Unethical Sensationalist Bloggers and YouTubers Capitalize on Russian and Chinese Fears of US Military Attack

by bluesbaby5050 on October 14th, 2014

Unethical Sensationalist Bloggers and YouTubers Capitalize on Russian and Chinese Fears of US Military Attack. "Conspiracy Watch Your Truth Watchdog."

Please, don’t pay any attention to the fear mongering sensationalists posting headlines like; “OFFICIAL WARNING – U S to hit RUSSIA with FIRST STRIKE – PREPARE NOW“ These people are only wanting to scare you for website hits and YouTube views.

Although there is a kernel of truth to these type of headlines, they have been totally taken out of context and blown out of proportion. It all started with an article by Sergey Glazyev, a Russian politician and economist, who recently wrote:

“History shows that the United States has benefited politically and economically from wars in Europe. The huge outflow of capital from Europe following the First and Second World Wars, transformed the U.S. into a superpower … Today, faced with economic decline, the US is trying to precipitate another European war to achieve the same objective.” Naturally, Glazyev’s article spawned responses from countless analysts, including one from the Guardian’s Nafeez Ahmed, who explains what was really going on behind the curtain of the civil uprising facade in Syria. Here’s an excerpt from an article by Ahmed called, “Syria intervention plan fueled by oil interests, not chemical weapon concern”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NePChnsuMNs&feature=player_embedded#t=0

“In May 2007, a presidential finding revealed that Bush had authorised CIA operations against Iran. Anti-Syria operations were also in full swing around this time as part of this covert programme, according to Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker. A range of US government and intelligence sources told him that the Bush administration had “cooperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations” intended to weaken the Shi’ite Hezbollah in Lebanon. “The US has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria,” wrote Hersh, “a byproduct” of which is “the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups” hostile to the United States and “sympathetic to al-Qaeda.” He noted that “the Saudi government, with Washington’s approval, would provide funds and logistical aid to weaken the government of President Bashir Assad, of Syria”…

According to former French foreign minister Roland Dumas, Britain had planned covert action in Syria as early as 2009: “I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business”, he told French television:

“I met with top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria. This was in Britain not in America. Britain was preparing gunmen to invade Syria.”
… Leaked emails from the private intelligence firm Stratfor including notes from a meeting with Pentagon officials confirmed US-UK training of Syrian opposition forces since 2011 aimed at eliciting “collapse” of Assad’s regime “from within.”

So what was this unfolding strategy to undermine Syria and Iran all about? According to retired NATO Secretary General Wesley Clark, a memo from the Office of the US Secretary of Defense just a few weeks after 9/11 revealed plans to “attack and destroy the governments in 7 countries in five years”, starting with Iraq and moving on to “Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.” In a subsequent interview, Clark argues that this strategy is fundamentally about control of the region’s vast oil and gas resources.”
(“Syria intervention plan fueled by oil interests, not chemical weapon concern“, The Guardian)

It appears as if Assad was approached by Qatar on the pipeline issue in 2009, but he refused to cooperate in order “to protect the interests of [his] Russian ally.” If Assad had fallen in line and agreed to Qatar’s proposals, the coupe to oust him probably would have been called off. But as it was, the developments in Syria triggered the desperate, panicky response in the Ukraine. According to Lehmann:

“The war in Ukraine became predictable (unavoidable?) when the great Muslim Brotherhood Project in Syria failed during the summer of 2012. …In June and July 2012 some 20,000 NATO mercenaries who had been recruited and trained in Libya and then staged in the Jordanian border town Al-Mafraq, launched two massive campaigns aimed at seizing the Syrian city of Aleppo. Both campaigns failed and the ”Libyan Brigade” was literally wiped out by the Syrian Arab Army.

It was after this decisive defeat that Saudi Arabia began a massive campaign for the recruitment of jihad fighters through the network of the Muslim Brotherhood’s evil twin Al-Qaeda.

Though there were other factors that caused tension between the US and Russia in Ukraine, but the primary bad blood came from the fact that US rivals Russia and Iran as the dominant player in an energy war that could increasingly weaken Washington’s power. Further economic cooperation between Europe and the Russian Federation posed a dire threat to US plans to deploy NATO troops to Russia’s borders, and to force the rest of the world to continue buying their global energy supplies in US dollars, aka Petrodollars.

