Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
June 10, 2021

Biden Seeks Allies For War On China

U.S. President Joe Biden is currently in Europe.

President Biden @POTUS - 14:26 UTC · Jun 10, 2021

I believe we are at an inflection point in history. A moment where it falls to us to prove that democracies will not just endure — they will excel as we rise to seize the enormous opportunities of this new age.

Democracies excel against whom?

According to the Democracy Perception Index 2020 73% of the people in China say that their country is democratic. Only 48% in the United States see their country as such.

China is indeed rising to the "enormous opportunities of this new age". The U.S., well, not so much. And that is the crux of the whole situation.

Biden's tweet is gibberish. A good translation of what he really meant is probably this:

chinahand @chinahand - 14:55 UTC · Jun 10, 2021

It's how the more homely and honest "we have to f*ck up china before it eats America's lunch" gets translated into faux Churchill hero speak. Suspect Jake Sullivan lobbied for the existential crisis for democracy angle coz why wud Europe line up to just to save America's ass?

Biden is in Europe to ask its leaders to support the U.S. in its efforts against China (and Russia). But that is not in Europe's interest:

The President and his advisors would do well to remember that while former Belgian foreign minister Mark Eyskens famously said that Europe is a political dwarf, he also called it an economic giant. As several U.S. presidents have discovered, the subservience of European countries to the United States stops as soon as European wallets are involved. This was demonstrated most recently in Germany’s adamant refusal to bow to U.S.pressure to abandon the North Stream gas pipeline from Russia.

A degree of common Western economic pushback against China is legitimate and necessary in two areas: Chinese behavior that clearly breaks universally accepted rules, as in the area of intellectual property theft; and control of vital national infrastructure. After all, the Chinese defend their own technological expertise, and they will never allow foreign control of essential sectors of the Chinese economy.

The Biden administration however seems to want to go much further than this, to effectively shut China out from any important say in shaping the rules of the international economy, and greatly restrict Chinese investment and infrastructural development outside China. This strategy is doomed to failure, and will cause deep divisions between the United States, Europe and Japan.

Europe won't line up behind the U.S. for its great war on China. And a war it is gonna be:

“I see stiff competition with China,” Biden said at the White House. “They have an overall goal to become the leading country in the world, the wealthiest country in the world and the most powerful country in the world. That’s not going to happen on my watch, because United States is going to continue to grow and expand.

China will also continue to grow and expand - only at a faster rate than the U.S.

The U.S. lost the competition when it, in the early 1990s, declared itself to be the sole superpower. It lost when it pushed for globalization and free trade. It lost when it let its finance, insurance and real estate sectors of its economy run amok in 2000, in 2007 (and again now). It lost when I broke its promise not to expand NATO to Russia's border. It lost when it decided to a wage a war of terror in the Middle East.

All the above gave China the 30 years it needed to catch up and to overtake the U.S. It has three times the population. It now has all the necessary infrastructure and industries. It graduates some 4.7 million per year in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) while the U.S. has only 600,000 STEM graduates per year.

The U.S. became the primer power after World War II because the industrial capacities of all other powers had been destroyed by the war. To regain such a position the U.S. would have to engineer a war that would destruct China's industrial capabilities. A civil war within China could achieve that. But the color-revolution the U.S. incited in China in 1989 has failed and any new attempt to incite some strife will now be much more difficult. An external war waged on China is even more difficult because China is a nuclear power which can shot back.

What the U.S. could do is not to attempt to out compete China. I could instead try to make it instrumental for its purposes.

Despite being on the winning side in both World Wars the British empire did not survive the carnage. Its role was taken over by the more powerful United States. But Britain did keep a role on the world stage that was (and is) disproportionate to its size. It managed to do so by making itself useful to the U.S. and by fostering a special relationship with its successor.

Could the U.S. try to get into a similar position in its relation with China? I believe that might be possible to a certain degree. It would be useful for China to grant the U.S. some special privileges if that avoids the costs of outright hostilities. But I also think that the U.S., for cultural reasons, will never try to get into such an agreement. It simply does not want to play number two.

So where do we go from here?

The most likely path is a more aggressive United States which uses its presumed advantages to attack China's capabilities below the level of open warfare.

