21st century, the Federal Reserve and Treasury have served only the interests of the large banks.  This has been at the expense of the economy and the population. For example, retired people have had no interest income for eight years in order that the financial institutions can borrow at zero costs and make money.

No matter how rich some families are, they cannot compete with powerful interest groups such as the military/security complex or Wall Street and the banks.  Long established wealth can look after its interests, and some, such as the Rockefellers,  have activist foundations that most likely work hand in hand with the National Endowment for Democracy to fund and encourage various pro-American non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in countries that the US wants to influence or overthrow, such as occurred in Ukraine.  The NGOs are essentially US Fifth Columns and operate under such names as “human rights,” “democracy,” etc.  A Chinese professor told me that the Rockefeller Foundation had created an American University in China and is used to organize various anti-regime Chinese.  At one time, and perhaps still, there were hundreds of US and German financed NGOs in Russia, possibly as many as 1,000.

I don’t know if the Bilderbergs do the same.  Possibly they are just very rich people and have their proteges in governments who try to protect their interests.  I have never seen any signs of Bilderbergs or Masons or Rothchilds affecting congressional or executive branch decisions.

On the other hand, the Council for Foreign Relations is influential.  The council consists of former government policy officials and academics involved in foreign policy and international relations.  The council’s publication, Foreign Affairs, is the premier foreign policy forum.  Some journalists are also members. When I was proposed for membership in the 1980s, I was blackballed.

Skull & Bones is a Yale University secret fraternity.  A number of universities have such secret fraternities.  For example, the University of Virginia has one, and the University of Georgia.  These fraternities do not have secret governmental plots or ruling powers.  Their influence would be limited to the personal influence of the members, who tend to be sons of elite families.  In my opinion, these fraternities exist to convey elite status to members.  They have no operational functions.

The Saker:  What about individuals?  Who are, in your opinion, the most powerful people in the USA today?  Who takes the final, top level, strategic decision?

Paul Craig Roberts:  There really are no people powerful in themselves.  Powerful people are ones that powerful interest groups are behind.  Ever since Secretary of Defense William Perry privatized so much of the military in 1991, the military/security complex has been  extremely powerful, and its power is further amplified by its ability to finance political campaigns and by the fact that it is a source of employment in many states. Essentially Pentagon expenditures are controlled by defense contractors.

The Saker:  I have always believed that in international terms, organizations such as NATO, the EU or all the others are only a front, and that the real alliance which controls the planet are the ECHELON countries: US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand aka “AUSCANNZUKUS” (they are also referred to as the “Anglosphere” or the “Five Eyes”) with the US and the UK are the senior partners while Canada, Australia and New Zealand are the junior partners here.  Is this model correct?

Paul Craig Roberts: NATO was a US creation allegedly to protect Europe from a Soviet invasion.  Its purpose expired in 1991.  Today NATO provides cover for US aggression and provides mercenary forces for the American Empire.  Britain, Canada, Australia, are simply US vassal states just as are Germany, France, Italy, Japan and the rest.  There are no partners; just vassals.  It is Washington’s empire, no one else’s.

The US favors the EU, because it is easier to control than the individual countries.

The Saker:  It is often said that Israel controls the USA.  Chomsky, and others, say that it is the USA which controls Israel.  How would you characterize the relationship between Israel and the USA – does the dog wag the tail or does the tail wag the dog?  Would you say that the Israel Lobby is in total control of the USA or are there still other forces capable of saying “no” to the Israel Lobby and impose their own agenda?

Paul Craig Roberts:  I have never seen any evidence that the US controls Israel.  All the evidence is that Israel controls the US, but only its MidEast policy.  In recent years, Israel or the Israel Lobby, has been able to control or block academic appointments in the US and tenure for professors considered to be critics of Israel.  Israel has successfully reached into both Catholic and State universities to block tenure and appointments.  Israel can also block some presidential appointments and has vast influence over the print and TV media.  The Israel Lobby also has plenty of money for political campaign funds and never fails to unseat US Representatives and Senators considered critical of Israel.  The Israel lobby was able to reach into the black congressional district of Cynthia McKinney, a black woman, and defeat her reelection.  As Admiral Tom Moorer, Chief of Naval Operations and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said: “No American President can stand up to Israel.”  Adm. Moorer could not even get an official investigation of Israel’s deadly attack on the USS Liberty in 1967.

