{"id":237671,"date":"2016-04-13T15:05:53","date_gmt":"2016-04-13T15:05:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/?p=237671"},"modified":"2016-04-13T21:47:52","modified_gmt":"2016-04-13T21:47:52","slug":"america-now-preparing-world-war-iii","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/breaking-news\/america-now-preparing-world-war-iii\/","title":{"rendered":"America Now Preparing for World War III"},"content":{"rendered":"

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

Because this article states so many things that might be likely to contradict what most people in Western countries have been led to believe, readers here are especially strongly encouraged to click onto any allegation which seems at all questionable, in order to get to the sources behind any given questionable allegation. And wherever a clicked-onto source turns out to be another article, one is encouraged similarly to do the same there, so that the reader will be able, in this way, to probe down to the ultimate sources, which are the sources upon which this article is finally based.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

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

After having expanded NATO right up to Russia\u2019s borders and essentially surrounded Russia with U.S. military installations<\/span><\/a>, the United States is now using the pretext of Russia\u2019s having allowed the people of Crimea in 2014 to rejoin Russia (after the Soviet dictator Khrushchev had transferred Crimea from Russia to Ukraine in 1954) as being an excuse<\/span><\/a> for arming and soldiering Russia\u2019s northwestern borders sufficiently to be able to launch as soon as 2017 a ground invasion of Russia<\/span><\/a>, which would then be backed up by U.S. air power and nuclear arms.<\/span><\/p>\n

In the United States and Europe, the promotion for this action presents the plan as purely defensive against \u2018Russian aggression\u2019, for Russia\u2019s having \u2018seized\u2019 Crimea in 2014<\/span><\/a>. Promptly, U.S. President Barack Obama slapped economic sanctions against Russia for Russia\u2019s accepting Crimea back into Russia. It was actually hardly a \u2018seizure\u2019; it was a protection of the residents there, 75% of whom had voted for the man who had recently been overthrown<\/span><\/a> in a violent coup (which was presented in the West as being a \u2018democratic revolution\u2019)<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

However, the U.S. had virtually forced Russia to accept the pleas of the residents of Crimea to become again a part of Russia, after the anti-Russian coup in Ukraine \u2014 which the head of Stratfor has called \u201cthe most blatant coup in history\u201d<\/span><\/a> \u2014 after that coup had terrified the residents of Crimea<\/span><\/a>, whom even Western-backed polling of Crimeans had shown wanted to rejoin with Russia, even before the U.S. took control of Ukraine in its very bloody coup<\/span><\/a>. (Ever since that coup, there has been no action condemned by the U.S. White House, on the part of the thus-installed anti-Russian Ukrainian government. Now, instead, the condemnations of the Ukrainian government are coming from Moscow, against Russia\u2019s now having such a rabidly anti-Russian-led nation along Russia\u2019s longest European or western border<\/span><\/a>. It\u2019s as if Canada were being led now by anti-American bigots who had been installed by the world\u2019s superpower in a world in which the U.S. were only the #2 power. The U.S. would then be extremely disturbed at that type of situation; and, so, too, are naturally Russians.) <\/span><\/p>\n

The anti-Russian Cato Institute calls Russia \u201ca defensive, paranoid, nuclear power.\u201d<\/span><\/a> Cato doesn\u2019t call the U.S. by a phrase that actually fits the U.S. but certainly not<\/i> post-Soviet Russia: \u201cthe greatest threat to peace in the world today.\u201d<\/span><\/a> That\u2019s because America\u2019s aristocracy want the American people and the people in the nations controlled by their allied aristocracies to view Russia as being \u201ca defensive, paranoid, nuclear power,\u201d instead of<\/i> as being an intensely threatened nation<\/i> \u2014 threatened by the U.S., the nation that is actually generally viewed as being, by far<\/span><\/a>, \u201cthe greatest threat to peace in the world today.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

The U.S. has expressed full support for Ukraine to become a part of NATO, but some other member-nations of NATO haven\u2019t yet allowed that to happen.<\/span><\/p>\n