Cyber warfare is a field in which the U.S. has already invested a lot. If its uses those capabilities, unacknowledged and in a destructive way, China's industries could be seriously harmed. The effects of random electricity failures, burning refineries and unreliable communication networks would accumulate to a slow down of China's growth. Ransomware like attacks on the Chinese banking system could leave its markets in chaos.

I am sure that there are a number of people in the Pentagon who are wargaming such scenarios. If history is any guide they will downplay the reactions and capabilities of their opponent. They might even be able to lure a president into signing off such a mission.

In the big picture though that would not change much. China would hit back against badly defended U.S. cyber targets. The skirmish would continue for several month but would end in a no-winner situation. After that it would be back to a cold war. The strategic situation would still be the same.

The U.S. can not win against China. How long will it take for it to recognize that?

Posted by b on June 10, 2021 at 17:52 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page

Haha ~ so true... Biden is Trump on steroids, meaning the same bs but slathered in "professionalism" aka Neoliberal pointy heads from Rand and other MIC cheerleaders who gave us the American War, as it is called here in Vietnam...

Posted by: Eddie D | Jun 11 2021 15:49 utc | 101

Bruised Northerner | Jun 11 2021 15:48 utc | 100 quote "I still think Canadian society struggles with Sinophobia for that reason (among others, I'm sure)." growing up in vancouver, i certainly don't see it as you do.. all the sinophobia is a more recent phenom thanks the media, especially from goofus trump and the china virus - forward.. the chinese built the national railway and have been in canada much longer then the hong kong arrivals in the 90's who were allowed to buy canadian citizenship with 250,000 investment - at least here in b.c. and they are a different type then the 3rd or 4th generation chinese that traditionally lived in vancouver and other large canuck cities... the chinese canucks are great canadians for the most part! so, lets just agree to disagree! cheers..

Posted by: james | Jun 11 2021 15:57 utc | 102

@CarlD #97

Yes, and we have the specter of Kim Jong-un apparently rapidly losing weight following an attempt on his life using some kind of biological weapon allegedly involving the CIA and South Korean intelligence.

A suspicious person might consider the possibility that a decision has been made that attacking leaders or population of a nuclear-armed or near-nuclear-armed competitor or adversary such as Russia, China, North Korea or Iran with biological means is acceptable.

Posted by: Billb | Jun 11 2021 16:05 utc | 103

did the usa, or its public have a problem with knocking off solemaini? when you are living in a country run by a crime syndicate, it is tricky to get outside of it..

Posted by: james | Jun 11 2021 16:13 utc | 104

@Lucci 86

That is a very important point. I don't think people realize how, in sacrificing their sovereignty (although understandable after being subjected to such horrible violence), Japan and So. Korea were blessed with incredible development but now both countries are in great crisis internally. Many in Japan would be happy to tear up the non-violence amendment of their constitution and create an offensive-capable military to better protect the country against China.
It is pretty amazing that the current poor relations between Japan and So. Korea are due to unresolved issues from WWII. Some news related to that is the dismissal of a case over forced labor by Japanese companies in Korea. This happened four days ago, and is thought that it will help ease tensions between the countries.
South Korean court dismisses wartime labor case against 16 Japan firms

Posted by: Eddie D | Jun 11 2021 16:18 utc | 105

"The U.S. lost the competition when it, in the early 1990s, declared itself to be the sole superpower. It lost when it pushed for globalization and free trade. It lost when it let its finance, insurance and real estate sectors of its economy run amok in 2000, in 2007 (and again now). It lost when I broke its promise not to expand NATO to Russia's border. It lost when it decided to a wage a war of terror in the Middle East."

Suggested: The U.S. lost the competition in the early 1990s when it declared itself to be the sole superpower. It lost when it pushed for globalization and free trade. It lost in 2000, in 2007 (and again now) when it let its finance, insurance and real estate sectors of its economy run amok. It lost when it broke its promise not to expand NATO to Russia's border. It lost when it decided to a wage a war of terror in the Middle East.