Anyone who criticizes Israeli policies even in a helpful way is labeled an “anti-Semite.”

In American politics, media, and universities, this is a death-dealing blow.  You might as well get hit with a hellfire missile.

The Saker:  Which of the 12 entities of power which I listed above have, in your opinion, played a key role in the planning and execution of the 9/11 “false flag” operation?  After all, it is hard to imagine that this was planned and prepared between the inauguration of GW Bush and September 11th – it must have been prepared during the years of the Clinton Administration.  Is it not true the the Oklahoma City bombing was a rehearsal for 9/11?

Paul Craig Roberts: In my opinion 9/11 was the product of the neoconservatives, many of whom are Jewish allied with Israel, Dick Cheney, and Israel.  Its purpose was to provide “the new Pearl Harbor” that the neoconservatives said was necessary to launch their wars of conquest in the Middle East.  I don’t know how far back it was planned, but Silverstein was obviously part of it and he had not had the WTC for very long before 9/11.

As for the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, US Air Force General Partin, the Air Force’s munitions expert,  prepared an expert report proving beyond all doubt that the building blew up from the inside out and that the truck bomb was cover.  Congress and the media ignored his report.  The patsy, McVeigh,  was already set up, and that was the only story allowed.

The Saker:  Do you think that the people who run the USA today realize that they are on a collision course with Russia which could lead to thermonuclear war?  If yes, why would they take such a risk? Do they really believe that at the last moment Russian will “blink” and back down, or do they actually believe that they can win a nuclear war?  Are they not afraid that in a nuclear conflagration with Russia they will lose everything they have, including their power and even their lives?

Paul Craig Roberts: I am as puzzled as much as you.  I think Washington is lost in hubris and arrogance and
is more or less insane.  Also, there is belief that the US can win a nuclear war with Russia.  There was an article in Foreign Affairs around 2005 or 2006 in which this conclusion was reached.  The belief in the winnability of nuclear war has been boosted by faith in ABM defenses.  The argument is that the US can hit Russia so hard in a preemptive first strike that Russia would not retaliate in fear of a second blow.

The Saker:  How do you assess the current health of the Empire?  For many years we have seen clear signs of decline, but there is still not visible collapse.  Do you believe that such a collapse is inevitable and, if not, how could it be prevented?  Will we see the day when the US Dollar suddenly become worthless or will another mechanism precipitate the collapse of this Empire?

Paul Craig Roberts:  The US economy is hollowed out.  There has been no real median family income growth for decades.  Alan Greenspan as Fed Chairman used an expansion of consumer credit to take the place of the missing growth in consumer income, but the population is now too indebted to take on more.  So there is nothing to drive the economy.  So many manufacturing and tradable professional service jobs such as software engineering have been moved offshore that the middle class has shrunk.  University graduates cannot get jobs that support an independent existence.  So they can’t form households, buy houses, appliances and home furnishings.  The government produces low inflation measures by not measuring inflation and low unemployment rates by not measuring unemployment.  The financial markets are rigged, and gold is driven down despite rising demand by selling uncovered shorts in the futures market.  It is a house of cards that has stood longer than I thought possible.  Apparently, the house of cards can stand until the rest of the world ceases to hold the US dollar as reserves.

Possibly the empire has put too much stress on Europe by involving Europe in a conflict with Russia.  If Germany, for example, were to pull out of NATO, the empire would collapse, or if Russia can find the wits to finance Greece, Italy, and Spain in exchange for them leaving the Euro and EU, the empire would suffer a fatal blow.

Alternatively, Russia might tell Europe that Russia has no alternative but to target European capitals with nuclear weapons now that Europe has joined the US in conducting war against Russia.

The Saker:  Russia and China have done something unique in history and they have gone beyond the traditional model of forming an alliance: they have agreed to become interdependent – one could say that they have agreed to a symbiotic relationship.  Do you believe that those in charge of the Empire have understood the tectonic change which has just happen or are they simply going into deep denial because reality scares them too much?

