Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
March 07, 2014

Where Is Obama's Off-Ramp In This Escalation Spiral?

Obama points to the "the path of de-escalation" in Ukraine by saying:

"Let international monitors into all of Ukraine, including Crimea, to to ensure the rights of all Ukrainians are being respected, including ethnic Russians. Begin consultations between the government of Russia and Ukraine, with the participation of the international community.

"Russia would maintain its basing rights in Crimea, provided that it abides by its agreements and that it respects Ukraine's sovereignty and territory integrity.

How please could a U.S. president guarantee a contract that Ukraine would have to agree upon? Obama values "self determination" and "democracy" of a country 10,000 miles away from his so much that he is dictating what that country would have to agree upon in this or that case? Russia would be nuts to take any "guarantee" from Obama.

Obama wishes de-escalation so much that he ordered sanctions on Russian individuals and their money and pressed on European countries to do the same. Russia will retaliate with similar measures. Obama sends additional fighter jets to Lithuania and Poland and send an additional destroyer into the Black Sea. Russia will beef up its western forces. The puppet the Obama administration installed in Kiev added to the "de-escalation"by inviting NATO to Kiev and by promising to sign parts of an EU association agreement even before new elections in the Ukraine can take place. Polls have shown that there is no Ukrainian majority for either. Countering the Russian parliament votes to accept the Crimea into its federation.

If Obama and his puppet "Yuk" stay on this "path of de-escalation" the U.S. will be at DEFCON-1 in just a few weeks.

Obama said he would offer Russia an "off-ramp". But that "off-ramp" includes his demand to Russia to recognize the unelected, illegitimate puppet government in Kiev. Russia will surely never agree to that. Tit for tat will thereby continue. Where is Obama's own off-ramp in this escalation spiral?

Posted by b on March 7, 2014 at 15:46 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page

Posted by: Pirouz_2 | Mar 8, 2014 3:38:43 PM | 198

Agree, it is a huge game of monopoly, but much much bigger monopoly than in any Western country (in the EU there are actually laws against it, so that a merger is legally not possible in certain circumstances and certain business practices that cut out competition are forbidden) - and it is a game of monopoly with a state and a secret service.

Power generation cannot be called a non-core activity for Gazprom. The Company’s strategic goal is to become a global energy company covering the whole value chain – from upstream to downstream – both for gas and liquid hydrocarbons, as well as producing a wide range of deliverables including electricity.


That is a lot of control over a lot of industries. The difference to Shell, Exxon Mobile etc. - they do not have this close relationship with the state, they do not have this width of the value chain, management runs them by the quarter picking up opportunities, not with a long term, political strategy. And most of all, they own the resources, they do not have to buy and bribe.

A comparison would be Saudi Arabia with its own weapons industry, own oil technology, a modern education system, an effective army and a nuclear bomb.

Iran may be getting close.

Posted by: somebody | Mar 8 2014 21:16 utc | 201

.A comparison would be Saudi Arabia with its own weapons industry, own oil technology, a modern education system, an effective army and a nuclear bomb.

oh boy, now he's claiming Russia=Saudi Arabia.

Does this man have no shame?

Agree, it is a huge game of monopoly, but much much bigger monopoly than in any Western country (in the EU there are actually laws against it, so that a merger is legally not possible in certain circumstances and certain business practices that cut out competition are forbidden)

In the EU there are laws that in practice are against state ownership, state exploitation and state profiting from of any resources. These laws were brought in as a result of the GATT agreemnets.

Essentially how it works is if any private Corp wants to compete with the state for delivering any service then the State must allow them some access to it's own resources, which they can then profiteer to their hearts content.

In the west all States are essentially banned from profiting directly from the exploitation of their own resources.

So - Fuck the EU - it's quite capable of handing out what are in effect the basics for Corps to create monopolies, or things that are in effect virtually monopolies.