"The U.S. became the primer power after World War II because the industrial capacities of all other powers had been destroyed by the war. To regain such a position the U.S. would have to engineer a war that would destruct China's industrial capabilities. A civil war within China could achieve that. But the color-revolution the U.S. incited in China in 1989 has failed and any new attempt to incite some strife will now be much more difficult. An external war waged on China is even more difficult because China is a nuclear power which can shot back."

Suggested: The U.S. became the primary power after World War II because the industrial capacities of all other powers had been destroyed by the war. To regain such a position the U.S. would have to engineer a war that would destroy China's industrial capabilities. A civil war within China could achieve that. But the color-revolution the U.S. incited in China in 1989 has failed and any new attempt to incite some strife will now be much more difficult. An external war waged on China is even more difficult because China is a nuclear power which can shot back.

"What the U.S. could do is not to attempt to out compete China. I could instead try to make it instrumental for its purposes."

Suggested: What the U.S. could do is not to attempt to out compete China. America could instead try to make itself instrumental for China's purposes.

"Cyber warfare is a field in which the U.S. has already invested a lot. If its uses those capabilities, unacknowledged and in a destructive way, China's industries could be seriously harmed. The effects of random electricity failures, burning refineries and unreliable communication networks would accumulate to a slow down of China's growth. Ransomware like attacks on the Chinese banking system could leave its markets in chaos."


Suggested: Cyber warfare is a field in which the U.S. has already invested a lot. If it uses those capabilities, unacknowledged and in a destructive way, China's industries could be seriously harmed. The cumulative effects of random electrical failures, burning refineries and unreliable communication networks would slow China's growth. Ransomware like attacks on the Chinese banking system could leave its markets in chaos."

Posted by: Hermit | Jun 11 2021 16:33 utc | 106

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Jun 11 2021 15:41 utc | 98

""uncontrolled re entry" of the Long March rocket. Breaking news: all rocket debris re entry is "uncontrolled ". If it's controlled, it's not a rocket, it's a missile. And the debris fell harmlessly into the Indian Ocean "

China successfully tests parachutes for safe rocket debris landing

Posted by: arby | Jun 11 2021 16:38 utc | 107

@ 102

I lived in Vancouver for about 15 years and I don't disagree at all. Those were different waves of immigration. I was speaking about the wave of immigration in the 90's exclusively (and I agree, that I didn't experience Sinophobia in Vancouver, except for a resentment of wealthy Asian money purchasing large amounts of Vancouver real estate.) I've seen no pick-up of the Trump 'China virus' narrative at all.

Posted by: Bruised Notherner | Jun 11 2021 17:17 utc | 108

@ Bruised Notherner.. thanks.. actually there has been a pick up of hostility towards chinese the past year and more - unfortunately it shows in the stats..

Posted by: james | Jun 11 2021 17:25 utc | 109

Hermit @Jun11 16:33 #106

Massaging an incorrect narrative doesn't make it more correct.

USA hasn't/wasn't competing with China.

See my comment @Jun10 19:17 #8 for more.

<> <> <> <>

Furthermore, b presents a false choice based the poor historical analogy of British-US relations. Is the only choice between a USA/Empire that is "instrumental" to China or USA-China conflict? No!

Putin has offered Russia as mediator between USA and China. That would make Russia a guarantor of peace. Neither USA or China can prevail without a hugely destructive war and neither will accept a secondary role. But Russian support for either can tip the balance making Russia a perfect mediator.

Why is this Russian offer not seriously considered? Western parasites want to continue to pursue every avenue for achieving their dream of global domination AND intend to retain their cherished perks and prerogatives for as long as possible.

So the world continues to waste trillions of dollars on goofball military adventures and spy games.

Enjoy the show.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 11 2021 18:02 utc | 110

did the usa, or its public have a problem with knocking off solemaini? when you are living in a country run by a crime syndicate, it is tricky to get outside of it..

Posted by: james | Jun 11 2021 16:13 utc | 104

Hmmmm...
This, among many reasons, is why I find it hard to understand V.V.Putins meeting in Switzerland. What an amazing opportunity to kill one of the greatest blocks to "global domination" while making it look like a "terrorist" event ? Oh dear, Vova is dead, but it can't be us (pun intended) because our beloved peace seeking Prezz is dead too ! It's them effing Palistanis :!

Bla, bla, rinse and repeat !