The United States government, via its USAID, and NATO, and Atlantic Council, and Brookings Institution<\/span><\/a>, and American Enterprise Institute, and Open Societies Foundations, and Cato Institute, and all of the other foreign-affairs \u2018charities\u2019 run by the U.S. aristocracy, is promoting this preparation for WW III, by repeating the U.S. White House\u2019s line, that the coup in Ukraine was no coup but just a \u2018democratic\u2019 overthrow of the democratically elected President of Ukraine (Viktor Yanukovych), done in order to eliminate a corrupt (but democratically elected \u2014 his having been democratically elected is not<\/i> being disputed) President, but conveniently ignoring that all<\/i> Presidents of post-Soviet Ukraine have been<\/i> corrupt, and none of them would even have been able to win that office in any other way. Furthermore, the U.S.-installed regime there is yet more corrupt than was the one the U.S. overthrew. Yet, still, the U.S. isn\u2019t condemning its new client-state. \u2018Corruption\u2019 was an excuse for the coup, not the actual cause of any \u2018Maidan Revolution\u2019<\/span><\/a> \u2014 and now the residents even within the formerly pro-overthrow portion of Ukraine regret the overthrow<\/span><\/a>. (And how<\/span><\/a>!) (And, for Gallup, there, to compare the favorability rating of the post-coup President, Poroshenko, who rules a country which no longer includes Donbass, which had voted 90% for the man whom Obama overthrew, and also no longer includes Crimea, which had voted 75% for the man whom Obama overthrew<\/span><\/a>, isn\u2019t at all fair \u2014 even though Gallup still did<\/i> find that Yanukovych\u2019s approval-rating \u201cwas never as low as Poroshenko\u2019s is now.\u201d<\/span><\/a> Poroshenko was bombing Donbass, which is the dark purple part of that map<\/span><\/a>, and he still wants to go to war against Crimea; so, his approval rating in those two former<\/i> parts of Ukraine, would be about zero \u2014 which would lower his approval in all of the former parts of Ukraine, even lower than it showed in Gallup\u2019s recent poll.)<\/span><\/p>\n

You can see here<\/span><\/a> and here<\/span><\/a> what the Obama regime was actually sponsoring in Donbass: the bombing of the cities and villages there, while labeling all of the residents there as \u2018terrorists\u2019 and this bombing campaign against them as an \u2018Anti Terrorist Operation\u2019 or \u2018ATO\u2019. And here<\/span><\/a> are the international laws that the Obama-imposed Ukrainian regime was violating. The goal of this bombing was to kill as many of the residents as possible and drive the rest into Russia as refugees, so as to clear Donbass for gas-drilling by U.S.-backed companies \u2014 and maybe set up U.S. nuclear missiles there, also. The plan didn\u2019t succeed, though it did produce lots of corpses and refugees.<\/span><\/p>\n

U.S. President Barack Obama is a brilliant person, who has thus been able to fool not only many of his fellow-Americans, but solid majorities also in the allied nations that the U.S. largely controls, to believe his lie, that the aggression is in Moscow, not<\/i> in Washington. But fooling people to believe a lie doesn\u2019t make a lie any the more true \u2014 it didn\u2019t do that with George W. Bush\u2019s ‘Saddam\u2019s WMD\u2019<\/span><\/a> lie; and it doesn\u2019t do it with \u2019the democratic revolution in Ukraine\u2019 lie (where democracy had actually ended<\/i> with America\u2019s coup there).<\/span><\/p>\n

On February 6th, I reported<\/span><\/a>:<\/span><\/p>\n

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg\u00a0<\/i>announced on February 2nd<\/i><\/span><\/a>\u00a0that he approves of U.S. \u2018Defense\u2019 Secretary Ash Carter\u2019s proposal to quadruple U.S. armaments and troops in Europe, against \u2018Russian aggression.\u2019<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

Secretary Carter\u00a0<\/i>said earlier that same day, in his announcement of America\u2019s arming for war against Russia<\/i><\/span><\/a><\/span>:<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

“We are reinforcing our posture in Europe to support our NATO allies in the face of Russia’s aggression. In Pentagon parlance, this is called the European Reassurance Initiative and after requesting\u00a0about $800 million for last year, this year we’re more than quadrupling it for a total of $3.4 billion in 2017.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

