Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
October 02, 2018

Note To NATO - You Don't "Take Out" Missiles Without Having A War

Earlier today the U.S. ambassador to NATO threatened to "take out" a new kind of Russian missiles:

The U.S. envoy to NATO on Tuesday said that Russia must halt development of new missiles that could carry nuclear warheads and warned that the United States could “take out” the system if it becomes operational.

The U.S. and Russia have for some time disagreed about the INF treaty. The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty was signed in 1987 between the Soviet General Secretary Gorbachov and U.S. President Reagan. It prohibits land based (not sea based) nuclear capable systems with a range of more than 500 kilometers and less than 5,500 kilometers. The agreement came to pass after the Soviets stationed SS-20 missiles in East Europe. NATO responded with the Pershing II deployment. The problem with these missiles was warning time. Fired at a relative short range they threatened to overwhelm one side before it could respond. The missiles thus destroyed the equilibrium of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD). The INF treaty banned these missiles.

Russia said for years that the U.S. broke the INF agreement when it stationed missile defense systems in Europe to allegedly take out North Korean and Iranian intercontinental missiles. The missile defense missiles could be armed with nuclear warheads and could probably be used in a surface-to-surface mode. Previously deployed U.S. Nike-Hercules 'air defense' missiles had such capabilities. The National Defense Authorization Act for the year 2018 calls for (pdf, pg 240):

... evaluating existing U.S. missile systems for modification to intermediate range and ground-launch, including Tomahawk, Standard Missile-3, Standard Missile-6, Long-Range Stand-Off Cruise Missile, and Army Tactical Missile System.

Any such modification would be undetectable from the outside, especially when the missiles are stored in launch canisters or silos. It would also clearly be in breach of the INF treaty.

The U.S. denies that its current missile defense systems break the INF and accuses Russia of breaking the treaty by testing a land launched version of its sea launched Kalibr cruse missiles. Russia denies that it is testing anything that is not compatible with the INF treaty. If there is a land launched version it is likely confined to a range below 500 kilometers and thus in compliance with the INF. The sea launched version has a reach of up to 2,500 kilometer, but its export variant is limited to 300 kilometer. The possibly land launched version, which is said to be shorter than the original Kalibr missile (see comments), might well have a much shorter range than the sea launched system. The missiles have, as far as is publicly know, non-nuclear warheads.

The U.S. ambassador to NATO is Kay Baily Hutchinson, a long-term Republican politician with no military experience. Her choice of words in today's press briefing was clearly unprofessional:

Question: [...] Ma’am, can you be more specific what kind of new information that you are bringing to the table regarding the breach of the INF Treaty? And more explicitly also, what kind of countermeasures that you are considering.

Ambassador Hutchison: The countermeasures would be to take out the missiles that are in development by Russia in violation of the treaty. So that would be the countermeasure eventually. We are trying not to do anything that would violate the treaty on our side, which allows research, but not going forward into development, and we are carefully keeping the INF Treaty requirements on our side, while Russia is violating. ...

The reporters in the room were in disbelieve over such aggressive wording and followed up:

Question: Thanks, Ambassador. Lorne [Inaudible], Associated Press. Just to clarify a little bit when you said to take out the missiles that are in development, we are a little excited here. Do you mean to get those withdrawn? You don’t mean to actually take them out in a more [inaudible]?

Ambassador Hutchison: Well, withdrawing, yes. Getting them to withdraw would be our choice, of course. But I think the question was what would you do if this continues to a point where we know that they are capable of delivering. And at that point we would then be looking at a capability to take out a missile that could hit any of our countries in Europe and hit America in Alaska. So it is in all of our interests, and Canada as well, I suppose. So we have our North Atlantic risk as well as the European risk.

So what is the ambassador going to do? Bomb Russia over a disagreement about the technical specification of a potential new missile that is not even deployed yet?

This nonsense comes just days after the U.S. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke suggested that the U.S. Navy might blockade Russia's energy trade.

When the INF treaty was signed NATO was far from Russia's border. Now it is directly at it. The Russian government takes such threats seriously. Its spokesperson was not amused (Ru, machine translation):

The North Atlantic Alliance does not realize the degree of its responsibility and the dangers of aggressive rhetoric, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said Tuesday when commenting on the words of US Permanent Representative to NATO Kay Bailey Hutchison about the possibility of shooting down Russian missiles.
"It seems that people making such statements do not realize the degree of their responsibility and the dangers of aggressive rhetoric. Who authorized this woman to make such statements? The American people? Are the people in the US aware of the fact that so-called diplomats are paid aggressively and destructive? It is very easy to break and destroy everything. It is difficult to repair and repair. American diplomacy has a lot to do to recover from the consequences of its inherent errors, "Zakharova told reporters.

One hopes that the ambassador erred in her "take out" response. Otherwise Russia will probably consider to "take out" the ABM assets the U.S. deploys over Europe. That would surely produce a lot of frightening content for the Express' "World War3" category.

Posted by b on October 2, 2018 at 18:15 UTC | Permalink

next page »

these threats to Russia from the US are getting increasingly unhinged, almost panicked. Perhaps the US dollar is closer to the edge than we previously thought let's see if another crazy threat is made in the next couple days

Posted by: Kadath | Oct 2 2018 18:22 utc | 1

Hutch, is a solid member of the Warmongering Nuts of Club 9ll.

In 1993, she was elected to the United States Senate in a nonpartisan special election against Democrat Bob Krueger and became the first woman senator in Texas history. (The fix was in.)

After being reelected to the Senate in 1994, 2000, and 2006, Hutchison was an unsuccessful candidate for Governor of Texas in 2010, losing the Republican primary to incumbent Rick Perry. Hutchison was the most senior female Republican senator by the end of her tenure in 2013. In 2013, she joined the law firm Bracewell & Giuliani.

On June 29, 2017, Hutchison was nominated by President Donald Trump to be the next United States Permanent Representative to NATO.[3] She was confirmed by the U.S. Senate in a voice vote on August 3, 2017.[4]

WIKI ALREADY UPDATED with this tremendous faux pas!

On October 2, 2018, Hutchinson threatened that NATO would invade Russia due to improvements of their missile capabilities.[5]

Posted by: fastfreddy | Oct 2 2018 18:38 utc | 2

Does anyone think the US government will stop short of nuclear war, once that becomes its last recourse to try to hang on to its domination?

I fear to feel it, but I think the answer is No.

Posted by: Russ | Oct 2 2018 18:45 utc | 3

thanks b.. i agree with you and the first 3 comments here... i thought this quote from her was also interesting :" our countries in Europe..." that is an interesting way to frame it...sort of like this coalition of the willing thing...

it seems to be a regular occurrence - this type of talk... the usa seems to think it can say whatever it wants and that it won't be held accountable... it is true none of the usa presidents have been held accountable for anything to date, and obama basically said he didn't want anyone to be held accountable either, lol... i can see the drawbacks to this way of thinking and hope it comes to an end..

Posted by: james | Oct 2 2018 18:59 utc | 4

All this claptrap from loud-mouthed non-combatant Yankee Desk Jockeys begs the question "Who are they trying to scare?"
It also reminds me of my favourite #Occupy poster...


A couple pf years ago Xymphora summed up AmeriKKKa's approach to Crisis Management thus:

"Let's do SOMETHING - even if it's stupid."

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Oct 2 2018 19:01 utc | 5

The difference between a "local" war (or massacre) and a "World War" is that the second is won when the enemy's ability to continue is destroyed. Local wars depend on the ability of the outside influences to resupply their side or other factors (ie political).
So what must be starting to worry the US/NATO nuts is the newly acquired Russian and Chinese ability to develop new or updated weapons. (Which work !)
Russian hypersonic weapons, new tanks and robot vehicles, new anti-missile systems, revamped anti-satellite air launched missiles (speculation based on one photo). etc.