Posted by: Sarlat La Canède | Jun 11 2021 21:22 utc | 111

@ Sarlat La Canède | Jun 11 2021 21:22 utc | 111... i am kinda on the fence about this... i just don't think the west would be stupid to do it, but i have underestimated their stupidity in the past, so - who nose.. the shit would hit the fan right quick if this was to happen.. that might be to the wests advantage as they are losing any advantage as time moves forward..

Posted by: james | Jun 11 2021 21:54 utc | 112

stupid enough... missing 'enough'...

Posted by: james | Jun 11 2021 21:55 utc | 113

@Hermit #106

Well quite, but these infelicities of style are the only proof we have that the piece was actually written by b. We can surely forgive him and let them pass. They are the idiosyncrasies of his posts and correcting his English misses the point. If only I could write in German half as well...

Posted by: Patroklos | Jun 11 2021 22:06 utc | 114

Maybe I'm seeing things but it appears that a lot of folks fear not being number one. My interpretation of the "real new world order" is that there will be no number one. China and Russia seem to only want to be treated and respected as humans and equals.
The USA will be fine if it joins that club with honesty.
I also doubt that that will come without a huge takedown.

Posted by: arby | Jun 11 2021 22:16 utc | 115

George W Oprisko #23

Thank you, that is exactly what is emerging in SE Asia. Plus China competes with the USA for food goods produced in SA Asia and that sets a floor price higher than the US wants to pay. The profit level of US trading corporations is being drained to the benefit of local producers and China. That is not without problems but it is certainly painful to the thieving USAi empire.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Jun 11 2021 22:38 utc | 116

Piotr Berman #99

On German elections and the Greens submergence: Alexander Mercouris has a word or two here. Fake Greens get colonised then become transparently fake - traditional parties maintain their grip. And that is the same process in most countries.

Odd how all those opinion polls were so completely WRONG!!!! Alexander explains how these polls are played and cites France as a decades old example of BS polling and poll gaming.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Jun 11 2021 22:45 utc | 117

@ Posted by: uncle tungsten | Jun 11 2021 22:38 utc | 116

Food is not a problem for humanity nowadays. If distributed correctly, we could feed everybody right now and there would still be excess food. It's much less a problem for the USA, who has the most privileged weather and amount of extremely fertile land in the world.

Again, these are one of the rationalizations we do when we take Geopolitics too seriously. If we sleepwalk into this, we will be advocating for Neomalthusianism soon without even realizing it.

Posted by: vk | Jun 11 2021 23:09 utc | 118

Fundamentally, the Chinese have a vision for the betterment of the nation state. Things like this used to be called "industrial policy" regardless what one may think about it. The United States sort of has an industrial policy. But the policy works around furthering the interests of governing elites. US industrial policy has nothing to do with the betterment of the nation. I doubt if a bunch of greedy CEOs and incompetent politicians will out compete the full force of the Chinese nation. Just as the covid was going full throttle in China, there appeared articles that democracies would handle the pandemic much better than authoritarian regimes like China. Give American high tech $250 billion to win "innovation" while those getting the money spent the last two decades using things like stock buyouts to enrich themselves instead of innovating witness that Intel can no longer build advanced node chips.

Posted by: Erelis |

Posted by: Erelis | Jun 12 2021 0:22 utc | 119

Posted by: Leftraru | Jun 10 2021 22:03 utc | 27

who wrote:"...Actually, this started in the beginning of the 20th century when Britain had to face the German and Russian threats, they just accomodate to the rising USA. At that point, the USA already had a larger manufacturing base and the Brits excluded the US from their Two-Power standard which required Britain to have an equal number of battleships to those of the next two largest competitors combined. Also, they were forced to make concessions in the Western Hemisphere to avoid a devastating war against the US." 


I think you are referring to the 5 -5 - 3 agreement. This meant that for every five ships Britain and America built Japan could build three.

Harvard educated, Admiral Yamamoto, represented Japan at the post WW1 London Naval Conference but was privately pleased aircraft carriers were excluded while battleships were the focus. Yamamoto considered aircraft carriers to be 'the most offensive' naval asset and 'the most effective of armaments.' Japan later withdrew from the agreement and began a naval shipbuilding frenzy. 