Posted by: brb | Mar 8 2014 21:26 utc | 202

That is a lot of control over a lot of industries. The difference to Shell, Exxon Mobile etc. - they do not have this close relationship with the state,

the above is complete and utter bullshit.

Shell has a very close relationship with both the Brit and Dutch Gov'ts as do other Oil Co's such as BP - part owned by the Brit State.

and anyone that knows anything about history knows about the sort of relationship co's like Exxon have with the US Gov.

Posted by: brb | Mar 8 2014 21:29 utc | 203

Western Spy Agencies Infiltrating, Warping World Of Online Activism

U.S. Gov't exercising trolling, blog infiltration, false flag and sting operations

Using sophisticated psychological templates, the slides show how the intelligence service believes it can use subversion to disrupt online networks by using various tactics, of which Greenwald descibes two as key: “(1) to inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets; and (2) to use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable.”

In just one example, a slide titled “Disruption” offers a playbook for some of the tactics used to discredit a target. Those possible tactics include: infiltration, false flag, false rescue, and sting operations.

Historian Juan Cole, writing on his influential blog Informed Comment, responded to the latest revelations with this:

    To have [intelligence agencies paid] for by tax payers, engaging in trolling the internet is highly corrosive of the values of a democratic country. Democratic politics depends on citizens knowing each other and knowing where they stand politically. To have secret government officers manipulating the reputations of people, breaking up their friendships and associations, and entrapping them with sex set-ups creates a situation where it is impossible to trust democratic process.

Recognition: I truly love it when I seen links to my articles from IP adresses on the Sitemeter coming from Herzliya (Israel) or some weird address in Kansas [8636-8692 NW 120th St Potwin, KS 67123, USA]. Doing a bit of search via Internet WhoIs and DNS look-up, it links to WOL servers in Herndon, VA. A bit deeper one comes across Road Runner LLC. Following some suggestions, this comes near Lockheed Martin and DoD Cyber Crime Unit in Ohio. I wasn't the first one to do a trace – link here.

Posted by: Oui | Mar 8 2014 22:36 utc | 204

Recognition: I truly love it when I seen links to my articles from IP adresses on the Sitemeter coming from Herzliya (Israel) or some weird address in Kansas [8636-8692 NW 120th St Potwin, KS 67123, USA]

oh boy

Whatever you do, don't give up the day job to take up a career in cyber-sleuthing.

Posted by: brb | Mar 8 2014 22:45 utc | 205

Historian Juan Cole, writing on his influential blog Informed Comment,responded to the latest revelations with this:

To have [intelligence agencies paid] for by tax payers, engaging in trolling the internet is highly corrosive of the values of a democratic country. Democratic politics depends on citizens knowing each other and knowing where they stand politically. To have secret government officers manipulating the reputations of people, breaking up their friendships and associations, and entrapping them with sex set-ups creates a situation where it is impossible to trust democratic process.

While you were researching all of that did you not manage to find out that Juan Cole worked for the cia for quite some time, but kept ultra quiet about it until a short while ago.

so you're quoting a guy, (that until recently had undisclosed connections to the cia,) telling us all about those nasty cia guys that keep thing from us. -

seems a tad recursive that does

I'm going to click on your weblinks in a few minutes - perhaps you ould be so kind as to report back and tell me my ip afterward?

I need to know it and don't know how to do that for myself.

Thanks in advance

Posted by: tsk | Mar 8 2014 23:03 utc | 206

Heeheeheehee

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2009/06/juan-cole-neocon-in-liberal-cloth.html

Posted by: tsk | Mar 8 2014 23:05 utc | 207

So there you are oui: both brb and tsk object to your uncovering of the ways that intelligence agencies use trolling techniques to disrupt internet forums.

As to Juan Cole his links with the CIA have been public knowledge, as I recollect it, for the better part of a decade. He gave seminars, for Christ's sake.