Paul Craig Roberts:  Stephen Cohen says that there is simply no foreign policy discussion.  There is no debate.  I think the empire thinks that it can destabilize Russia and China and that is one reason Washington has color revolutions working in Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan. As Washington is determined to prevent the rise of other powers and is lost in hubris and arrogance, Washington probably believes that it will succeed.  After all, History chose Washington.

The Saker:  In your opinion, do presidential elections still matter and, if yes, what is your best hope for 2016?  I am personally very afraid of Hillary Clinton whom I see as an exceptionally dangerous and outright evil person, but with the current Neocon influence inside the Republican, can we really hope for a non-Neocon candidate to win the GOP nomination?

Paul Craig Roberts:  The only way a presidential election could matter would be if the elected president had behind him a strong movement.  Without a movement, the president has no independent power and no one to appoint who will do his bidding.  Presidents are captives.  Reagan had something of a movement, just enough that we were able to cure stagflation despite Wall Street’s opposition and we were able to end the cold war despite the opposition of the CIA and the military/security complex.  Plus Reagan was very old and came from a long time ago.  He assumed the office of the president was powerful and acted that way.

The Saker:  What about the armed forces?  Can you imagine a Chairman of the JCS saying “no, Mr President, that is crazy, we will not do this” or do you expect the generals to obey any order, including one starting a nuclear war against Russia?  Do you have any hope that the US military could step in and stop the “crazies” currently in power in the White House and Congress?

Paul Craig Roberts:  The US military is a creature of the armaments industries.  The whole purpose of making general is to be qualified to be a consultant to the “defense” industry, or to become an executive or on the board of a “defense” contractor.  The military serves as the source of retirement careers when the generals make the big money.  The US military is totally corrupt.  Read Andrew Cockburn’s book, Kill Chain.

The Saker:  If the USA is really deliberately going down the path towards war with Russia – what should Russia do?  Should Russia back down and accept to be subjugated as a preferable option to a thermonuclear war, or should Russia resist and thereby accept the possibility of a thermonuclear war?  Do you believe that a very deliberate and strong show of strength on the part of Russia could deter a US attack?

Paul Craig Roberts: I have often wondered about this.  I can’t say that I know.  I think Putin is humane enough to surrender rather than to be part of the destruction of the world, but Putin has to answer to others inside Russia and I doubt the nationalists would stand for surrender.

In my opinion, I think Putin should focus on Europe and make Europe aware that Russia expects an American attack and will have no choice except to wipe out Europe in response.  Putin should encourage Europe to break off from NATO in order to prevent World War 3.

Putin should also make sure China understands that China represents the same perceived threat to the US as Russia and that the two countries need to stand together.  Perhaps if Russia and China were to maintain their forces on a nuclear alert, not the top one, but an elevated one that conveyed recognition of the American threat and conveyed this threat to the world, the US could be isolated.

Perhaps if the Indian press, the Japanese Press, the French and German press, the UK press, the Chinese and Russian press began reporting that Russia and China wonder if they will receive a pre-emptive nuclear attack from Washington the result would be to prevent the attack.

As far as I can tell from my many media interviews with the Russian media, there is no Russian awareness of the Wolfowitz Doctrine. Russians think that there is some kind of misunderstanding about Russian intentions.  The Russian media does not understand that Russia is unacceptable, because Russia is not a US vassal. Russians believe all the Western bullshit about “freedom and democracy” and believe that they are short on both but making progress.  In other words, Russians have no idea that they are targeted for destruction.

The Saker:  What are, in your opinion, the roots of the hatred of so many members of the US elites for Russia?  Is that just a leftover from the Cold War, or is there another reason for the almost universal russophobia amongst US elites?  Even during the Cold War, it was unclear whether the US was anti-Communist or anti-Russian?  Is there something in the Russian culture, nation or civilization which triggers that hostility and, if yes, what is it?

Paul Craig Roberts: The hostility toward Russia goes back to the Wolfowttz Doctrine:

“Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.”