As NATO has a 12 to 1 numerical advantage, facing a revised military force with updated arms and techniques is an increasing threat to NATO and the rather inept US arms industry. (inept in monetary terms at least).

However, a major part of modern warfare is now "asymetrical"; including media, assassinations and propaganda, sanctions, cyberwarfare and so on. As these forms are designed to eliminate the opposite sides ability to function (at least this appears to be the aim for the US), then we are already in WWIII

Posted by: stonebird | Oct 2 2018 19:07 utc | 6

I once watched the end of late night senate hearing, on New Year's Eve, on magic mushrooms. As soon as the session ended, with all of the actual humans hurriedly scurrying away to their New Year's Eve festivities, one Kay Bailey Hutchinson stood out to me as not being like the rest. As the camera now displayed a wide angle view of the entire room, a strange perspective on the post-hearing vibe was revealed. there she was just slowly perambulating, eventually makinh several pointless circles, stopping everyone in her path for an animated, chummy exchange. This went on for at least a half an hour, and only ended when she was the last one in the room.

The relevance of the magic mushroom tidbit. I'm convinced she is part bovine. From above and at a distance her skull and jawbone look exactly like a cow's.

Posted by: sejomoje | Oct 2 2018 19:12 utc | 7

One can only conclude that Hutchinson's comments to 'take out' Russian missiles seen as breaching the INF treaty is scripted and deliberate. I think that USA/NATO is preparing for hot war with Russia, it is the trend over time: more and more combative rhetoric such as this; more encirclement of Russia by NATO; more sanctions–sanctions so extreme as to sanction and penalize ANY country which does trade with Russia (similar to the Helms-Burton act against Cuba which makes it illegal for any country in the world which has operations in USA from doing any trade with Cuba). The Syria situation with Russia, USA, Israel, Iran concentrated in such a small space...this is really fucking dangerous shit. It's brinkmanship done by Israel-USA. I have a bad feeling we might be in for WWIII if current trends continue :-(

Posted by: Deschutes | Oct 2 2018 19:13 utc | 8

In the news, the latest US threat is side by side with the news that Russia has completed delivery of S-300 system or systems to Syria.
In the first year or so of the Trump admin, the threat of nuclear war seemed to have receded,but over the last few months, Trump appointees have been ramping up the war rhetoric against Russia.
Just under two years now since Trump was elected and we are nearly back to the point where Obama left off and Clinton was about to take over the build up to war against Russia.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 2 2018 19:14 utc | 9

My only real responsibility in my life is to live it lovingly to the end. I will try to continue that effort in the event of nuclear war. Unconditional Love is a commitment that is unaltered by external circumstances - it is an inner decision. Freedom is the ability to maintain a chosen course in spite of external pressures.

Posted by: mike k | Oct 2 2018 19:35 utc | 10

...And the US, with a bold move, manages to edge ahead of Ukraine and Israel in the "Inflammatory Threats Delivered Without Provocation" competition of 2018! U-S-A! U-S-A!

Posted by: worldblee | Oct 2 2018 19:38 utc | 11

The wild gestures of Kay Bailey are irrelevant except we have to understand that central to the dominant political ideology in Washington (neoconservativism) is the idea that in order to scare your opponents you have to appear unhinged and liable to do anything at any moment however irrational it may appear. It is this that deeply frustrates the Russians who have only recently begun to understand the game and pay no attention to it. It appears they have seen through it and understand what factions within the Deep State are rational and carry on secret discussion with them. Both in Washington and the rest of the country being rational is seen as a sign of either weakness of perversion so we keep our rationality to ourselves. Honestly, when talking with others socially, even nice people I have to pretend not to notice absurd statements.

Posted by: Banger | Oct 2 2018 19:44 utc | 12

Not only is there a risk of putting nuclear warheads on missiles from anti-missile shield systems, there's also that small issue that an effective anti-missile shield, if possessed and activated by only one side/superpower, becomes by essence an offensive weapon, because it then means you can do a first strike against anyone without suffering any serious retaliation. As such, anti-missile shields should be banned as well, since by definition they aim to cancel MAD.
Sadly, I'm growingly pissed off, because it really looks like the US is on such a foolish path that the only reasonable way out of it is, for any other power who can actually achieve a genuine first strike on the US without causing the destruction of most of the world, to actually do it, as it's the only foreseeable way of avoiding the nuclear armageddon that US seems, growingly, doomed to bring upon the whole world. I wish there's another way, but I'm not even sure a bona fide countrywide 2nd American Civil War would do the trick.

Posted by: Clueless Joe | Oct 2 2018 19:46 utc | 13

CJ @13--

Fallout from a successful 1st Strike KO against US/NATO would still provoke Nuclear Winter. The only way to prevent nuclear war, IMO, is for US citizenry to regain complete control of federal government via the rapid rise of an across-the-board Populist Party national electoral victory. Only then can the Swamp be truly drained, denuclearization begun, and a Peace Dividend realized.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 2 2018 19:55 utc | 14

"I have a bad feeling we might be in for WWIII if current trends continue.."

It could be argued that WW III is already taking place- in Syria Iraq, Yemen and Iran. Like the previous two World Wars it is about control of Eurasia
The hope is that it won't go nuclear because, if it does, it will engulf us all. World wars are like Rome- there won't be a fourth one.

Posted by: bevin | Oct 2 2018 20:00 utc | 15

As someone who loaths Hillary and corporate Democrats, it pains me to say that the Trump regime is much worse than Hillary would have been re matters of war snd peace and saving a fraying social safety net.

Posted by: Ragheb | Oct 2 2018 20:03 utc | 16

i had a faint hope that trump would prove to be less of a warmonger than clinton, but that hope is being dashed as the neocons consolidate their hold on his administration.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Oct 2 2018 20:50 utc | 17
"I cannot confirm that that is accurate. I hope that they did not, that would be a serious escalation and concern," Nauert said when asked about the administration's reaction to reports Russia sent S-300 systems to Syria.

Sounds like Russia have shut down all US surveillance over Syria - or at least a section of it.
Another curious sentence from Shoigu reported in AMN.
“Russia will control a 200km remote zone in Syria,” he added.

I have not been able to find a transcript of Shoigu's report to see more of the context for a Russian controlled remote zone.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 2 2018 20:55 utc | 18

I'm just surprised to find that Kay Baily Hutchinson is still, er, working. Deplorably ageist of me, no doubt, but there it is.

I was never "for" Trump, but his election didn't trigger Trump Derangement Syndrome in me either. So I've tried to keep an open mind, but Trump's version of "draining the swamp" increasingly resembles Pandora's "opening the box" technique.

It must be one of those "second-term" goals.

The reappearance of Hutchinson is another reminder that the US, and indeed most Western governments in the hegemony, no longer have sentient, responsible, mature humans to serve as political leaders and diplomats.

Instead, the West is represented by surrealistic animatronic puppets programmed to spew hegemony-serving authoritarian talking points du jour.

Meanwhile, I have a bad feeling that Trump is negotiating with Satan for the return of Jeane Kirkpatrick to the above-ground lineup.

Posted by: Ort | Oct 2 2018 20:58 utc | 19

Although the ignorance of those who confuse Armenia with Austria is breathtaking, in this case, to the extent that she really thought it through at all, we might interpret this as the capacity to take them out in the air, that is, once launched. I don't think that's what she meant, but virtually any other interpretation is either insane or only nonsense.

Posted by: Paul Damascene | Oct 2 2018 21:13 utc | 20

@10 mike k. Beautifully said. What else can one do but sigh serenely against adversity?

Posted by: Lozion | Oct 2 2018 21:21 utc | 21

This video of Hutchison's presser shows a very low number of reporters in attendance. There's also been a change in Syrian rhetoric regarding Turkish "operation to clear radical groups from Idlib," which is a welcome development if relations continue to thaw.