The most publicised example of Intelligence services trolling was in the last Presidential election in South Korea where the neo-fascist (daughter of President Park-he was a nasty piece of work) was greatly assisted in a close contest by the enormous effort the spooks put into creating thousands of sock puppets to attest to her virtues and her opponent's dangerous communist links. I'm unsure what happened to the case, I imagine the President ran interference. And I have no links but...

Posted by: bevin | Mar 9 2014 0:36 utc | 208

@tsk #205 : Wow, nice job.

Even a broken clock … No, I definitely have my differences with JC, so your post is a welcome boost. JC was a big supporter of the Muslim Brothers – Qatar, Egypt (Morsi) and Turkey (Erdogan). Indeed, identical to the neocon-hawks in Obama's White House: Ms Clinton, Ms Rice, Mr Ross, Mr Indyk, Ms Power, etc. Regime change by means of R2P policy, same effect (innocent victims) as Bush's pre-emptive wars.

Meet Professor Juan Cole, Consultant to the CIA
An apology … not!
ACLU Sues CIA for Documents on Iraq War Critic Juan Cole :-)

Posted by: Oui | Mar 9 2014 0:40 utc | 209

@bevin #206 : Troublesome …

Samantha Power married Cass Sunstein. No, not the fact they are married, but the Obama administration hired Cass Sunstein … unbelievable.

    "Of course I came across Cass Sunstein and see him as a "nutty" professor from Harvard who apparently has much influence on Barack Obama's thinking. He also has worked in the Obama administration. I'm contemplating a diary on Barack Obama and Sunstein in relation to the harsh stance vs whistleblowers Manning/Snowden and investigative journalists."

Obama, Sunstein, Vermeule and "Conspiracy Theories"

Posted by: Oui | Mar 9 2014 1:10 utc | 210

So there you are oui: both brb and tsk object to your uncovering of the ways that intelligence agencies use trolling techniques to disrupt internet forums.

Posted by: bevin | Mar 8, 2014 7:36:13 PM | 206

Now you see, earlier in post #195 when I said

Bevin's only interested in facts when they help his case - otherwise he's not averse to throwing in the odd lie and smear as it suits him because protecting the image of the Left and winning the argument is what counts . . .

So labeling is very important to people like him - and "accuracy" not so much. He'll try his damnedest to label anyone with a different opinion as "Right Wing" because he thinks that will discredit them,

Posted by: brb | Mar 8, 2014 3:04:22 PM | 195

it was actually based on observation.

and here is bevin kindly taking the time to prove my observations correct.

No one at all objected to Oui doing anything he likes, but it is quite typical of you to make such a claim.

In fact far from objecting, I found it quite funny. Scraping Sitemeter data can be very misleading if one then goes on to Geo-Locate the IP's scraped from Sitemeter. Oui is making a classic mistake of presuming that the IP-geo-location data returned in his search is actually accurate.

But nevermind, it's a minor point.

And if bevin were a tad more honest he would not describe Oui's actions as "uncovering" anything, since the story has been doing the rounds here for a while, certainly well before Oui started posting here, so as I pointed out in #195 "accuracy" ain't at all important for bevin if he can slip in a smear instead.

As to Juan Cole his links with the CIA have been public knowledge, as I recollect it, for the better part of a decade. He gave seminars, for Christ's sake.

Oh dear. That lack of accuracy tripping you up again

Coles Seminars were maybe 10 years ago but the were only revealed to the public back in 2011, so really I'd have to conclude that at best, (and this would be a charitable interpretation) you're trying a little too hard to find error or fault in what I said, trying so hard in fact that you are prepared to invent things from thin air, like "As to Juan Cole his links with the CIA have been public knowledge . . . for the better part of a decade." which just is not true, even if you say it is.

(Oui has even linked to the proof for me already)

Certainly John Q Public was not aware of it, nor for example was the author of this Counterpunch article of Aug 30 2011

Meet Prof Cole: "Consultant" to the CIA"
It hit this listener like a ton of bricks when it was disclosed in Goodman’s interview that Cole was a long time “consultant” for the CIA, the National Intelligence Council and other agencies.

