{"id":244266,"date":"2016-05-18T00:12:24","date_gmt":"2016-05-18T00:12:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/?p=244266"},"modified":"2016-05-18T00:12:24","modified_gmt":"2016-05-18T00:12:24","slug":"obama-ratchets-invade-russia","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/breaking-news\/obama-ratchets-invade-russia\/","title":{"rendered":"Obama Ratchets-Up to Invade Russia"},"content":{"rendered":"

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

An article published May 7th by Andrei Akulov<\/a><\/span>\u00a0brings together mainly Western news sources, all solid, to make the case that U.S. President Barack Obama is pushing even highly reluctant European populations to join America\u2019s increasingly overt hostile military stance targeting Russia as the world\u2019s chief source of alleged \u201caggression” that must be stopped. One of those sources is a Reuters article that states: “Only 22 percent of Finns support joining NATO, while 55 percent are opposed, a recent poll by public broadcaster YLE\u00a0showed. Finnish membership of NATO would double the length of the border between the alliance and Russia and increase the\u00a0NATO presence in the Baltic Sea.\u201d Yet, still, according to that Reuters article, Finland will probably join NATO, regardless of what the Finnish population want. This is supposedly how \u2018democracy\u2019 functions nowadays.<\/span><\/p>\n

America is installing in Europe a new system that\u2019s designed to block Russia\u2019s ability to retaliate against a nuclear attack, but Obama sold it to European nations saying it will protect them against a nuclear attack from Iran<\/i>. Now that Obama\u2019s own agreement with Iran will assure that, for at least a decade, there won\u2019t be<\/i> any nuclear weapons in Iran, he continues this deception as if the public are mere fools \u2014 and he\u2019s not being called to task for it (except by Russia\u2019s President<\/span><\/a>).<\/span><\/p>\n

In U.S. President Obama\u2019s definitive statement on U.S. military policy, his\u00a0National Security Strategy 2015<\/i><\/span><\/a>, he cited Russia\u00a0on 17 of the 18 occasions where he used the term \u201caggression” or its equivalents<\/span><\/a>. He even played upon the old Cold-War-era anti-communist, and sometimes even anti-Semitic, charges that the Soviet Union characteristically lied, when Obama strung together there a statement about Russia that sounded just the same as such \u201cred-scare\u201d literature, except only using this time the term \u201cRussia,\u201d where American far-rightists back in the 1950s had referred to the USSR or Soviet Union. He said:<\/span><\/p>\n

“And we will continue to impose significant costs on Russia through sanctions and other means while\u00a0countering Moscow\u2019s deceptive\u00a0propaganda with the unvarnished truth. We will deter Russian\u00a0aggression, remain alert to its strategic capabilities, and help our\u00a0allies and partners resist Russian\u00a0coercion\u00a0over the long term, if necessary.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

If that\u2019s not multiply hostile, then what is? It’s certainly not the type of thing one would allege if one is attempting to negotiate with a competitor, instead of to coerce an enemy \u2014 which is by now the second-term Obama Administration\u2019s clear position<\/i>\u00a0regarding Russia. He had simply deceived the American public when he claimed during his re-election campaign to disagree with Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney\u2019s statement about Russia,\u00a0\u201cThis is without question our No. 1 geopolitical foe.\u201d<\/span><\/a>\u00a0His alleged disagreement with Romney about that was one of the reasons Americans re-elected Obama. But then, Obama promptly turned to planning the\u00a0coup against Ukraine<\/span><\/a>, which\u00a0started to be activated on 1 March 2013<\/span><\/a>\u00a0and wasn\u2019t\u00a0completed until 27 February 2014<\/span><\/a>. (And the top officials at the EU were then\u00a0shocked to learn that it had been<\/i> a coup<\/span><\/a>. But nonetheless, they participate in the sanctions against Russia, for, essentially, defending itself against them, and against the U.S.)<\/span><\/p>\n