Posted by: Paul | Jun 12 2021 0:55 utc | 120

rjb1.5 all

Thank you, loving all that you say. Laughter at the deep cynical turns of phrase.

I will shout you a long drink at the bar of excommunicated souls.

Stay with us a while :))

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Jun 12 2021 1:08 utc | 121

ZH quotes below provide a glimpse into how China is responding top pressure from Biden's Bozos

"
There should be little doubt that the timing is intentional: China on Thursday passed its sweeping new law to 'safeguard' Chinese businesses and entities from Western and especially US sanctions, just hours ahead of President Joe Biden sitting down with G-7 leaders in Cornwall to argue for a common stance on curtailing China's influence. AFP observes: "China's quick rollout of a law against foreign sanctions has left European and American companies shocked and facing 'irreconcilable' compliance issues, two top business groups said Friday, despite Beijing saying the move would unlikely impact investment."

The Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law, as we described earlier, is designed shield Chinese entities and institutions from "the unilateral and discriminatory measures imposed by foreign countries" and ultimately the "long arm jurisdiction" of the United States.

It effectively enables the Chinese government to sanction all who comply with US/EU sanctions by drawing a bright red line, forcing entities to choose whether to comply to Washington's side or Beijing's side. Upon its introduction early this week in the National People's Congress there were few details given, other than vowing that "if Chinese entities are hit with unjustified sanctions, the proposed law is supposed to crystallize actionable countermeasures against the foreign governments and institutions…expecting the legal effort to make up for losses that Chinese entities would suffer."

With the law's passage, details have been revealed as follows:

Countermeasures in the Chinese law include "refusal to issue visas, denial of entry, deportation... and sealing, seizing, and freezing property of individuals or businesses that adhere to foreign sanctions against Chinese businesses or officials," according to the text published by the standing committee of the National People's Congress, China's top legislature.

Thus it "answers" current US tactics in a serious escalation: whereas Washington currently often seeks to punish third party entities or countries for direct or even indirect dealings with a sanctioned regime (the cases of Venezuela and Iran are clear examples, or even European companies which worked on the Russia-to-Germany Nord Stream 2 pipeline), Beijing has now given itself the 'legal authority' to do the same.

The foreign ministry announced upon the law's passage: "The law aims to firmly safeguard the sovereign dignity and core interests of the country and oppose Western hegemony and power politics," according to state media. And a Global Times op-ed asserted: "It will act as a powerful deterrent against countries imposing sanctions," and further: "We will not hesitate to fight back against forces that arrogantly challenge us and will continue to enrich our legal toolbox."
"
How will the G7 respond?

The shit show continues until it doesn't

Posted by: psychohistorian | Jun 12 2021 1:57 utc | 122

@ ph #122
Thanks for that. The "rules-based international order" now has another powerful country establishing the rules. China didn't advocate it, didn't support it, but now . .hey, if they can do it so must we.
some recent history --
Secretary Blinken:
... Our administration is committed to leading with diplomacy to advance the interests of the United States and to strengthen the rules-based international order. That system is not an abstraction. It helps countries resolve differences peacefully, coordinate multilateral efforts effectively, and participate in global commerce with the assurance that everyone is following the same rules.
China responds:
What China and the international community follow or uphold is the United Nations-centered international system and the international order underpinned by international law, not what is advocated by a small number of countries of the so-called “rules-based” international order.
The UN has a position on that. . .
According to the United Nations, US sanctions are unilateral coercive measures that violate international laws. The UN Charter – which the US was itself instrumental in writing – clearly states only those sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council can be considered legal. Sanctions imposed by one country on another are not legal.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Jun 12 2021 2:17 utc | 123

Below is another ZH posting quote and while not about China directly it is about sanctions and how countries are countering them....Cuba is the example

"
On Thursday the state-run Central Bank of Cuba (BCC) announced that it's suspending all deposits in US dollars due to what it called America's "economic blockade" of the country's banking system.

"Given the obstacles imposed by the US economic blockade for the Cuban banking system to depositing abroad cash in US dollars collected in the country, the decision has been made to temporarily stop the acceptance of bills in that currency by the Cuban banking and finance system," national media cited the bank as saying.