While the US was focused on its MidEast wars, Putin restored Russia and blocked  Washington’s planned invasion of Syria and bombing of Iran.  The “first objective” of the neocon doctrine was breached.  Russia had to be brought into line.  That is the origin of Washington’s attack on Russia.  The dependent and captive US and European media simply repeats “the Russian Threat” to the public, which is insouciant and otherwise uninformed.

The offense of Russian culture is also there–Christian morals, respect for law and humanity, diplomacy in place of coercion, traditional social mores–but these are in the background.  Russia is hated because Russia (and China) is a check on Washington’s unilateral uni-power.  This check is what will lead to war.

If the Russians and Chinese do not expect a pre-emptive nuclear attack from Washington, they will be destroyed.

Very detailed article, I think Russia and China have been expecting a nuclear attack from Washington. That is why Russia and China are modernizing their armies and nuclear arsenal.

Gen Ivashov is confirming what I felt for few years. Russia can afford to resist more, against the barbaric US behaviour, but President Putin and its coalition are more reluctant, because many of his key allies are oligarchs. In fact, if Russia wants, it can easily expels US from Europ, and Asia, but ambiguous behaviour of Russia's direction could be explained by many are US spys, the first among them, Medvedev, and others like financial, economy ministers.....

Pravda.Ru
- See more at: http://english.pravda.ru/russia/politics/28-02-2013/123934-russia_america-0/#at_pco=smlre-1.0&at_si=55b55b0df7480bd2&at_ab=per-4&at_pos=7&at_tot=4

Russia must always keep America at gunpoint

"Tactical nuclear weapons that are constantly threatening the United States must become the factor that will deter large-scale aggression. Holding it at gunpoint - this is the deterrent," General Colonel in reserve, MGIMO Professor, Leonid Ivashov, said in an interview with Pravda.Ru editor-in-chief Inna Novikova.

"Mr. Ivashov, your forecasts of what is going on with Russia's defensive ability, and generally your views of Russia's current position in the world are very pessimistic and critical. You said that Russia has lost all allies during the recent years. Who we our allies, except for our army and navy?"

"You know, when we talk about allies, we do not necessarily have only the military component in mind. When it goes about allies, it goes about, above all, the geopolitical level ....Allies support our foreign and domestic policies. Previously, there was not only the Warsaw Pact, but also the so-called Non-Aligned Movement - more than 100 countries in the world with the vast majority of the world's population. They were, in fact, supporters of our foreign policy. Wasn't the Islamic world our ally before December 1979? China as a socialist state was our ideological ally.

"The situation with China is difficult, because, on the one hand, you say that China is our ally..."

"A geopolitical ally."

"Yes. On the other hand, China is very interested in our territory. Why does China sometimes with America make decisions behind Russia's back?"

" ... You know, China has its own geopolitical project, America and Europe have their own projects too. Everyone has their own geopolitical doctrines. What does Russia have? Does it have its own project, its own vision of the world? In general, what role does Russia want to play? There is no project. We rush between North America, Europe and China. They are three leading centers, they form global historical processes. And in essence, they struggle with each other."

"What do they struggle for?"

"The Americans in their national security strategy identified three main objects, for which they struggle. They are key regions of the world, usually at the crossroads of civilizations, marketing communications and global resources, especially energy resources. And if Russia takes the position of a seller of raw materials and does not aspire to anything else, then it is only Russia that drove itself into this corner."

"Well, Russia had to take this position. At first we destroyed everything, let Americans in everywhere."

"By the mid-90s, we rolled down to the status of a raw power, but now we are a raw colony. Here is the degradation of our geopolitical status. And, therefore, we do not enjoy anyone's respect because there is nothing to respect us for, except for past achievements. Because we ape: We buy arms in the West, then in Israel and so on. We play the ape."

"Mr. Ivashov, everything turns out to be so fine when you say it. There used to be a fair socialist society and a brutal capitalist one. They used to scare us with stories of homeless sleeping in the streets. When there was the Iron Curtain, we were more or less ok, we lived the way we lived. And then it turned out that in that violent society there was delicious food, all kinds of music, clothes and other great things that we never had. When the curtain fell, there was so much visual appeal that we just cried, we wanted to be like them. But we are talking about geopolitics and military matters right now. Do we have a military doctrine today? Have our potential adversaries been defined?"