Peter AU 1 @18--

There are reports of increased Zionist recon flights presumably aiming at trying to locate S-300 emplacements. Of perhaps greater concern was the Iranian missile attack on Deash forces East of Euphrates, of which is being said to be just the first of several. That it's targeting Daesh in close proximity to Outlaw US Empire forces isn't a mistake. Given the lack of response (or perhaps info was provided via deconfliction mechanism) to Iranian drones, I expect them to be used again. Also read an unconfirmed report of the S-300 being tested in central Syria yesterday.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 2 2018 21:39 utc | 22

Sorry, only slightly OT, in the macro picture, as reflected in the micro-penis news:

Clarence Thomas’s ‘High Tech Lynching’ Awakened Andrew Breitbart;
What will the Kavanaugh Witch Trial Produce?

Nothing about the threat to bomb Russia. Desperate for a SCOTUS Lynching Tribunal! These are clearly crazy End Times for the bizarre White USAryan Mental Breakdown. And anyone with any sense of irony and humor has to be ROTFLMAO at that Breitbart 'News' headline, with their up-shot triptych of Clarence Thomas, Andrew Breitbart and Brett Kavanaugh.

CT and BK were both charged with SH & AR. Andrew Breitbart's famous last words, to OWS, just before the Creator struck him dead on the sidewalk was, "Stop! You're raping me!!"
Of the three, only Andrew was struck dead. Get it? Mockery! God, I cannot stop laughing. John Bolton, Mike Pompeo and Kay Baily Hutchinson should've been struck dead years ago!

Speaking of mockery, (besides 'The Miracle of the Two Planes and the Three Towers') had Wall Street not (literally) pissed down on OWS, USArya wouldn't be running on MAGA! fumes today. In 30 days from now, after WW3 on Iran breaks, then voting begins Civil War Two, and Thanksgiving-slur-Xmas shopping seasons crater, destroying US retail, then Alita: Battle Angel drops on the Holy Weekend. "When Alita awakens, she has no memory of who she is, nor does she have any recognition of the world she finds herself in."

Wow, does that sound familiar, neh!?

"You're gonna beg me to stop all the winning!!"

It's -$24,000B down, and goal to go. E pluribus now get back to work.

Posted by: Anton Worter | Oct 2 2018 21:48 utc | 23

Maybe I am wrong but I believe this is all for domestic consumption (US and EU) so as to garner support for massive increases in military expenditures. Also, when people fear an imminent war people seek a safe have in the USD. US is looking for dollars in the face of the QT by the Fed. Corporate repatriation, an equity bubble they keep propping up to attract overseas investment to counter massive deficits in the face of tax cuts for corporations (30% down so far, 80 billion) and the rich

There are also the mid term elections loming. People more likely to want Republicans in power when there is a military or security threat. Hype the threat.

So maybe a skirmish here and there but I would be surprised anyone crosses the line to a full scale war

Posted by: Pft | Oct 2 2018 22:03 utc | 24

A clarification from the US ambassador to @NATO after her comments made headlines:
I was not talking about preemptively striking Russia. My point: 🇷🇺 needs to return to INF Treaty compliance or we will need to match its capabilities to protect US & NATO interests. The current situation, with 🇷🇺 in blatant violation, is untenable.

Posted by: ALAN | Oct 2 2018 22:08 utc | 25

If this was before 1937, WW would've already begun. The only reason we're still not in a hot world war right now is because, given the strength of modern weaponry, the stakes are infinitely higher.

Posted by: vk | Oct 2 2018 22:09 utc | 26

vk @25

For a war to start "officially" there has to be some kind of declaration. In this age if one side decided to make such a declaration they would probably be wiped out while they were reading out the declaration (presumably live from the White House).

So I imagine there will never be a formal 'declaration of war'. It will either become slowly, or suddenly, apparent.

And there will be no chance for 'the people' to exercise any democratic influence.

Posted by: ADKC | Oct 2 2018 22:23 utc | 27

Hutchinson is spouting uneducated nonsense, politician drivel forged exclusively in the fires of domestic consumption. The idea of sending a woman like that to foreign countries is as appalling as everything else the US does. Watching the video linked by karlof1 @22 reveals a woman simply parroting Pompeo's nonsense. It's all group-think, and she has simply drunk from the cup. She has been an accomplished Texas politician, but also a privileged one, and she well reflects and represents the unworldliness of the US, in which ambassadors are selected on the basis of domestic political favors.

But as b notes, Russia has to take formal and military notice of this, and act accordingly. One day someone will say something that will result in a major walk-back for the US.

The US will not go to nuclear war, because the Pentagon understands this would mean the total destruction of the US (and the world, of course, but we're talking about what the Pentagon sees as damage).

Russia understands the domestic political scene and the US culture very well. She professionally studies her adversary, of course, and has done so for decades. My guess is that within the Russian thinking sits the understanding that propaganda dupes like Hutchinson are a small price to pay for the privilege of watching your opponent progressively destroy all its footing in the world.

Russia will only challenge the gaucheries of the US in very calculated and measured ways - because, there's no sense to wake up your enemy in the middle of his making yet another mistake.

Part of what drives armchair hotheads crazy is that Russia refuses to react, and instead simply acts. And yet, by "doing nothing", Russia is winning in perceptible strides. Here again, it's important to see the mistakes of this naive Texas woman in the world theater as another step forward for Russia, another step backwards for the US.

So don't worry, y'all.

Posted by: Grieved | Oct 2 2018 22:39 utc | 28

ADKC @26--

If you read the Outlaw US Empire's newest National Defense Strategy, its lead author Gen. Mattis says in the middle of the 4th paragraph the Empire's already waging war: "the longest continuous stretch of armed conflict in our Nation’s history," to which there was no declaration, and to which all the conflicts it's started constitute the waging of Aggressive War--the #1 War Crime of them all.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 2 2018 22:45 utc | 29

Grieved @27

I largely agree with your post but not it's conclusion. It seems that a new 'reality' is being developed/created, something like a cold war but more similar to the world described in Orwell's 1984 (a continuing no-winner war).

The west is getting into brinkmanship in an increasing way and the general public are not really engaged or worried about it. I think we should be worried about the situation and our apparent inability (in democratic western countries) to address the issue.

Posted by: ADKC | Oct 2 2018 22:53 utc | 30

look on the bright side - if we turn everything into radioactive dust, there won't be any worry about the recession the IMF is warning about.

Posted by: Xeno | Oct 2 2018 22:58 utc | 31

@ Grieved, I believe it is in the Stone interviews were Putin talks about the collapse of the Soviet Union, Gorbachev and Yeltsin. From memory, Putin was saying that the leadership of the Soviet Union and then Russian Federation knew they had to make major changes but nobody knew how to do it. He then spoke of a somewhat similar situation in the US. Other commentators like Saker have also compared the current US to the last days of the Soviet Union.
The gist of Putin's take, for me, was that he believes the US will collapse of its own accord. The constant blocking of US expansion ambition re Ukraine, Syria ect rather than offensive moves may be all it takes to hasten the downfall of the US and this I suspect is Putin's strategy.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 2 2018 23:32 utc | 32

karlof1 22

It will be interesting to see what develops in Syria. I guess more detail will come out in the not too distant future.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 2 2018 23:34 utc | 33

@30 The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades!

Posted by: Ash | Oct 2 2018 23:41 utc | 34

There will be no 'Hot' WWlll that historians will distort because there will be no one to report the war. In less time than we (homo sapiens) have been here no one will know we existed. I find a certain comfort in that thought for natures little creatures.

Posted by: Ger | Oct 3 2018 0:08 utc | 35

Anyone notice a pattern here? Unhinged rhetoric from the minions who serve the empire. Just part of the "war theater", to frighten folks into shoveling buckets of cash to the war machine. No way in hell the world's real rulers, the oligarchs, will engage in full on N warfare. In chaos and fear it's easy to fleece the sheep.

Posted by: ben | Oct 3 2018 0:16 utc | 36

With support for sanctions beginning to weaken in Europe, the u.s. is looking for a new reason to extend sanctions. By raising the INF treaty at this time and in this way, it is setting the stage for using "violations" as their new and longer lasting reason for extending sanctions.