See, one might actually come to respect you if you were not so dishonest, but you seem determined to continue to be dishonest, even about the most trivial things.

And as someone once said to me: If a man will even lie about the little things, what deceptions would he be capable of in more serious situations?


Posted by: brb | Mar 9 2014 1:28 utc | 211

Ps

If one wanted to help shore up the flagging credibility of a shill like Cole, what better way to do that than to have it put about that the CIA had been trying to smear him.

No real evidence is required - just trot out some other ex-CIA onto a fake lefty radio prog like Democracy Now, and all the chattering classes will start flocking back to the highly discredited Mr Cole convinced that if the CIA is supposed to be smearing him then "He simply must be ok!"

Posted by: brb | Mar 9 2014 1:32 utc | 212

Got to wonder about the ultimate strategy here. Disrupt the board so that people stop posting? Bore everybody to death?

Posted by: dh | Mar 9 2014 1:56 utc | 213

Excerpt from Counterpunch:
Cole is anxious to promote himself as a man of the left as he spins out his rationale for the war on Libya. At one point he says to Goodman (3/29),

“We are people of the left. We care about the ordinary people. We care about workers.”

Good man Juan - that explains his bloodlust in favour of the ZATO attack on Libya - he did it all for the Workers!!!

No wonder bevin is so quick to defend the ex-CIA "Consultant" - when it comes to waffling and wrapping themselves in a pro-poor-downtrodden-worker-cloak they seem identical

Posted by: brb | Mar 9 2014 2:05 utc | 214

dh @211 - that looks like the plan, lol.. we will down to 1 person posting pretty soon..

Posted by: james | Mar 9 2014 2:23 utc | 215

@ Mr. Pragma

"Right wing? I assume that's based one my statements re. "liberal elements" (read: zio and neocon tools) like pussy riot, navalny, etc."

Mr. Pragma, I think you have Pussy Riot and Navalny wrong. There is nothing "liberal" about them. The former is a stunt fostered by western intelligence agencies, while the latter is an out and out racist who intends to destroy Russia with his phony "nationalism". A nationalism which would lead to riots in Russia's cities, social break down as we are now seeing in Ukriane - if he had his way.

This is the danger in him. To call him "liberal" would be to call the Maidan Square putschists "patriots".

bevin did not call you a national socialist. Nor, I am certain, is he a believer in the dominance of the US military.

Posted by: guest77 | Mar 9 2014 2:58 utc | 216

This isn't a sympathy contest.

If you feel that brb (or whoever) tells bullshit, just show it using proper techniques and factual arguments.
If he doesn't tell bullshit but you happen to strongly dislike him, well then, tough luck.

Because that's what we are interested in here. Facts, analysis, insight, information, educated interpretation, preferably conclusive and well based.

Frankly, as far as I'm concerned those smearing others or discussing others rather than the matter at hand aren't any better than those they try to strip or smear. Sometimes even worse.

So, can we return to some kind of reasonable discussion between adults? Thanks.

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Mar 9 2014 3:04 utc | 217

guest77

I know, I know (pussy riot, navalny and other tools). But the western brainwashing and propaganda campaigns often paint them as liberals (in a positive sense) and as the best hope of humanity.

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Mar 9 2014 3:07 utc | 218

If you feel that brb (or whoever) tells bullshit, just show it using proper techniques and factual arguments.

They can't though, so they resort to lies (guest being the most obvious example)

They can accuse me of lying, but they never ever provide any proof of lies on my part

I on the other hand can provide plenty of proof of their own lies

Because that's what we are interested in here. Facts, analysis, insight, information, educated interpretation, preferably conclusive and well based.

That's what you are interested in. That much is clear, you have been completely consistent in that

It's not what they are interested in though - they're only interested in promoting their dodgy version of history, and attacking anyone else that might voice a different opinion or version.