"The last doctrine, signed by Mr. Medvedev, - God forbid ... Yes, there is a doctrine, but it does not have such words as "strategy", "operation", "offensive". Therefore, we have no offensive or defensive operations. There is only terrorism left there. It is all very uncertain ...

"Uncertainty about what? About a terrorist threat, a nuclear threat, a climate threat?"

"No. There is no certainty at all. What is going to happen, for example, by the middle of the 21st century - what the world will be like, what the economy will be like, what the international security system will be like? It does not say whether anyone can guarantee safe development to the country. Nothing."

"What has recently changed in the American military doctrine?"

"In America, it is all vice versa. On October 18, 2003, Bush signed a directive on the concept of Prompt Global Strike. A priority was not a first massive nuclear strike, but a strike with the use of high precision technologies. Glide bombs then finish it off and a country is presented with an ultimatum. If this country does not agree, it will repeat all over again. It is clear that the first target for this potential attack is Russia. But Russia - accidentally or not - may launch its strategic nuclear arsenal. To avoid this, nuclear facilities need to be destroyed first. In 2011-2012, the concept was amended."

"But is it justified? Americans, their policies are based on the fact that they are very far to reach."

"To attack China or Russia, cruise missiles will be used. A third of them come with nuclear warheads. Nowadays, four-class "Ohio" submarines, the largest American subs, that had 24 intercontinental ballistic missiles on board, are being reequipped. They remove the ICBMs and replace them with 158 cruise missiles on each sub. The same thing happens to "Virginia" subs. They develop a strategic cruise missile, the range of which will be not less than 5,000 kilometers. Its speed will be equal to two sonic speeds. It will be the type of arms that no one will be able to destroy - neither Russia, nor China or anyone else."

"Let's go back to our military doctrines. In the past, during the Soviet era, there was a military doctrine, our potential adversaries were identified. Do we now have a general understanding of our place?"

"I'll offer the new defense minister to abandon the nuclear deterrence factor. Relying on strategic nuclear forces no longer meets reality. Yes, strategic nuclear forces played the role of a deterrent factor when we had equal potentials of conventional arms with Americans. Today we lag behind them, therefore, to deter large-scale aggression, tactical nuclear weapons will have to play the role of the deterrent. These weapons should constantly be aimed at the United States, because it is the most vulnerable territory in the world. Keeping this territory at gunpoint - this will be a deterrent."

"But is it real to do it now?"

"It's quite possible."

"Do we have to rebuild it all in Cuba or anywhere else?"

"There are places, yes. Above all, we need our own geopolitical doctrine. Whatever we may think of ourselves today, we are a potential victim for both the West and the East if we act alone. We need to reformat the world so that we once again have our place in this world. Nowadays, the West, the East, Latin America and Africa realize that one can not live like this. No one will offer another way to live and develop. We, Russian thinkers, our Academy of Geopolitical Problems, are ready to offer a project like that, and I believe, it will be supported. Today, the planetary forecast is catastrophic, and we can offer a way out of this disastrous scenario."

"Whom do you offer these solutions?"

"For the General Assembly of the United Nations, we propose to change the structure of the Security Council. The time, when the victors in World War II were playing the first fiddle, has passed. In the renewed council, representatives of the world's ethnic and cultural civilizations should act as permanent members. They are ambassadors from North America, Europe, Latin America, China, India, the Islamic world, the African Union and, of course, Russia. This is how we see it. We need to have powerful allies today in the face of world civilizations. And the next step is to develop the Euro-Asian continental union, which includes Russia, China, India, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Mongolia within the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization."