The US has no intention of normalizing relations with Russia, and it is not about to let the EU have any reason to normalize relations with Russia.

Posted by: les7 | Oct 3 2018 0:27 utc | 37

This is clearly 100% panic mode and fear, it is the same over and over in the past few months, the coalition of evil are in panic mode, afraid and fear is masqueraded as empty threats as yesterday's naval blockade on all Russia.
At the end of the empire of chaos, comes delusion and illusion, this is all going south fast. $21.5 trillion in federal debt, over $100trillion in total liability, the ordinary Americans can be considered slaves for centuries if this liability is to be paid, the end is getting really near and US regime officials are demonstrating that through their fear.
The end is coming and it is near.

Posted by: Canthama | Oct 3 2018 0:45 utc | 38

Transcript of Shoigu's report is now at the President of Russia website.
...Apart from that, we have significantly strengthened and activated the electronic warfare system, and added extra equipment to it. As a result, as of today we control the close zone of up to 50 kilometres and the remote zone, where sorties on Syrian territory mainly originate from, we control 200 kilometres of that...

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 3 2018 0:47 utc | 39


Agreed. These guys on both sides have too much to lose. Life is good for the 0.1%

Douglas Reed in Far and Wide (copyright expired so freely available as pdf) expressed some interesting sentiments back in 1951 that are similar to what I believe is still ongoing albeit with different characters, scripts and stage settings

“The money-power and the revolutionary-power have been set up and given sham but symbolic shapes ('Capitalism' or
Communism') and sharply-defined citadels ('America' or 'Russia'). Suitably to alarm the mass- mind, the picture offered is that of bleak and hopeless enmity and confrontation: Black Knight and White Knight. One must destroy the other.

Such is the spectacle publicly staged for the masses. But what if similar men, with a common aim, secretly rule in both camps and propose to achieve their ambition through the clash between those masses?

In the United States, particularly, these powerful men behind-the-scenes have in the last thirty years been able to give such a slant to governmental actions that these went to promote the ends of Soviet Communism and Zionist Nationalism.

Thus I think that out of the smoke and smother of any new war, begun on the one side to 'destroy Capitalism' and on the other to
'destroy Communism', will at the end be produced (if this situation continues) what those managers really want: the Communist-Capitalist Super-State with all the Capitalist-Communist power over people and and all the nations submerged. “

Of course now that nukes can destroy us all including the elites the skirmishes of the present and future will be rather low level affairs but will be enough the scare the masses into capitulating to authoritarian control over fears of escalation and nuclear annihilation.

Posted by: Pft | Oct 3 2018 0:50 utc | 40

>> No way in hell the world's real
>> rulers, the oligarchs, will engage
>> in full on N warfare. In chaos and
>> fear it's easy to fleece the sheep.

Our psychopath rulers are not necessarily smart or very well informed. As they push and push the crowd toward the cliff, they keep pushing people off in relatively small numbers. We see these as mistakes/crimes but they see it as "worth it". Who's to say they won't feel justified launching a "pre-emptive" attack on Russia, while they're secure in their bunkers or space stations and dreaming of deploying AI and robots to detox the planet once it's rid of the 99.9% surface folk?

Posted by: dumbass | Oct 3 2018 1:33 utc | 41

Incompetent, reckless statements by the likes of dingbat NATO hag Hutchison and national parks and Indian reservations foreman stinky Zinke seem to be popping up in a crescendo that would make it more likely for the average, uninformed American yahoo to see them as a part of the US zeitgeist, so that similar statements by actually powerful nut jobs like Bolton and Haley would be accepted as normal and logical with little or no public pushback when the globalists go into full apocalyptic mode. It's just a hunch but this seems like a psy-war softening of public American perception to grease the skids for an actual enactment of madness on a scale rational people now think unlikely. The blind stupidity of its brainwashed masses is the most dangerous weapon in the empire's arsenal.

Posted by: Gatopardo | Oct 3 2018 1:46 utc | 42

@ Gatopardo who wrote:
It's just a hunch but this seems like a psy-war softening of public American perception to grease the skids for an actual enactment of madness on a scale rational people now think unlikely. The blind stupidity of its brainwashed masses is the most dangerous weapon in the empire's arsenal.

You are not the only one with that hunch. Many of us are watching it happen and wondering what madness is next as well.

But, but, but, this is all about the advancement of civilization........./snark

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 3 2018 2:06 utc | 43

daily press briefing from usa propaganda dept oct 2nd 2018 on this thread topic..

"QUESTION: Thanks. U.S. Ambassador to NATO Kay Bailey Hutchison mentioned today to reporters that Russia continues to violate the INF Treaty, and that while the U.S. would prefer a diplomatic solution it would be pursuing a potential capability to take out a missile that could hit any of the – any of our country, she said. Is this a change in policy? What does that mean, exactly?

MS NAUERT: Well, we have said for quite some time that Russia has not been in compliance with the INF Treaty. We’ve been saying this for four years now. Russia has not taken any steps to return to compliance. Instead, they’ve just levied specious accusations about U.S. compliance. And yes, we do believe that we are in compliance with the INF Treaty.

I think what Ambassador Hutchison was talking about was improving our overall defense and deterrence posture. The current situation, where Russia is just blatantly violating our central tenet of the INF Treaty, is untenable. Our goal is Russian compliance. We go back and say that time and time again, that Russian compliance is what we are seeking. We’ve taken diplomatic, we’ve taken military, research and development, and also economic measures to increase the costs on Russia and ensure the security of the United States and our allies if Russia chooses not to return into compliance with its treaty obligations.

So these are a series of ongoing conversations that are being had right now. The United States is committed to upholding its arms control obligations and expects Russia to do the very same thing. Ambassador Hutchison said our goal is Russian compliance, and we’re in close consultation with our allies on this issue.


STAFF: (Off-mike.)

MS NAUERT: Pardon me?

STAFF: She did tweet about it.

MS NAUERT: Oh, thank you. Apparently, Ambassador Hutchison just tweeted about it, so I’d encourage you to take a look at her tweet for any further questions.

Okay, hi.


QUESTION: Wait. You’re referring us to a tweet for further questions? A hundred and forty characters?

MS NAUERT: Well, sometimes yes, because Ambassador Hutchison spoke to that herself in her tweet."

Posted by: james | Oct 3 2018 2:11 utc | 44

@36 les7.. i think you are bang on in that comment.. you can see that in the press briefing i just posted..

Posted by: james | Oct 3 2018 2:12 utc | 45

da @ 40 said in part;"Who's to say they won't feel justified launching a "pre-emptive" attack on Russia, while they're secure in their bunkers or space stations and dreaming of deploying AI and robots to detox the planet once it's rid of the 99.9% surface folk?"

Old saying: "the comfort of the rich depends on an abundance of the poor."

IMO, much of the lust for power/wealth,is the status derived from same.

Without peons/subjects, is not much fun to be king.

But then, who knows, maybe some aliens from space will save us poor peons:)

Posted by: ben | Oct 3 2018 2:19 utc | 46

I've been trying to find out exactly what is going on with the INF Treaty. US and Russia accuse each other of violations. I found this helpful....

"Over the past 30 years, the achievement of the INF Treaty—reducing the risk of a sudden nuclear attack in the European theater—has been gradually eroded by new technologies and changing threats. Today, modern drones can deliver nuclear weapons in the 500-5,500-kilometer range. Air- and sea-launched cruise missiles, not covered by the treaty, are proliferating and can deliver nuclear warheads over much of the European region that the treaty hoped to protect."

Posted by: dh | Oct 3 2018 2:27 utc | 47

Trump seems to use a variation of the Nixon madman strategy in which he talks shit, gets everyone rattled and confused and finally everyone is grateful when he settles for something rational. This is a contagious sort of mania that has infected his minion in NATO. His management of trade involves this bluster and bullshit. So far he's a paper tiger. And he might be queer, too, the way he falls in love with a small fat narcissistic tyrant. Eat your heart out Dutuerte! If I get a text from this sob, I'll delete it unread.