The decision will go into effect starting June 21, and for now it appears indefinite with no end date for the restrictive measures being issued.

Continued US punitive measures which have greatly weakened the Cuban peso created distortions between public and black market rates of late, a disparity which has hit state employees who are paid out in the national currency the hardest.

"This comes as the U.S. dollar in Cuba’s black market has soared in recent months to about 70 Cuban pesos, about triple the official exchange rate of 24 pesos," The Miami Herald reports.

"The Cuban peso weakened significantly against the dollar after the island eliminated a confusing dual-currency system that maintained one currency valued at parity to the dollar and another much weaker currency," the report added.

Central Bank Vice President Yamile Berra Cires further cited as part of the rationale for the drastic move that some two dozen banks had halted business with the island in the wake of the prior Trump administration's tightened US sanctions. She said the move is necessary to protect the local financial system.
"

@ Don bacon with the UN sanction context...thanks....this is just another example

Posted by: psychohistorian | Jun 12 2021 2:21 utc | 124

denk #79

Thank you for that link to Voltaire net and the 2013 report by Robert S Rodvik.

That is a great reminder of USAi - the true perpetrator of evil that stalks this world.

So I took a search for more of that writers outputs and found this gem from 2003.

Here is Rodvik's introductory reference:

"A careful examination of U.S. foreign policy history reveals over 400 overt military interventions and over 6,000 covert interventions into at least 100 countries, killing millions of innocents. The first recorded use of U.S. Armed Forces abroad occurred in 1798 when the Marines were dispatched to Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic. Eighty-five interventions later, the U.S. Armed Forces invaded the Hawaiian Islands in 1889 to protect U.S. "interests" in the coastal city of Honolulu. Several hundred more interventions occurred between 1890 and the present. The Marines have been practicing and refining their destabilizing intervention techniques into coastal cities for 200 years. Virtually all of these interventions have violated international laws."
- (Who are the REAL Terrorists? - S. Brian Willson, 1999)

And then Rodvik begins:- "Once again the world has been force-fed the indigestible. With the "weapons of mass destruction" charade exposed like the bare bones on an X-ray film the Armageddon gang running the White House reverted to that pathetically over-used justification: "liberation"; as in, liberate the people from the despotic dictator - never mind that Saddam the Cruel was installed by the ruling gang of thugs whose progeny are now in charge of snuff teams trying to eliminate their Frankenstein monster."

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Jun 12 2021 3:18 utc | 125

Unfortunately for America, China is simply too big to be contained at this point. Americans still keep medicating themselves with claims of being economic power number one, but that’s just silly. By every tangible measurement - from steel output to car sales to construction - the USA is simply is a far smaller player. Because of the ridiculous overvaluation of USD - which only leads to its continuing deindustrialization - it can appear as the biggest economy, but in reality it’s a dead entity. Status quo which Biden is determined to preserve is getting more and more lethal in its overall impact on American life (with escalating money printing only keeping the final body decomposition temporarily contained). Necessary radical change appears impossible, as it entails admission of complete national bankruptcy and total collapse. And so the United States is backed into a corner from which there is no escape.
The final endowment is already preordained and will be catastrophic. It starts next year, once the fiscal sugar high is gone for good.

Posted by: Venom | Jun 12 2021 3:21 utc | 126

b, please substitute “endowment “ for “reckoning “, thank you.

Posted by: Venom | Jun 12 2021 3:33 utc | 127

vk #118

Food is not a problem for humanity nowadays. If distributed correctly, we could feed everybody right now and there would still be excess food. It's much less a problem for the USA, who has the most privileged weather and amount of extremely fertile land in the world.

Again, these are one of the rationalizations we do when we take Geopolitics too seriously. If we sleepwalk into this, we will be advocating for Neomalthusianism soon without even realizing it.

Food and food price is a problem for the USAi as it is for any nation with a declining distribution of wealth. Nothing gets a revolution going faster than hunger, poverty and anger. Drought is gripping the USA again and only a few years after the the last.

You are free not to take rationalisations and geopolitics too seriously, but that is not my perspective.