Inna Novikova

lol this guy will fly out of the reserves as well it seems.

total disrespect for the countries leaders, just another tin foil hat, we will nuke the enemy, america and china want russian land BS.

as few of these people in a position of power and progress will come faster

[b] And if Russia takes the position of a seller of raw materials and does not aspire to anything else, then it is only Russia that drove itself into this corner [/b]. wrote:

And this is exactly the major mistake of Russia policy ever.. can't say for sure if this is a
Modern Russia only thing..But like i have been saying .. Putin ,Lavrov complain and complain
and complain and more  bitch about not being respected or taken seriously.. but is clear that for
mr short sight PUTIN, in hostile environments with hostile players..


Respect is something you need to win ,is an earned thing.. not a given for free..

[u]The west will not really respect Russia for the simple reason... that..
It needs NOTHING FROM RUSSIA  .

That they cannot get in another place. If PUshed into a corner the EU can easily build a pipeline from Azerbaijan/IRAN and Egypt/Israel to Europe.. also with Norway help... and many other options like fracking ,nuclear reactors,Coal ,
or American Exports of Liquid Gas.. it will be an inconvenience but not a game breaking that will
collapse Europe..  In the other hand if Russia is banned from selling any Energy to Europe will c
collapse. and become again at same place they were in the late 90s.. when their economy was 10x times smaller.  




now let see if American sanctions any European nation of their technology and cut their internet
and you will see a major revolution to become again closer to the west.. This is the major HUGE
PRoblem that RUssia have.. that its policy is killing them...When all they need to do is not to
patrol more oceans but to become a Real Alternative to America.. This thing is something Russia
can achieve since already Russia have achieved this in in space albeit with a more less ambitious program..and in military too.. but this is not enough.


And in the other hand Americans ,policy ,aimed and becoming an World Empire  ,
is getting some major substantial results.. And this will have been impossible for them to do it
had the only thing they had was their large military ,nukes and a control of financial markets..

They did something clever and they began an industrial revolution ,with very aggressive advertising and marketing world wide..to get everyone consuming their products.. in Short
Americans were far more ambitious.. and Russia is paying the price for being so lame in being
happy with just making money quietly from europe , and not daring to do anything to compete with the west.. in anything but military.  Russia policy have been always of compete with the west only in Military and space.. and NOTHING ELSE.

Had Russia had a vision of becoming the most developed nation in the world ,with a truly
independent nation.. none of this problems Russia face in Ukraine or even middle east will exist.
This is because for the first time the World major economy.. the EU ,will notice Russia and say..
mmm.. We did dont need americans anymore. we dont need Apple ,We dont need Intel ,we don't need Microsoft , We dont need Hollywood , American music industry and entertainment dominated also by them..or NASA.. no longer needed for mission beyond earth orbit..  (Russia have limited to be a taxi to the ISS).. And then instead you will see people in Europe ,wanting
to join the Russia orbit and not the American one.

Russia leadership is to blame for the mess they have put themselves .. they have powerful enemies and they continue with their idiotic policy ..of countering americans with a bigger navy
and more nukes.. instead of starting an Industrial Revolution and a model nation to the world.
Japan have less territory and less people than Russia and they have far more developed country
than Russia. they need to look at their neighbors .  Same with Germany..

They cut the expenses of their Space Program.. by 10% or more.. in the only things that have allowed Russia to earn some respect and become an influence in the west.. So as long the current short vision leadership continues in Power.. Russia will not see a real end to the west trying to isolate them.. Because Americans demand Europe to pick between Russia and them...
and they always pick the west...since Russia have done not much to become a real world leader
in most things and replace the americans position..

Sadly im not away of any leader in Russia with any real vision of becoming a world leader and
and alternative of the west.  The few things Russia is doing.. like BRICS , and import substitution.. is only done because they have no choice ..and not because they really want it to
lead the world..  It seems to me.. That Putin hoped to quietly build a very power Navy and make a lot of money from American close allies.. while them doing nothing to stop Russia for becoming a big influence problem in the long run for them.. now he know he was WRONG.

Russia policy have been dead wrong for decades.. they have seek to earn respect through force or through becoming an energy monology..and not through producing things that every society
needs and wants...    And you see that leadership everywhere.. American music in Russian events or activities, american PCs dominating Russia.. American Movies..american fast food the most popular.. and so and so and so..  