Posted by: jadan | Oct 3 2018 3:03 utc | 48

Re: Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 2, 2018 3:14:26 PM | 9

In the first year or so of the Trump admin, the threat of nuclear war seemed to have receded,but over the last few months, Trump appointees have been ramping up the war rhetoric against Russia.
Just under two years now since Trump was elected and we are nearly back to the point where Obama left off and Clinton was about to take over the build up to war against Russia.

Interesting thought. What are people's thoughts on the best result to hope for at the US Mid-Terms?

I would consider Democrats capturing the House and Republicans increasing their Senate majority to 55/56 to be the best result.

A handbrake/accelerator on Trump at the same time.

Posted by: Julian | Oct 3 2018 3:20 utc | 49

My best hope for US midterms is a massive solar flare that takes down the grid.

Posted by: Perimetr | Oct 3 2018 3:52 utc | 50

It's only Tuesday, but the US has twice threatened Russia, with a naval blockade of Russian exports and a pre-emptive strike on Russian missiles. That is taking the Nixon madman strategy to a whole new bat shit crazy level. And last week deployment of S-300 defence system I Syria was called a provocation, or to translate Orwellian double speak, "You can't do that. We like our victims defenceless."

Russia no doubt is aware that this crazy talk is just talk from people that realise that they are helpless to change the course of events, from the continued erosion of the US dollar to friends seeking saner people to deal with. At least that is my last thought before going to sleep at night that this is all sound and fury, signifying nothing.

If Shakespeare was alive today, we all know who he would have been thinking of when he wrote this.

This life, which had been the tomb of his virtue and of his honour, is but a walking shadow; a poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more: it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Posted by: Tom | Oct 3 2018 3:53 utc | 51


“Our psychopath rulers are not necessarily smart or very well informed.”

On the contrary. They are the cognitive elite, with IQ’s 4-6 above the mean and privy to the real history of the world past and present while feeding the rest of us with myths and lies

This is not to say they are omipotent. Miscalculations are possible but the global elite have had a couple of thousand years to sort out their differences and have finally arrived at a common ideology with the means and opportunity. Elite man as God tasked to organize the world order as they see fit and rule the rest of us that they deem useful. As for the unuseful, which will be many with 3D printing, AI, Robotics,etc ? Well, over vaccination, 5G, genetically modified foods, pharmaceuticals, restricted access to health care , bioengineered diseases, limited wars and famine will take care of the numbers over time

Posted by: Pft | Oct 3 2018 4:22 utc | 52

@ Tom with the quote from Shakespeare's Macbeth

You lost me with your question about who this equates to today????

Did somebody's wife just commit suicide on the eve of a big battle?

I do hope you slept well.......

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 3 2018 4:34 utc | 53

@ julian 48 yeah gridlock is our friend. we need to get rid of both parties, but i don't know if that is feasible. it's going to be a bumpy ride.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Oct 3 2018 5:26 utc | 54

Julian @48:

Gridlock is likely the best situation.   IMO, it's irrelevant on who controls Congress as both party elites are spoiling for a war of some kind.   Rhetoric against China and Russia will continue, but I believe it's a distraction from their attempts to launch a hot war against Iran.

Posted by: Ian | Oct 3 2018 6:33 utc | 55

Trump appointees above all else must be zionist jihadists. By naming Israel as being responsible for the downing of the IL-20, and the upgraded Syrian defenses, Russia has become an enemy of Zion. Not to mention stymieing Trump's global energy dominance ambitions.
Trump has bet the remains of the US dollar on gaining control of world oil supplies. Part of that bet was that Russia would join Trump's US in a monopoly on oil and gas.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 3 2018 7:08 utc | 56

Somebody above mentioned "an effective antimissile system". These have been, and will remain, a pipe dream for a very simple reason. The cost and technical complexity of any effective interceptor missile will always be an order greater than that of standard offensive missiles. The latter can be produced in far greater numbers by any state capable of posing a significant threat to the major powers. China's current strategy to bypass US systems in the pacific is simply this, to overload them. Even if they somehow proved 100% effective, China would far more quickly, and far more cheaply, replenish it stocks for a second wave. This is aside from the current reality that tests of anti-missile systems still have only a very poor success rate, even when the weather conditions are perfect and the time and direction of attack are known.

Hutchinson's comments are not likely to have been intended as a threat to Russia but rather as a signal to politicians and their backers that the BMD pork-barrel contracts will continue to flow as long as similar excuses can be found and fobbed off on a clueless media.

Posted by: Bran | Oct 3 2018 7:21 utc | 57

Agreements are only pieces of paper and can be easily broken as WWII showed us. Stupid warmongering makes it difficult to resolve problems in Syria. My guess is that the US troops are leaving FAST. Russia and Assad won that war-end of the story. The panicky statements are to divert the attention from the real problem of the DEDOLARIZATION of energy and its consequences for the US.
I am optimistic that Pres. Trump will finally end that stupid war in Syria and move on to build peace in the Middle East. Kay Baily Hutchinson is about as smart as Mrs. May.

Posted by: Friar Ockham | Oct 3 2018 7:22 utc | 58

This life, which had been the tomb of his virtue and of his honour, is but a walking shadow; a poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more: it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

@ Tom with the quote from Shakespeare's Macbeth
You lost me with your question about who this equates to today????
Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 3, 2018 12:34:56 AM | 52

Well he meant the USA, surely!

Posted by: BM | Oct 3 2018 7:33 utc | 59


My only responsibility in life is now just to myself, keeping myself physically and mentally fit, even if I have to live for 150 years, until I can find where the coffin is that Rodham sleeps in at night, then summon my last strength and will power to lift that 5 pound hammer up and drive an acacia locust tree root sharpened wooden stake through her black heart.

The acacia thorns were thought to trap evil spirits, and traditionally their wood was used in witch-burning. The heartwood can also be turned and burnished on a lathe and fits .44 shell casings, so I'm stacking and packing sub-sonic rounds for my Cimarron Bad Boy .44 Mag, to defend against her winged-monkeys and her buffalo haradins.

That Hag will have to sleep with one eye open!

Posted by: Anton Worter | Oct 3 2018 7:44 utc | 60

we would then be looking at a capability to take out a missile that could hit any of our countries in Europe and hit America in Alaska

I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that the issuance of such a threat as the above - or equally the recent naval blockade threat - legally constitutes an act of war (in this case, a war of aggression), and thus legally entitles the counterpart to make acts of war (i.e. hot war, without thereby committing an act of war of aggression, because the war has already been started by the US*).

I am conscious of confounding two issues here though - the definition of a war of aggression definitely includes acts of aggression threatened but not yet carried out, but my knowledge of the subject is insufficient to be sure what the legal implications of such threats are.

Relevant here is the obvious fact that - Alaska aside - the US cannot claim to be threatened by the alleged intermediate range Russian missiles (assuming they are in Europe), therefore unilaterally destroying them would necessarily constitute a war of aggression.

The converse does of course NOT apply - the mere existence of the US nuclear missiles in Europe directly on Russia's border necessarily entails a dire threat to Russia's security, and possibly could be construed as legal grounds for their destruction by Russia. If you put the two together, their combined effect is certainly much greater than the sum of the parts - meaning that by putting their missiles directly on Russia's border AND verbally threatening to destroy any corresponding missiles on Russia's side (but within Russia and not threatening the USA), solely because they are there, the US is placing a particularly immediate threat on the security of Russia.

This argument is only intended to investigate the implications of Hutchinson's reckless statements and not to imply that Russia would/should take any such action - indeed it is the very last thing Mr Putin would do in response to Hutchinson's statements. Nevertheless my point is that in making that statement it has very profound implications.