“That will fund a lot of things: more rotational U.S. forces in Europe, more training and exercising with our allies, more preposition and war-fighting gear and infrastructure improvements to support all\u00a0this.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

“And when combined with U.S. forces already in and assigned to Europe \u2014 which are also substantial \u2014 all of this together by the end of 2017 will let us rapidly form a highly capable combined arms\u00a0ground force that can respond across that theater, if necessary.”\u00a0<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

However, the truth is: Russia is not expanding to NATO\u2019s borders; NATO is expanding to Russia\u2019s borders. The baldness of the Western lie to the contrary is an insult to Westerners\u2019 intelligence.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

The U.S. is preparing for an invasion of Russia.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

However, it turned out that that wasn\u2019t an insult to the intelligence of a certain reader at\u00a0a different site, where an article I had written about the news-media\u2019s failures to report these realities, was posted, and at which<\/span><\/a>\u00a0a \u201cfuster\u201d responded by saying that “most likely reason why other media wont carry the story is…because the story is false and shoddy.\u201d He then insulted me personally, and alleged that I “was predicting that the US was gonna nuke the Russians over the Ukraine.\u201d \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

However, (beside the fact that that reader had apparently not clicked onto the links in the article, which documented the truth of what it was alleging), for me to have said that \u201cThe U.S. is preparing for an invasion of Russia\u201d is not at all for me to have said that \u201cthe US was gonna nuke the Russians over the Ukraine.\u201d There is an important distinction between those two statements, and I shall highlight it here, so that readers can more accurately understand what U.S. policy is, on this very important matter:<\/span><\/p>\n

For the U.S. to prepare for an invasion of Russia, is not necessarily for the U.S. \u201cto nuke the Russians.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

A good example of this distinction is that, when the Soviet dictator, Nikita Khrushchev, tried to place nuclear missiles 90 miles from the U.S. in Cuba in 1962, that could have been seen by him as being a defensive measure against a possible nuclear attack against his USSR, as Khrushchev alleged it to be, but the U.S. President, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, took it, and with good reason, to be instead an aggressive move against the United States \u2014 and he was willing to launch a nuclear attack against the USSR if Khrushchev didn\u2019t withdraw those missile facilities (which hadn\u2019t yet been supplied with missiles). The entire world (except for Fidel Castro, who had\u00a0requested the missiles in order to be able to prevent another Bay of Pigs invasion<\/span><\/a>) agreed with JFK on that; and, on the very same grounds (but even more so) the entire world ought now to support Russia when a succession of U.S. Presidents have expanded NATO right up to the very borders of Russia, and now plan to place thousands of U.S. soldiers and U.S. attack-planes and state-of-the-art tanks, right onto Russia\u2019s borders. This is a no-no, if anything<\/i> is.<\/span><\/p>\n

Russia isn\u2019t being faced here with merely one locale, 90 miles off the U.S. coast, but instead with numerous locales, right on Russia\u2019s very borders, which might soon be bristling with U.S. nuclear missiles against Russia. And, clearly, America\u2019s having basically false-flagged<\/span><\/a> the entire Ukraine-Crimea matter so as to be able now to position yet more nuclear weapons along Russia\u2019s longest border (which is its border with Ukraine) is intensely aggressive, and would be seen as such by any rational leader of Russia \u2014 and should be seen that way by any rational person, in any<\/i> country.<\/span><\/p>\n

On top of that, Jens Stoltenberg has recently stated that NATO will now be coordinating more closely with the alliance of Arabic nations that are owned by fundamentalist-Sunni royal families: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, and Oman.<\/span><\/a> Those royal families, and their retainers (state-contractors), provided virtually all of the funding to Al Qaeda prior to 9\/11<\/span><\/a>, and (according to their friend Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State in 2009) were continuing to do that (and she was requesting them to stop doing it \u2014 and she also noted that they were the major funders of other anti-American jihadist groups, which she was hoping they\u2019d stop funding)<\/span><\/a>. However, they\u2019re all against Russia; and, so, NATO will be even more actively teaming up with them. (Saudi Arabia also happens to be by far the nation that\u2019s the largest of all purchasers of U.S.-and-EU-manufactured weapons, such as from Lockheed Martin.) <\/span><\/p>\n