And as they have so recently demonstrated several times on this thread alone, they are quite prepared to lie in order to do so.

That's not a smear - it's a statement of fact, as I have demonstrated several time already on this thread alone.

Posted by: brb | Mar 9 2014 3:13 utc | 219

Oh come on brb your MO is well known.

bevin (or somebody)) makes a not unreasonable statement like.... 'As to Juan Cole his links with the CIA have been public knowledge, as I recollect it, for the better part of a decade. He gave seminars...' (see post #206) and he is immediately accused of lying by your current incarnation.

Sure looks like sabotage to me.

Posted by: dh | Mar 9 2014 3:28 utc | 220

Juan Cole his links with the CIA have been public knowledge . . . for the better part of a decade. He gave seminars...' (see post #206) and he is immediately accused of lying by your current incarnation.

yes, you see it's that phrase " public knowledge for the better part of a decade"

It's completely untrue, and he knows it is - so he just invented it because he could not single out any thing factual, concerning what I said, to object to, so he just invented that "for the better part of a decade"

That's what makes it a lie.

You can pretend it was merely an unavoidable error if you want.

Posted by: brb | Mar 9 2014 3:36 utc | 221

addendum:

so he just invented that "for the better part of a decade"
+ "in a vain and dishonest attempt to discredit what I said concerning Cole"

again: imho, evidence of dishonesty

Posted by: brb | Mar 9 2014 3:40 utc | 222

Now who's manipulating words? In fact what bevin said was 'As to Juan Cole his links with the CIA have been public knowledge, as I recollect it, for the better part of a decade. He gave seminars...'

He qualified the statement by admitting that it's just his recollection.

Sorry brb. I've watched you provoke, or attempt to provoke too many times to trust your motives.

Posted by: dh | Mar 9 2014 3:44 utc | 223

See?

I provided proof that what he said was untrue - he and his fellow liars provide no proof of any lies on my part, just accusations.

That makes them appear to be dishonest to any rational honest individual.

They could stop telling lies, or else provide proof for their accusations, but they continue to with that behaviour - that's what confirms their dishonest intentions

Posted by: brb | Mar 9 2014 3:46 utc | 224

"Now who's manipulating words?"

Right now?

You are.

Posted by: brb | Mar 9 2014 3:47 utc | 225

brb

I'm here since quite some time now. And I remember many thoughtful posts from guest77.

I don't think it's as easy as "They are all liars and I'm fucking right". But I do think that you focus too much on the occasional error, bad memory and the like. You also seem to be pretty quick putting large labels like "liar" on people where a smaller label might do (That's why I preferred you calling out "lack of accuracy" much more). Also don't forget that it's hard to judge someones intention (which one *does* when using terms like "liar").

Just one of these days guest77 pissed at me, too. Well, fuck it, we are all humans. That doesn't make him a complete asshole or a liar or whatever. And it doesn't change the fact that he has written many thoughtful posts.

I personally don't have a problem with you so far but if quite some guys here are having a problem with you then it might be a smart thing to reflect whether some part of the problem might be to do with you, too.

Last but not least: It sometimes helps a lot to simply ask "OK, guys, what's your problem with me? Tell me!"

Again - let's find back to a constructive way to deal with each other.

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Mar 9 2014 3:50 utc | 226

I knew this was a waste of time before I started. You obviously have an agenda that goes beyond the simple pursuit of truth. Maybe one day you'll tell us where you really stand.

Posted by: dh | Mar 9 2014 3:50 utc | 227

Sorry Mr. Pragma. 225 was adressed to brb, stfu, foff, hmm and the gang.

Posted by: dh | Mar 9 2014 3:53 utc | 228

Sorry brb. I've watched you provoke, or attempt to provoke too many times to trust your motives.

And i have watched them lie too many time to pretend that they are anything but liars when it suits their purposes

I knew this was a waste of time before I started.

Oh "Me too!"