In the lying-department, Obama \u2014 despite his claiming that he\u2019s \u201ccountering Moscow\u2019s deceptive propaganda with the unvarnished truth\u201d \u2014 vastly beats-out Russia\u2019s leader Vladimir Putin there. As I had previously documented,\u00a0“The Entire Case for Sanctions Against Russia Is Pure Lies\u201d<\/span><\/a>. What that article documents is: before Russia \u2018seized\u2019 Crimea (which until 1954 had been part of Russia, and which had had Russia\u2019s main naval base since 1783, and where the population were overwhelmingly opposed to having been transferred to Ukraine in 1954 by the Soviet dictator Nikita Khrushchev), Obama had violently overthrown the democratically elected President of Ukraine, for whom 75% of Crimeans had voted, and then Obama\u2019s goons started directly\u00a0attacking Crimeans<\/span><\/a>, virtually terrorizing them to flee from the newly installed Kiev government. But as you\u2019ll see in that article exposing the entire case for sanctions against Russia, Obama\u2019s lies about Crimea are even broader than that, and he needs these lies as his \u2018justification\u2019 for what he\u2019s now doing along Russia\u2019s borders: installing U.S. nuclear weapons against Russia.<\/span><\/p>\n

Obama now is going beyond mere \u201csanctions,\u201d to real military preparation for an invasion of Russia. And that\u2019s what Akulov\u2019s frightening, but well-documented, article reports about.<\/span><\/p>\n

On May 12th, Stuart Hooper at 21st Century Wire headlined,\u00a0“New Arms Race Begins: US Launches European Missile Shield in Romania\u201d<\/span><\/a>. So: not only is the U.S. placing nuclear missiles on Russia\u2019s borders, but it\u2019s also placing there anti<\/i>-missile missiles, to destroy outgoing Russian missiles that could be flying in retaliation against America\u2019s attack.<\/span><\/p>\n

And, then, when Russian President Vladimir Putin responds to that type of aggressive move, by his moving Russian forces to Russia\u2019s own borders to deter<\/i> NATO\u2019s aggression, Obama and his propagandists blame Putin for threatening\u00a0\u2018aggression against a NATO member\u2019<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

This bizarreness extends even beyond that, however, to NATO\u2019s mocking Putin for being concerned at all about America\u2019s antimissile system, which is also called \u201cBallistic Missile Defense\u201d or BMD. A NATO Web-posting in October 2015 was headlined, \u201cHow Putin uses missile defence in Europe to distract Russian voters\u201d<\/span><\/a>, and it said:<\/span><\/p>\n

The logic behind one of Russia\u2019s classic grievances against the West \u2013 the deployment of ballistic missile defence (BMD) in Europe \u2013 has remained largely unexplained. \u2026<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

Since the United States officially announced the deployment of BMD in Europe in 2004, Russia has persistently referred to the project, run by NATO, as a demonstration of anti-Russian intent. \u2026<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

Moscow\u2019s confrontational position on missile defence has proven politically expedient for a Russian government that has built its legitimacy on the necessity to defend Russia from external enemies. Now, when Russia is entering <\/i>[due to Obama\u2019s economic sanctions etc.] a full-fledged economic crisis that could affect the political allegiances of the Russian population<\/i> [oh, sure: perhaps turn those \u2018allegiances\u2019 toward America instead?], the Kremlin needs to revive the issue of BMD \u2013 a welcome enemy that contributes to the justification for government survival. \u2026<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

The justification that Russia has to protect itself from the external threat strengthens the need to maintain a strong, centralised government.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

To extend this fantasyland even farther into the bizarre, that presentation went on to allege that the Russian population were simply being deceived by Putin into thinking that America\u2019s anti-missile system would endanger their security:<\/span><\/p>\n

The strategy to portray BMD as a threat to the Russian population seems effective. A survey conducted by the Russian polling organisation Levada centre in 2007 and again in 2010 revealed that the majority of the Russian constituency believed that the US construction of BMD in Europe presents a larger threat to Russia than the acquisition of offensive military capabilities by Iran or North Korea.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

The 2010 Levada poll showed that 55 per cent of the respondents believed that the number one threat to Russian security was the deployment of US BMD in neighbouring states. Only 13 per cent of the respondents stated that Iran\u2019s nuclear programme represented the main threat to Russia and 13 per cent indicated that the main threat was North Korea\u2019s possession of nuclear weapons.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

The 2010 Levada survey could be analysed together with another 2010 Levada poll that confirmed the deeply engrained perception of America\u2019s hostile intentions among Russians. Some 73 per cent of the polled Russians indicated that the United States was an aggressor that sought to establish control over all states. \u2026<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