So effectively Russia policy is one that is doomed to a major confrontation with Americans..
because they are playing the lame card of being just a Gas station with a taxi to the ISS..
but so far have done next to nothing to become a real alternative to americans in Europe.
Europe are vassal states of americans not because they don't want it.. but because there is no other alternative to US..  US shut down internet to Russia and what are they going to do? wait years and hope to get a mini internet with Asian nations..    

Lack of vision ,lack of a leader with real major ambitious. Putin only achievement is uniting Russia society and getting Russia again as a military super power. and with good space technology. but unfortunately this is not enough to stop Americans firm grab of Europe.
Greece never considered an option to leave the EU why? because Russia was never an alternative to it.. when u speak about EU.. you speak about a whole package of the western
markets.. Eastern markets non NATO markets where Russia can freely move have nothing to offer Europe..that they cannot get elsewhere .  Nobody wants to be close to Asia and is because they are behind in almost everything. when it comes to Society needs. Russia is the only exception.. but is very limited the things they have to offer Europeans that cannot get in Europe or US.

So we will continue listening how the west does not take seriously Russia..until no one explain
Putin or Lavrov or Russian leadership that they are the ones to blame for it..  Building more nukes and more warships is not going to convince anyone in Europe to take Russia seriously.


This does not means Russia needs to become a world empire now and do what Americans
do and start invading nations.. instead that Russia needs to be much more an attractive nation
to the developed economies in Europe.. if they really want to be taking seriously and their interest respected.  Unfortunately there is nothing for Russia to replace in Asia.. there is no influence there at all..  like there is none in Africa and middle east..  Russians society will never want to be closer to people that look very different to them ,and very incompatible culture or belief.  

This does not means either to capitulate to the west.. but that Russia needs to be a real ambitious program to make Russia a real alternative to America..  Putin have said himself..
"They will never accept us as equals" when speaking about Americans and Europe.. but guess
what? They are the ones to blame for it.. since they continue sitting on their hands with their thumbs right up in their buts.  Instead of creating a real industrial /social revolution.. they continue building more nukes ,more warships as if somehow that will help Russia to ever become taken seriously.

Russia needs to cut by 50 to 70% its navy ,axe their most costly to maintain soviet crap.. and invest that money instead in Space exploration beyond earth as NASA does, Seriously Compete with Intel ,apple and microsoft on semiconductor industry ,build everything in Russia. Have a solid entertainment industry from Media centers for homes to video games industry ,compete against hollywood and music industry too.  and very important create their own internet. All those things will be highly influential ,very hard to ignore..  that will truly take Russia as a world leader..and not ignored by the west.  Europeans will want no longer to be attached to the "American world" and create their own natural economic and military alliance with Russia..and a new United Nations created not in New York..but moved to europe.. This is only when the world
will be balanced and no longer NATO exist. and we live in total different times ,since without Europe ,Americans becomes in effect just a regional major power..and lose their world influence status. and no longer the will be able to start a way anywhere or risk be sanctioned and isolated. This will be possible ONLY when no longer American are needed.  because an alternative Russia exist.  I really believe Russia have those capabilities.. is only their leaders that sucks.. not terrible but neither the right ones to put Russia in the world map as a leading
nation.

Russia real problems is an influence problem .. that they don't have enough .
Russia goes and oppose American Imperialism.. So this force americans to pressure Europe to pick a side.. and naturally ,the so materialistic european society will pick the access to American business over Russian ones. So unfortunately.. Europeans will continue looking to the sides ,
whenever US invade another nation or finance terrorism and provokes a major war against Russia. Until Russia (if ever) become an alternative.. for US.

How can someone you give no respect earn your respect?

Civilised behaviour would dictate treating everyone with respect... western media have forgotten this and so there is no way back to civilised discussions with Russia or China... they just put the boot in and demonise automatically... meaning relations will never be good.

Personally I think Russia would be better off finding her own way rather than rushing down the path of consumerism and western corruption... US attempts to assimilate the human race must be thwarted.

Well is like this...when american people say something else than their leaders is called free will...when someone from other COUNTRY speak something else is called "agitation" by the west.