In particular, if at some stage the military threats to Russia become so extreme that Russia decides it strategically necessary to preventatively destroy the US ABM sites in Rumania and (eventually) Poland, in any statement justifying the act they will include a list of the extant threats to Russia's immediate security - INCLUDING that mad verbal threat of Hutchinson.

The US leaders and politicians are so insanely reckless, with every action they take and every word they utter they are painting their own destruction. Russia and China know they only have to keep their cool and hold back, acting rather than reacting (but always ready to take whatever action is required, should it become necessary), and simply waiting for the US to self-destruct. Apart from a few guiding actions and whatever defensive actions are necessary, they are unlikely to have to do much.

I would like to think Hutchinson's statement was just an act of personal idiocy and recklessness, but unfortunately the fact that it fits in with a concerted pattern of aggression and provocation that has been steadily building up over 25 years implies otherwise. I don't think it can be viewed in isolation.

(* there are of course simultaneously so many other US acts of threat/provocation/sanctions/blockade/economic war/cyber war/proxy hot war/direct hot war that the US and Russia are effectively already legally at war, and so in that sense it is moot; nevertheless the sum total of the constellation is important).

Posted by: BM | Oct 3 2018 8:41 utc | 61

in addition what's detailed in article, the department of state issued a warning regarding of s-300 to syrian gov.

"I cannot confirm that that is accurate. I hope that they did not, that would be a serious escalation and concern," Nauert said when asked about the administration's reaction to reports Russia had sent S-300 systems to Syria.

but Россия did it.

we see TELARs unloaded from Antonov-124 as well as launcher canisters, no radars. maybe they are just increasing numbers of TELARS.

Posted by: partizan | Oct 3 2018 9:29 utc | 62

Interestingly, control of Soviet air defense systems installed for the Syrians were placed under a Soviet headquarters in Damascus.[55] In addition, “non-Russians were denied access to the bases without special permission.” While developing nations did receive modern equipment, it is clear that “limits do exist on Soviet willingness to allow local militaries to assume full control of the weapons.”[56]

i have a hard time to believe this above, it is unimaginable that the Iranians or Chinese, or any other working in parallel with the Russian on own soil.

Posted by: partizan | Oct 3 2018 9:37 utc | 63

To Mike Kudos to you and the path your on. I disagree with some you espouse however good to you. Read Erich Fromm which you have properly read.
28 I sure hope you are right!

Posted by: Col from OZ | Oct 3 2018 9:49 utc | 64

There's not going to be an N war, and not in the near future. All of this BS about war is nothing more than a t-rump et al distraction... for whatever the reasons.

Posted by: jadeehawk | Oct 3 2018 10:34 utc | 65

Nine hours after she made her "take out" remark Hutchinson was pressed to take it back.

Ambassador Hutchison @USAmbNATO 14h

I was not talking about preemptively striking Russia. My point: 🇷🇺 needs to return to INF Treaty compliance or we will need to match its capabilities to protect US & NATO interests. The current situation, with 🇷🇺 in blatant violation, is untenable.

The NYT says she got some urgent phone calls:

... behind the scenes, officials in Washington pressed for Ms. Hutchison to backtrack on her comments, especially after the Russians mocked her remarks, and then suggested that it was the United States, not Russia, that was deploying weapons in violation of the Intermediate Nuclear Forces treaty, which dates to the Reagan administration.

American officials suggested that Ms. Hutchison, a politician for years before President Trump asked her to represent the United States at NATO, an institution he has often called “obsolete,” was simply not in full control of her language on a critical issue: whether the United States would deal with the Russian deployment of new missiles with diplomacy, sanctions, missile defenses or military action.

Now that's what we all need - a U.S. ambassador to NATO who is "not in full control of her language on a critical issue".

Posted by: b | Oct 3 2018 10:38 utc | 66

@ ben 36
Your "war theater" narrative would be believable except for one problem: There is no nuclear war hysteria in the USA at the moment. While there absolutely should be massive nuclear war hysteria in America at this point, there is none. There is some hacking hysteria and some silly-Facebook-meme hysteria, but no nuclear war hysteria, and this is terrifyingly problematic. Apparently Americans all have faith that:

a) Russians backed down in 1991. They will back down again. We just need to push hard enough.
b) America has Star Wars missile defenses. The best of these are secret and are the real reason why military weapons systems cost so much (money secretly diverted to making "Giant freakin` laser beams!").
c) Russian nukes are all old and rusty. They will just fizz a little like damp firecrackers.
d) Any Russian nukes that do somehow successfully launch and dodge through our Hollywood missile defenses and actually remain functional will be confronted with America's awesome and undefeatable exceptionalism. If the nuke even bothers to explode at this point all it will accomplish is causing a very manly and photogenic scratch on Bruce Willis' shoulder and trigger oohs and ahhs from the audience.

What is most problematic is not that average Jodie American believes this nonsense, but rather that faith in it is practically universal throughout the entire US imperial power structure. Nuclear war is simply off the scripts for any narratives that Americans are ready to believe.

Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 3 2018 10:58 utc | 67

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) was formed by mainly investment bankers in 1921. It’s publication, FP, provides sometimes coded information that gives an insight into what senior figures are thinking and I am as guilty as anyone else about neglecting it. Here is an FP article that has relevance to the topic under discussion. At no point is WWIII ever considered. It begins…

“Lately, international relations hands such as Patrick Porter, Graham Allison, Thomas Wright, Robert Kagan, Rebecca Lissner, Mira Rapp-Hooper, yours truly, and a host of others have been caught up in a lively discussion about the current world order.”

Posted by: Lochearn | Oct 3 2018 11:25 utc | 68

B @ 66:

So the US ambassador to NATO is not in "full control of her language on a critical issue"?

I wouldn't like to know what the same American officials think of the US ambassador to the United Nations when she lets fly with gems like "Russia will never be our friend" and "we'll [the US] slap them [the Russians] when we need to". Is Nutty Nikki in full control of her language?

Posted by: Jen | Oct 3 2018 11:33 utc | 69

Anton Worter @ 60:

When you find the Evil One's coffin, don't hesitate to call on us. You need all the help you can get and if anything we'll all be fighting among ourselves to lay at least one finger on the hammer that will pound that stake through her stone-cold heart.

Posted by: Jen | Oct 3 2018 11:38 utc | 70

>> On the contrary. They are the cognitive elite,


>> with IQ’s 4-6 above the mean

How do they compare to Chomsky, Michael Hudson, Chris Hedges, pro-peace activists, and the people on this board?

>> and privy to the real history of the
>> world past and present

And what did they learn? To brutally victimize rather than bear a tiny risk of being victimized? To always escalate? To always war? In the age of nuclear weaponry, to continue the practices of the past?

I reject characterizing them as the cognitive elite. Their defining characteristic is that they're assholes. They're evil.

Posted by: dumbass | Oct 3 2018 11:45 utc | 71


Yes, they are evil. They walk with Lucifer. They are a satanic cult. We live in a pathocracy. Our rulers have no empathy. We are insects to them. Get it?

BTW I meant 4-6 SD above the mean. They are not dumb

Posted by: Pft | Oct 3 2018 11:56 utc | 72

What BM said:
>> I would like to think Hutchinson's
>> statement was just an act of personal
>> idiocy and recklessness, but unfortunately

and what Tom said:
>> It's only Tuesday, but the US has
>> twice threatened Russia, with a naval
>> blockade of Russian exports and a
>> pre-emptive strike on Russian missiles.

So true. It's a build-up. They're mobilizing for war with a nuclear power and supplying "they're threatening us" rhetoric to whip up domestic enthusiasm. We've seen this before and it's almost always led to war.

JFK de-escalated during the USA-Cuban Missile Crisis. Will Trump, who hired all these assholes, turn into JFK at just the right moment? Who wants to bet their lives on that?

Posted by: dumbass | Oct 3 2018 11:56 utc | 73

Pft, "they" are not "dumb" compared to the mean. Sure. Neither are we.