Reconstructing the image of the United States as a Cold War type aggressor facilitated this perception and justified running again on the basis of the need to protect the Russian people from external enemies.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

Hence, castigating the United States and NATO again became an effective strategy to win votes. \u2026<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

BMD has become a political, rather than military, tool for distraction that helps to convince the Russian population of the need to focus on protecting the Russian state, rather than their economic livelihoods.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

Then, the U.S. National Public Radio network, NPR \u2014 the most trusted news-source by the American public<\/span><\/a> \u2014 served up, on its Morning Edition program, 13 May 2016, a segment, \u201cTo Defend NATO, U.S. Sets Up Missile Defense Systems In Eastern Europe\u201d<\/span><\/a>, which pushed the line that, \u201cThe U.S. is trying to reassure the Russians that the defense systems are not a threat\u201d (so as to fool the U.S. public into thinking that the U.S. government really cares about what the Russian people think, and would be reluctant to turn Russians into nuclear char if it \u2018has to\u2019 do so). This segment closed with NPR\u2019s Moscow correspondent saying, \u201cYou know, most of people I’ve talked to so far say they’re not worried about it, and some \u2026 say that it’s because they trust that President Putin will take whatever steps are needed to make sure that Russia’s safe. A few of the younger people I spoke with though said that they don’t feel any particular danger from NATO and that they don’t believe that NATO is out to start a war.\u201d No mention was made there of the polling, by Levada and others, which showed that the attitudes that NPR\u2019s Moscow propagandist says \u201cthey\u2019re not worried about it,\u201d run overwhelmingly<\/i> in the opposite<\/i> direction. But, after all, isn\u2019t this inevitable: for example, how did the American people feel about Soviet dictator Nikita Khrushchev\u2019s plan to place Soviet missiles in Cuba, 90 miles from America\u2019s border, in 1962? And what Obama-NATO are doing here to Russians is vastly bigger and vastly worse than that. But NPR miraculously reports that Russians are \u201cnot worried about it.\u201d Americans are being fed lies like this all the time \u2014 it\u2019s like \u201cSaddam\u2019s WMD\u201d were in 2002; it\u2019s the lying by government and media, that has become routine in America.<\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s a\u00a01984<\/i><\/span><\/a>-type world, where aggression by one\u2019s own nation doesn\u2019t exist, and where defense by the ultimately targeted nation, against that aggression, is itself called<\/i> \u2018aggression\u2019 (or even attacked as being promoted in order to \u201cstrengthen the need to maintain a strong centralised government\u201d: i.e, as some shading of that deceased ideological ogre, communism) \u2014 and European nations go along with this cockeyed reasoning, in order to participate not only in economic sanctions against that ultimately-targeted nation, but to participate in NATO\u2019s\u00a0Operation Atlantic Resolve<\/span><\/a>, joining in this rabidly lying aggression against Russia, after having already<\/i> participated in the lying economic sanctions against that same target.<\/span><\/p>\n

What does this say about\u00a0today’s United States government<\/span><\/a>? And what does it say about Europe?<\/span><\/p>\n

It says a lot. That\u2019s for sure.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014<\/span><\/p>\n

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of\u00a0 They\u2019re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010<\/i><\/span><\/a>,<\/i> and of<\/span> \u00a0<\/i>CHRIST\u2019S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity<\/i><\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org An article published May 7th by Andrei Akulov\u00a0brings together mainly Western news sources, all solid, to make the case that U.S. President Barack Obama is pushing even highly reluctant European populations to join America\u2019s increasingly overt hostile military stance targeting Russia as the world\u2019s chief source of alleged \u201caggression” […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1254,"featured_media":242113,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[487],"tags":[115,30,535,59,1023,753,524,754,523,49,76,40,1024],"class_list":{"0":"post-244266","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-breaking-news","8":"tag-barack-obama","9":"tag-big-brother","10":"tag-global-news","11":"tag-military","12":"tag-nuclear","13":"tag-police-state","14":"tag-russia","15":"tag-syria","16":"tag-ukraine","17":"tag-usa-news","18":"tag-warfare","19":"tag-white-house","20":"tag-ww3"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/244266","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1254"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=244266"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/244266\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/242113"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=244266"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=244266"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=244266"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}