Clearly the Asian nations including Iran, Syria, Iraq and many others - Cuba, Venezuela etc., are not sleepwalking into anything: they know the enemy and they know its ways. The five eyes gang are totally blind to their craven errors and their incapacity to take geopolitics into account at all.

Barflies might consider Robert S Rodvik again. This time looking at the underlying ideology of geopolitical malfeasance.

Who gave NATO the right to rule the world? This author elucidates how the Western elite, many of whom were Hitler supporters, rescued a vast number of Nazi hierarchy and placed them in positions to continue the many decades long fight against Russia. The One Percent of the time and the One Percent of today have sent millions to their deaths in formulating and enacting Winston Churchill’s 1918 pledge to “strangle at its birth” the Bolshevik menace. Total control of the so-called mainstream media has furthered that odious task.

Many writers have documented how British and American elites bankrolled Hitler’s rise to power and not until he turned his forces westward did they begin to mount defensive actions against the Third Reich. In Britain, elite members of The Right Club, often with government collusion, secretly supported Hitler’s actions against the Jews and against communists and socialists. The Duke of Wellington was a noted anti-semite and a member of the Right Club. Edward the VIII, known as “the Traitor King” was close friends with Adolf Hitler and was forced to give up his throne, not because of Wallis Simpson, but because it was discovered that he was passing British war operations documents to the Nazis. The aristocracy, after all, have never submitted to sharing the wealth with the lesser classes and Adolf was equally amenable to those ends, the destruction of the untermenschen being foremost in Plan A of his conquest strategy for Europe and Russia.

Ukraine is the latest example of the error of trying to rationalise away the nazi assault on freedom. Belarus is fully aware that ignoring geopolitics and rationalising is a ridiculous and unhealthy pursuit.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Jun 12 2021 3:44 utc | 128

Trump managed to successfully sell himself as "tough on China" while doing noting to advance America's economic or political interests against them. Biden is trying a different approach, but cannot afford politically to be seen as "soft on China".

Posted by: Malchik Ralf | Jun 12 2021 8:44 utc | 129

Biden is a suitable representative for the current state of the USA. I was just having a huge laugh at the banter going on at Usefull Idiots with Katie Halper and Matt Taibbi and this great line (among many in this broadcast) came from Matt in regard to Biden: "if he is wearing pants for the event, he has already done well".

See it here in their conversation re Biden speaking at a ceremony honoring the dead from the Tulsa riot.

Now that is a good line and underscores the immense contribution to wit that has emerged from Hunter S Thompson and George Carlin.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Jun 12 2021 9:53 utc | 130

Of course, the growing confrontation is not able ideals but interests. Communist China was allied with the West for much of the Cold War. All wars about power. That is the pattern of history. Unfortunately empires delude themselves, convinced the sun will never set – but it does – as certain as night follows day.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/

Posted by: peter mcloughlin | Jun 12 2021 10:30 utc | 131

Main Headline currently at Politico:
"Biden flourishes in Trump’s absence from the world stage"

"All Hail to the Return of The Status Quo"
- there, fixed it for you, Politico

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/12/trump-biden-reception-493606

This sappy line from the article made me think of "lemon drops, blue birds and red roses too":


French President Emmanuel Macron, who had never met Biden before, put his arm around him and the two walked arm and arm. They engaged in a brief but animated conversation that included talking about ways to make democracies more effective for the middle class, one of Biden’s favorite topics.

Also, you might find this noteworthy...or not...:


“Being able to meet Joe Biden is obviously important because he stands for the commitment to multilateralism, which we were missing in recent years.” said German Chancellor Angela Merkel, one of Trump’s favorite targets, just after she arrived at the summit Friday.


Posted by: librul | Jun 12 2021 12:20 utc | 132

@ librul 132
Merkel: "Joe Biden is obviously important because he stands for the commitment to multilateralism"
Merkel means the deal between Germany and Russia, an obviously important commitment which Biden is now permitting.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Jun 12 2021 13:19 utc | 133

The British empire won the World Wars but lost overall because of US economic policy after both wars. They were offered a choice: be the US' toy or be an independent nation.
We all know which path they chose.
The American deep state clearly believes the same will happen to this country if they "lose".
As for cyber attacks: China is a much more difficult target than American industries.
For one thing: while China is much more advanced in automation in manufacturing - at the same time they have much higher presence of people at key junctures than comparable American institutions.
The Great Firewall of China is another major factor.
The US intel agencies and military have enormous advantages due to their platform access, but the US overall is such an underinvested, old, fragmented and disorganized mess that an American cyber attack would - as they say - not mean what the aggressors think it means.