Posted by: dumbass | Oct 3 2018 12:06 utc | 74

Posted by: Pft | Oct 3, 2018 12:22:12 AM |
“Elite man as God tasked to organize the world order as they see fit and rule the rest of us that they "deem useful.”

The so-called “elite men” reveal themselves as being the half-wit and cowards unable to comprehend the complexities of this world.
The only thing the “elite men” are good at is creating an army of sycophants and opportunists that are able to destroy the world due to their incompetence and cowardice. Look no further than Brennan, Bolton, Rod Rosenstein, Gavin Williamson, Jens Stoltenberg and the multitude of other parasites in service to the poor-quality “elite men” (the Deciders).

Posted by: Anya | Oct 3 2018 12:17 utc | 75

".......Russia denies that it is testing anything that is not compatible with the INF treaty......."

Threatening a naval blockade or threatening to take out missiles inside of Russia are acts of war - and are delusional threats anyway. The US is not going to blockade or attack Russia (ever). This is one reason that the inflammatory Trump should never have been elected President. However, the Russian government has absolutely no credibility when it comes to denials. They have a recent history of lying and denying that makes even Trump look like a boyscout:

1. The Russian government lied when they denied invading Crimea
2. The Russian government lied when they denied invading Eastern Ukraine.
3. The Russian government lied when they denied hacking the DNC and Podesta emails and
turning it over to WikiLeaks (even Guccifer 2.0 was a lie).
4. The Russian government lied when they denied bombing the Red Crescent Aid Convoy in
5. The Russian government lied when they denied the attempted murder of Skripal (and
the murder of Litvinenko).
6. The Russian government lied when they denied their complicity in shooting down MH17.

The list of Russian lies and denials goes on and on. Given that the Putin government and President Trump are chronic liars, the only sure way to control a potential arms race is using the Reagan slogan (taken from Russian a proverb): Trust but verify.

Posted by: craigsummers | Oct 3 2018 13:16 utc | 76

The USA diplomatic corps, and its generals, are known to be culturally inept at diplomacy and at caution. It is apparently inherent to almost all American leadership to be like the bully on the school playground, who brags loudly. This brought us to the bring of WW not only during the Kennedy years, but also in Germany 1983, and it is repeating itself again multiple times now. In Europe and other parts of the world, one can actually count on the Russians to have cool heads and know this deplorable and dangerous trait of Americanism.
Is it something Anglo-American? Because which other country allows its generals to come out with bellicose statements that would go outside of the line of its own administration? Generals which come out with preludes to books they are going to write, and make a lot of money on, spouting political opinions (Breedlove)? It's not only reprehensible, it is wrong for the commander in chief to allow freedom of speech to his military men.

Posted by: Josh | Oct 3 2018 13:43 utc | 77

Reading the article is an education in itself and shouldn't a university class for current events read this and discuss it? One learns about the range and rules for these missiles. For her, her comments are threatening but worse, it is clear she has no understanding about these armaments. I bet if she read what the Moon Man wrote, she would learn something; and maybe think about her grandchildren before she says such stupid things.

Posted by: charles | Oct 3 2018 14:07 utc | 78

In view of US madness, the indicated act by Russia should be an EMP preemptive strike on the US.

Maybe on those parts of Europe that harbor nuclear ballistic missiles too. Too bad for the landlords.

With a few simultaneous effective EMP strikes, properly aimed and timed, the US could not move
a finger. Therefore, Humanity at large would be spared a Nuclear winter.

Of course, nuclear subs would have to be located and sunk before they retaliate.

Posted by: CarlD | Oct 3 2018 14:18 utc | 79

craigsummers | Oct 3, 2018 9:16:28 AM | 76
In international politics at the highest level, in general you can do a lot.
& still you will be dealt with. With one exception: they will not deal with you if you are lying all the time.
Not because it is some kind of abstract sin. No, there, they do not pay attention to this. You will not be dealt with because it has no practical meaning. What is the point with you to negotiate, if you do not know: will you fulfill the agreement or not? Or maybe you're lying again? Or maybe you change your mind and when it becomes unprofitable for you to fulfill the contract - will you again deceive?
Putin has been caught so many times in lies, that it is already impossible for him to restore the reputation of a contractual person.
It seems that only one gallant Trump still wants to agree with him about something. And even then, his optimism is diminishing every day ... Putin needs to tell lies to himself. For sure he has a painful pathology. it obviously behaves destructively even in relation to its own interests!
For Putin, the scandal of Poisoning Skripal in Salisbury was a turning point, because it turned the country's leadership in the face of the world into a "commonplace criminal group with executors, customers and patrons".

Posted by: ALAN | Oct 3 2018 14:25 utc | 80

Sound and fury signifying nothing. pay no heed.
The more the americans realise their power is tangibly waning the more they squeal.
Debka files put out a few interesting snippets recently.
Much wailing and gnashing of teeth there thanks to Russia's recent moves.

Posted by: Adamski | Oct 3 2018 14:56 utc | 81

Thanks to Peter AU 1 for bringing up Putin's assessment of the US situation, and Grieved as well for emphasizing the same point, that probably the Russians know down to the smallest detail what is and has been happening in the US, are simply waiting for a quiet implosion (my own words.)

It is not unconsequential that the midterms are almost upon us, a voting period which it will take much manipulation to achieve the obfuscation necessary to delude others and ourselves that voting actually matters. I am pretty sure it doesn't any longer, and the only way to convince me that it does would be for the US to return to time honored practises of paper ballot votes that can be re-counted. For a long time we haven't had that, which makes manipulation possible.

The ptb must long ago have discovered that the US public, except for a diminishing minority, cannot be swayed any longer by mainstream media. We've opted out. And we're opting out of the voting process as well. I for one don't believe the Green Party got such a miniscule amount last election. The figure never changed of their percentage the entire recorded evening. So I am not a believer. What you see, what you will see, is the product of smoke and mirrors, just as the rhetoric has been, and increasingly false.

What I think Russia hopes, what the world hopes, and what I hope, is that this country will not descend into chaos. That would be a disaster for all. I don't think it will. I believe below the radar there are promising signs. They have to be unstated and kept in reserve, but I have faith in sensible Americans, of whom there are quite a few, that they will rally as the current system finally disintegrates.

I am looking forward to that time. Hang in there, people!

Posted by: juliania | Oct 3 2018 15:12 utc | 82

JFK de-escalated during the USA-Cuban Missile Crisis. Will Trump, who hired all these assholes, turn into JFK at just the right moment? Who wants to bet their lives on that?
Posted by: dumbass | Oct 3, 2018 7:56:18 AM | 73

Trump is CIC. He can, and imo will, prevent The Swamp from launching a major war of aggression. He's the only person in History who has claimed to have a plan to drain The Swamp AND committed himself to executing that plan. The Swamp is a bunch of insane arseholes. Anyone who expected the process to be simple, straightforward or pleasant, should exile him/herself to a unicorn farm and stop whingeing.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Oct 3 2018 15:26 utc | 83

they are 4 to 6 standard deviations (i assume that is what the poster meant, and not that they have iq's of 104-106) above the asshole mean. they are off the asshole charts, statistically speaking.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Oct 3 2018 15:28 utc | 84

Hoarsewhisperer @86:

He's the only person in History who has claimed to have a plan to drain The Swamp AND committed himself to executing that plan.
Obama had a very similar plan. He called it "transparency". "Sunlight is the best disinfectant", he said. But then he:

>> conducted a war on whistle-blowers;

>> allowed his attorney general and national security advisor to lie/mislead congress, conducted covert ops;

>> conducted a covert war and droned wedding parties ("I'm pretty good at it", he exclaimed);

>> took no action against CIA for their rendition and torture program and dismissed concerns about pervasive surveillance ("If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear," he told us);

>> supported bank bailouts and bank foreclosures - no bankers went to jail;

>> allowed use of toxic chemicals to dispurse oil in the Gulf so that BP's fine would be reduced;

>> coordinated nation-wide take-down of the occupy movement when the Democratic Party couldn't co-opt it;

>> coordinated behind the scenes with Republicans to make the Bush tax cuts permanent via a farce known as "the fiscal cliff";

>> and more!