Hi guys,

if the USA ever managed to install a pro US government in Russia. What wound it mean for Russia and its people?

Thanks

andrewlya wrote:Hi guys,

if the USA ever managed to install a pro US government in Russia. What wound it mean for Russia and its people?

Thanks

It already succeeded in doing this during the 1990s. The Yeltsin regime period tells you all you need to know. The
first thing Yeltsin did was to follow the shock therapy witchdoctor voodoo peddled by The Harvard Boys (including
Jeffrey Sachs). Under Yeltsin you saw the emergence of the oligarchy. Gangster oligarchs such as Khodorkovsky
and Berezovsky were basically running the show. It was somewhat like the US during the "Gilded Era" but the main
difference is that the tycoons of the US late 1800s were people who created their business empires from scratch,
while in Russia you had a bunch of Al Capone types who looted state industries and butchered all that stood in their
way. Khodorkovsky's henchmen filled a cemetery full of bodies during their takeover of Apatit (a fertilizer company).

Read "Godfather of the Kremlin" by Paul Khlebnikov. It is an excellent account of the criminal oligarchy and in particular
Boris Berezovsky and his machinations. Khlebnikov was murdered and in my view the most likely suspect was Berezovsky.

Yeltsin lost power in 1999 in a soft military coup. The NATO attack on Serbia after the 1998 financial meltdown finally
triggered blowback. Putin was basically in charge after he became Prime Minister. Yeltsin "resigned" in December of
1999 as piece of theater.

Hi guys,

if the USA ever managed to install a pro US government in Russia. What wound it mean for Russia and its people?

Thanks

The west does not see Russia as a potential partner or ally... they see it as both an enormous largely still untapped resource and a potential rival to its international power.

If it had control of the Kremlin... that is what they want... to control the governments of potential rivals because a potential rival is a potential threat, then they would quickly privatise all the assets currently in Russian government control and sell them off to the highest western bidder. the result will be that all the valuable resources of Russia would be used to profit western companies and to fuel western growth... it is a model they have used for a long time... in the immediate post WWII era you used to get really cheap crappy products made in japan. they were like the rubbish you get now from china. the thing is that japan used the income and work and went for quality and growth and strived to be the best they could be...I remember early japanese cars being rubbish... much worse than the european cars they tried to copy. Later however they worked on the designs and got better and now I would rather get a japanese car than a British one or an american one simply because it is a better product. These days however South Korea and even China are starting to give them a run for their money too.

The point is that over time the quality has improved and labour costs have gone up and western companies moved elsewhere for cheap labour so countries like Taiwan, Malaysia, Japan, and China and mexico have been exploited for their cheaper labour and that is what the west would do to Russia.

There was actually an enormous fear in the west in the early 1990s that Japan might form an alliance with Russia where they have the high tech expertise in electronics and precision tools while Russia has cheap labour, vast raw material reserves and of course air and space technology and Japan could rise again... at the start of WWII Japan had a formidable aircraft design capability, and despite much of its domestic armour and small arms design being a bit of a joke there was enormous potential there.

Of course relations did not get past the Kuril islands dispute and relations have remained pretty cool.

If the US had their men in the Kremlin they would pretty much do the same... the average Russian would suffer as health and education would be neglected, but the roads to and from the oil fields would be state of the art... just like in the 1990s with western investment in oil exploration and on not much else as it was a direct rival to western equivalents. If US stooges had gotten into power then NATO would be introducing F-35s today made of Russian Titanium and the Russian AF would be getting cheap worn out F-16s from the NATO countries buying F-35s.

I have heard a theory that the US will want to exploit Russia's natural resources if they put pro US puppet, but would it make Russians poorer?

I am looking at an example of Saudi. The US and Saudi goverment have signed an agreement that Saudi lets the US to take control of theirt oil fields in exchange that they leave their religion alone. The US having the control of the Saudi oil have not made the country poorer, the Arabs are one of the wealthiest people i nthe world. Also, if we take Norway. They have also got pro US goverment and they have also got oil, but people are rich, the country is propesperous. So why would it not be the same for Russia and Russians?