The report,\u00a0\u201dRethinking Armageddon: Scenario Planning in the Second Nuclear Age\u201d<\/span><\/a>,\u00a0issued on 13 March 2016 by the U.S. Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA), says (p. 45) that the change of Ukraine, from being allied with Russia, to being allied with the U.S., and the resulting separation and civil war between Ukraine\u2019s speakers of Ukrainian versus Ukraine\u2019s speakers of Russian, has been “Setting the Stage in Eastern Europe\u201d for a number of possibilities to provoke a nuclear conflict between America and Russia, such as over Latvia, where\u00a0the current repressions of Latvia\u2019s ethnic Russian minority<\/span><\/a>\u00a0will produce, gradually over the coming two years, a rising “largely peaceful protest movement for greater political representation and economic opportunity for ethnic Russians in southeastern Latvia [which] turns into a movement that ultimately will lead the United States and Russia to the nuclear brink.\u201d In this \u201cscenario,\u201d Russia\u2019s President Vladimir Putin supports Latvia’s ethnic Russians, tries to help them. Then (p. 51), “Putin is Dragged into a Crisis and Can\u2019t Escape.\u201d\u00a0Latvia\u2019s repression of that minority sets a trap; he gets caught in it.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

This CSBA \u201cscenario\u201d continues: “Fearing that Moscow is attempting to repeat its success in eastern Ukraine and divide his country, the president of Latvia calls for a meeting of\u00a0NATO\u2019s decision-making North Atlantic Council.\u201d Then, “The Latvian president, determined to avoid Ukraine\u2019s fate, orders the National Guard to join the Latvian security forces and regain control of the\u00a0contested border towns.\u201d Then: “The arrival of substantial NATO conventional reinforcements creates an untenable situation for Moscow. The commitment of significant ground\u00a0forces indicates that NATO will not be deterred from directly confronting Russia.” And, as “Putin\u2019s domestic position becomes increasingly untenable, he is forced to consider using tactical nuclear weapons.\u201d The scenario\u2019s indeterminate close (p. 64) is: \u201cIf Putin breaks the nuclear taboo, when, where, and how does it stop?\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

A reader, \u201cteddyfromcd,\u201d at russia-insider.com, on April 13th, who saw this report,\u00a0said, in a reader-comment<\/span><\/a>: \u201cRussians, every single one of them, no matter how remotely Russian, must begin preparations to leave [Latvia] and start transferring assets. \u2026 I am talking real pick-up-and-start-life-again \u2014 it is going to be a painful process, and they will have to sacrifice much of what they have established for generations in the Baltics.\u201d He was thinking that Putin would have to back down in Latvia because, unlike Ukraine, Latvia has already been admitted into and is a member of\u00a0the NATO alliance \u2014 the hair-trigger-organization for World War III<\/span><\/a> against Russia.<\/span><\/p>\n

And that was just one of several \u201cscenarios\u201d the CSBA report presents to U.S. policy-planners, for provoking WW III \u2014 though it ignores that this is actually what they are talking about.<\/span><\/p>\n

Russia is being surrounded. In such circumstances, if Russia strikes first, its enemies are the ones to blame. One can only hope that \u2018the West\u2019 (the U.S. and its stooge-aristocracies) will back down, and finally end its incredibly dangerous attempt to conquer Russia \u2014 before the whole world gets \u2018conquered,\u2019 into nuclear rubble.<\/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 Because this article states so many things that might be likely to contradict what most people in Western countries have been led to believe, readers here are especially strongly encouraged to click onto any allegation which seems at all questionable, in order to get to the sources behind any […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1254,"featured_media":236059,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[487],"tags":[115,96,535,59,524,523,49,76,40,1024],"class_list":{"0":"post-237671","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-cover-up","10":"tag-global-news","11":"tag-military","12":"tag-russia","13":"tag-ukraine","14":"tag-usa-news","15":"tag-warfare","16":"tag-white-house","17":"tag-ww3"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/237671","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1254"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=237671"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/237671\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/236059"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=237671"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=237671"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=237671"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}