Trump is CIC
Trump is a member of the leadership team. He was selected to be the face of the team just like Obama was before him. And, like Obama, his razzle-dazzle rhetoric masks the establishment's true agenda.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 3 2018 16:10 utc | 85

Grieved says:

So don't worry, y'all

should we go shopping instead?

probably the only Obama legacy program that resonated with Trump was the former's trillion dollar nuclear upgrade...a substantial portion of which is dedicated to the further development of smaller first-strike nuclear warheads. the doctrine for their use is also in place(since the Bush administration, i believe), and Afghanistan has been serving as a testing zone for conventional mega-bombs so these psychos can generate the necessary calibrations.

We have had the bomb on our minds since 1945. It was first our weaponry and then our diplomacy, and now it's our economy. How can we suppose that something so monstrously powerful would not, after forty years, compose our identity? The great golem we have made against our enemies is our culture--its logic, its faith, its vision E.L.Doctorow

but instead of an anti-war movement, we get oracles.

Posted by: john | Oct 3 2018 16:25 utc | 86

Bitter words from Vladimir Putin (Meduza: via @meduzaproject):

"......Speaking on Wednesday at the Russian Energy Week International Forum in Moscow, Vladimir Putin called former GRU officer Sergey Skripal a “scumbag” and a “traitor to his homeland,” referring to the double agent who spied for the British before being arrested for treason and later swapped with the West. In March 2018, Skripal was nearly killed in an apparent assassination attempt allegedly by Russian intelligence agents.

“As for Skripal and so on, this is just the latest spy scandal to be inflated artificially. I follow different information sources, and your colleagues are promoting the idea that Mr. Skripal is nearly some kind of human rights activist. He’s just a spy — a traitor to his homeland. Think about it: a national traitor,” Putin said. The president also called Skripal “nothing more than a scumbag,” and said he welcomes an end to the “informational campaign” surrounding Skripal's poisoning......."

Spoken like someone who knows he was caught lying about the attempted assassination of Skripal by the GRU.

Posted by: craigsummers | Oct 3 2018 16:27 utc | 87

> "the US will “take out” the missile."
This "broken record" endless cheap trash talk.

Hitler's Third Reich was not talking about invading USSR - it invaded.
Napoleon's French Europe did not talked about invading Russia - it invaded.
This XXI century self-proclaimed hegemon wants anyone to have any respect for them, but all they do is hyperinflating trash talk...

"You never ever pull a knife. But if you do - then only for striking."

Posted by: Arioch | Oct 3 2018 17:08 utc | 88

>> and more!

Trump is CIC
Trump is a member of the leadership team. He was selected to be the face of the team just like Obama was before him. And, like Obama, his razzle-dazzle rhetoric masks the establishment's true agenda.

Posted by: >> | Oct 3, 2018 12:10:05 PM | 88

Yeah, lots more ... like letting The Swamp wreck & loot Libya and start a proxy war in Syria.
When I'm treated to the spectacle of an Obama ex-fan with Buyer's Remorse comparing Trump with pious "blowing in the wind" frat-boy Obama, the first thing I notice is the Terminal Despair.

Obama was a virtual pauper before he became Prez and $old out.
He's not a pauper now.

Trump doesn't even pretend to be pious and is already wealthy hence there's (notionally) less incentive to sell out.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Oct 3 2018 17:10 utc | 89

john 89

The 2018 Nuclear Posture Review.

The pentagon now has tactical nukes in its shock and awe arsenal for use against non nuclear countries such as Iran.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 3 2018 17:16 utc | 90

juliania @85--

I urge you to reconsider your stance on voting as it still works to forward and deter projects and people as was recently proven here in our rural Oregon county. Also. look at Trump's election and tell me with a straight face that voting doesn't matter. The only way for the public to peacefully regain control of the federal government is through the ballot box, although as you note, it may require returning 100% to Democracy's Gold Standard to ensure election credibility. The reason Populist/ism was made into a negative word/concept is that twice in the past Populists came oh so close to gaining control over the federal government for We The People, while still managing to alter the course of US History--1880s-1900 & 1924-1940. Given current circumstances and likely future direction, I see no reason why another effort shouldn't be made--and it is being made despite BigLie Media's efforts to prevent news of its happenings.

Today as a result of recent rants by various members of the Outlaw US Empire, Putin opened his address to the Russian Energy Week event thusly:

"You came here to hold an open and trust based discussion on the issues of the global energy agenda....

"We believe that progress in global energy, as well as the stable energy security of our entire planet, can only be achieved through global partnership, working in accordance with general rules that are the same for everyone, and, of course, through conducting transparent and constructive dialogue among market players which is not politically motivated but is based on pragmatic considerations and an understanding of shared responsibilities and mutual interests." [My Emphasis. Previous linking to Kremlin website blocked, so I'm not going to try. Sputnik's Energy Week recap.]

And even more events are occurring as I type. International Court of Justice ruled against Outlaw US Empire's illegal sanctions of humanitarian goods on Iran, and that ruling prompted the "Outlaw Regime" to withdraw from a 1955 Treaty with Iran. Astounding!

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 3 2018 17:25 utc | 91

The eyes are running around
"he is just a spy, traitor to the motherland" said defending himself with fear
The eyes running around again. The criminal is confused after his lie has been revealed

Posted by: ALAN | Oct 3 2018 17:42 utc | 92

Jr @88 said in part;
Trump is CIC
"Trump is a member of the leadership team. He was selected to be the face of the team just like Obama was before him. And, like Obama, his razzle-dazzle rhetoric masks the establishment's true agenda."

In my world Jr, that statement is a bottom line truth. How people keep believing DJT is anything other than the latest "Carnival Barker" for the empire is beyond me.

Posted by: ben | Oct 3 2018 17:46 utc | 93

Oops! make that Jr @ 85. referring to my 93...

Posted by: ben | Oct 3 2018 17:48 utc | 94

Hoarsew@ 89: These "empire caretakers" go back way before Obama entered into their service. The Clinton's, the Bushes virtually all the Presidents, maybe with a few exceptions in the past, have served the interests of the ruling elites.

Posted by: ben | Oct 3 2018 17:58 utc | 95

Turkish Haber Turk break the news on Oct 1 2018 showing CCTV footage of Col. Anatoliy Chepiga and excerpts of the criminal case of the various cars they used during the mission.
Haber Turk article on Col. Anatoliy Chepiga on his mission liquidate a Chechen field commander in 2015 in Turkey.
Haber Turk says Col. Anatoliy Chepiga, entered Turkey as Andrey Sholkhov (Андрей Шолхов), met in with other GRU operator, entered Turkey as Dimitriy Bodrov (Димитрий Бодров) who used the weapon to assassinate the Chechen commander.

Posted by: ALAN | Oct 3 2018 18:01 utc | 96

Peter AU 1 @ 90

yeah, i was aware of that, and, inside the general scenario that i described above, i find it at least somewhat worrisome, no?

Posted by: john | Oct 3 2018 18:21 utc | 97

Wikipedia provides a section on Treaty Repeal within its discussion of the Treaty Clause within US Constitution. IMO, it's well beyond time for US citizens to challenge the government on the legality of treaty withdrawl. Certainly, unelected officials shouldn't have the power to abrogate any treaty or legislation.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 3 2018 18:45 utc | 98

Alan Summers - troll tag team.

Who cares?

You act like we should be shocked that a major power kills traitors and terrorists. They all do, we all know that. So what?

Nothing new under the sun. Including apologists for empire.

Posted by: BillyfaeFife | Oct 3 2018 19:23 utc | 99

take a look at how the usa-uk tag team deal with julian assange... neo con coolaid says assange is a traitor...

Posted by: james | Oct 3 2018 19:58 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.