Sorry, was I supposed to just agree with you? I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt. Waste of time of course,

You obviously have an agenda that goes beyond the simple pursuit of truth

Well then all you have to do is demonstrate the untrue things I have said.

Should be easy enough, since you are so convinced that I'm not being truthful, there should be plenty of evidence of lies on my part. I've certainly provided examples of lying on their part.

I'm sure if you really believe what you are saying you'll return in no time at all with a list of verifiable lies on my part then.


IF you really believe what you are saying, that is . . . .

Posted by: brb | Mar 9 2014 4:05 utc | 229

You also seem to be pretty quick putting large labels like "liar" on people where a smaller label might do (That's why I preferred you calling out "lack of accuracy" much more)

You maybe should reread the thread - you seem to have missed at least one verifiable lie told by guest.

It was very deliberate and that what confirms it as an outright lie, and confirms him as a liar. No question about that one.

Also don't forget that it's hard to judge someones intention (which one *does* when using terms like "liar").

Ok - might concede somewhat on that point concerning bevin - only somewhat though - he's happy enough to twist things to suit his purposes whenever it pleases him to do so.

But where guest is concerned? There's at least one perfect example of an outright lie on it's part. What more evidence would one need ? And if he'll lie about the little things . . .
Just one of these days guest77 pissed at me, too. Well, fuck it, we are all humans. That doesn't make him a complete asshole or a liar or whatever. And it doesn't change the fact that he has written many thoughtful posts.

The fact that he's so willing to lie is what makes him a liar, Pragma. Nothing more, nothing less. It's not like he's only ever done it the one time. I'm sure he'll be back soon to do it again too.

And his willingness to accuse others of lying without any grounds or evidence?

Strange that you said nothing about that at all - if accusations of 'lying' bother you, how come you have kept silent when he did it?

Again - let's find back to a constructive way to deal with each other.

When they start to be constructive I will too. Inventing things from thin air and outright lying (as in the case of guest) is not "constructive" by any definition of that word.


Posted by: brb | Mar 9 2014 4:22 utc | 230

Oh, and as we just happen to chat, let me help out with some info that might help to explain the urge "democracy" for ukraine:

In the Dnieper-Donets basin there is one of Europes largest shale gas deposits.

I guess one might call zusas mission "democracy fracking".

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Mar 9 2014 6:49 utc | 231

Evidently brb will keep reposting his insults, first on one pretext then on another, because he's paid to produce maximum disruption. We've seen this type of person scores of times by now.

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Mar 9 2014 6:51 utc | 232

"Again - let's find back to a constructive way to deal with each other"

The asshole's motives are polar to your suggestion. He is not here to be "constructive".

Posted by: PissedOffAmerican | Mar 9 2014 17:55 utc | 233

He is not here to be "constructive".

Posted by: PissedOffAmerican | Mar 9, 2014 1:55:12 PM | 233

Whereas clearly you dedicate your life to always being "constructive"

Everyone else appears to have moved-on. Not you though.

Posted by: tsk | Mar 9 2014 18:06 utc | 234

Mr Pragma you are being naive.

Pay attention to what a large number of veteran commenters on this blog, none of them given to group think, are telling you about the bot inserted here by the police.

Do not be misled by its occasional agreement with you. It is a parasite, verminous and best dealt with by isolating and starving it.

The purpose is to disrupt discussions in order to discredit the blog and to drive visitors away.

And, remember, there is no actual person behind the initials, just a "persona" hybridised out of software, MI6 Talking Points and a cast of low level clerical workers and interns auditioning for permanent positions in the war against humanity conducted for the 1% by the dullest of the dull.

Posted by: bevin | Mar 9 2014 18:41 utc | 235

See Pragma?

and you said he wasn't a liar.

Posted by: brb | Mar 9 2014 18:44 utc | 236

@ pat bateman @ 15 Led Zeppelin, Please

Posted by: Solerso | Mar 15 2014 21:48 utc | 237

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.