Posted by: c1ue | Jun 12 2021 14:16 utc | 134

Remember me again, which are the five stages of grief?

Will China save the U.S. from inflation fears? by Isabella Weber, The Japan Times

Posted by: vk | Jun 12 2021 15:22 utc | 135

@ Posted by: c1ue | Jun 12 2021 14:16 utc | 134

The Americans played masterfully in the politics of WWII. It never gave anything to its Western allies - it lent - and, after the War was over, it forgave the debt of the nations it needed to (West Germany, Japan) in order to fight the Cold War against the USSR, but not of those it didn't need to (the UK). The UK, after all, still had a lot of property around the globe to liquidate and pay back the loans. This included the outright transference of ports around the British Empire - much of today's American military bases around the world are descendant of the previous British constellation of overseas possessions.

And it worked: in a few years, the British Empire was effectively liquidated in the open market and given on a silver plate to the USA (the French also had to quickly give up its colonial possessions under American pressure for open markets). As far as capitalism goes, this is the closest thing we have of a literal passing of the crown.

Posted by: vk | Jun 12 2021 15:27 utc | 136

Mr. c1ue | Jun 12 2021 14:16 utc | 134

Russians won World War 2.

Posted by: Fyi | Jun 12 2021 16:00 utc | 137

uncle tungsten 125

Some wit called Reagun the 'teflon prez', 'nuthin sticks'.
In that case, we can say the 'rule based' five liars shall be called the 'teflon club', nuthin sticks.

Harold Pinter

It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn't happening. It didn't matter. It was of no interest . The crimes of the U.S. throughout the world have been systematic, constant, clinical, remorseless, and fully documented but nobody talks about them. No body ever has . Of course, it' s probably more than a newspaper or TV channel's life is worth to do so. It must be said, that as the absolute necessity of economic control is at the bottom of all this, any innocent bystander who happens to raise his / her head must be kicked in the teeth. This is entirely logical.

https://thirdworldtraveler.com/Terrorism/Never_happened.html

PS
somebody should do an autopsy on Pinter....you never knows.

RIP


Posted by: denk | Jun 12 2021 17:15 utc | 138

After much discussion the G7 has come up with a way to counter BRI. As we all know, if we read the MSM, the Chinese system is based on ‘forced labor’ in Xinjiang and designed to put poor countries in debt. The details aren’t clear but the G7 plan (B3W) will be ‘value-driven and ‘transparent’.

One would have thought a good start would be forgiving IMF debt.

Posted by: dh | Jun 12 2021 18:02 utc | 139

@Eddie D #101

So that is Biden's problem: Steroid Dementia Syndrome?!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steroid_dementia_syndrome

Posted by: William Haught | Jun 12 2021 18:37 utc | 140

Posted by: denk | Jun 12 2021 17:15 utc | 138

", any innocent bystander who happens to raise his / her head must be kicked in the teeth. "

Assange is an example.

Posted by: arby | Jun 12 2021 21:10 utc | 141

arby 141

With uncle sham,YOu dont have to stick your neck out, one can get clobbered just the same, by simply minding their own biz.

THREAT OF A GOOD EXAMPLE..

No country is exempt from U.S. intervention, no matter how unimportant. In fact, it's the weakest, poorest countries that often arouse the greatest hysteria.

https://thirdworldtraveler.com/Chomsky/ChomOdon_Example.html

Posted by: denk | Jun 13 2021 2:40 utc | 142

These western "democratic" leaders all have approval ratings in the 10-40% range.

Beacon of democracy, Macron, is almost universally hated in France.

Communist Party of China, on the other hand, has very high approval. Why? Because they improve the standard of living of their people, instead of trying to impose austerity on them like the west does. Evil undemocratic dictator Putin also has higher approval than all western leaders.

Posted by: Hun | Jun 16 2021 0:53 utc | 143

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.