Lehmann wrote that he conversed with “a top-NATO admiral from a northern European country” who summarized US foreign policy like this:

“American colleagues at the Pentagon told me, unequivocally, that the US and UK never would allow European – Soviet relations to develop to such a degree that they would challenge the US/UK’s political, economic or military primacy and hegemony on the European continent. Such a development will be prevented by all necessary means, if necessary by provoking a war in central Europe”.

Now we are at the heart of the issue, the United States not allowing any state or combination of states to challenge its dominance! Washington wants to continue to be the undisputed, global superpower. Something which Paul Wolfowitz pointed out in an early draft of the US National Defense Strategy:

“Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.”
So Obama and his administration are going to do whatever they believe necessary to stop further EU-Russia economic integration to preserve the Petrodollar monetary system. A system which originated in 1974 when President Nixon persuaded OPEC members to denominate their oil exclusively in dollars, as well as invest their surplus oil proceeds in U.S. Treasuries. This was an arrangement which raked in more than $1 billion per day!

This also allows the US to over-consume, over spend and over borrow, running up the deficits while other nations were forced to stockpile dollars in order to purchase their oil. Meanwhile, the US could exchange their fiat currency at no-expense to itself for all kinds of goods from around the world. These easily printed dollars then purchased oil or natural gas, the profits of which were recycled back into dollar-denominated assets such as U.S. stocks, bonds, real estate, or ETFs.

As one critic put it: “World trade is now a game in which the US produces dollars and the rest of the world produces things that dollars can buy.”

This circle kept the US in the top spot for years… but the Petrodollar is crumbling and the good times are coming to an end.

The Petrodollar helped the US maintain the dollar’s monopoly pricing which, in turn sustained the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. It created inflated demand for dollars which allowed the Fed to extend the nation’s credit by greatly reducing financing costs and interest rates. If oil and natural gas could be bought with other currencies, the value of the dollar would drop, the bond market would collapse and the US economy would slip into a long-term depression, effectively turning the United States into a Third World Country overnight.

Of course Moscow is aware of Washington’s weakness and is making every effort to exploit that weakness by reducing its use of the dollar in every possible trade agreement. Moscow was even able to persuade China and Iran to drop the dollar as their trading currency and have found other trading partners eager to do the same. Russian economic ministers recently conducted a “de-dollarization” meeting in which a “currency switch executive order” was issued stating that “the government has the legal power to force Russian companies to trade a percentage of certain goods in rubles.”

According to RT:

“The Russian and Chinese central banks have agreed a draft currency swap agreement, which will allow them to increase trade in domestic currencies and cut the dependence on the US dollar in bilateral payments. “The draft document between the Central Bank of Russia and the People’s Bank of China on national currency swaps has been agreed by the parties…..The agreement will stimulate further development of direct trade in yuan and rubles on the domestic foreign exchange markets of Russia and China,” the Russian regulator said.

Currently, over 75 percent of payments in Russia-China trade settlements are made in US dollars, according to Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper.” (“De-Dollarization Accelerates – China/Russia Complete Currency Swap Agreement“, Zero Hedge)

The attack on the Petrodollar is one of many strategies Moscow is currently using to discourage US aggression, defend their sovereignty and promote a multi-polar world where the rule of law prevails. Putin is also pushing for institutional changes that will make the playing field more competitive, effectively doing away with the unfair advantage for the wealthy nations like the US.

Naturally, replacing the IMF are on top of the agenda for most of the emerging market nations, particularly the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) who recently agreed to create a $100 billion Development Bank that will “will counter the influence of Western-based lending institutions like the IMF. This new bank will provide monetary loans for infrastructure and development projects in BRICS countries, but unlike the IMF or World Bank, every member country will have equal say, regardless of GDP size.

According to RT:

“The big launch of the BRICS bank is seen as a first step to break the dominance of the US dollar in global trade, as well as dollar-backed institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, both US-based institutions BRICS countries have little influence within…

“This mechanism creates the foundation for an effective protection of our national economies from a crisis in financial markets,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said.”
(“BRICS establish $100bn bank and currency pool to cut out Western dominance“, RT)

It’s clear that Washington’s aggression in Ukraine has focused Moscow’s attention on retaliation. But rather than confront the US militarily, as Obama and Co. would prefer, Putin is taking aim at the vulnerabilities within the system. A BRICS Development Bank challenges the IMF’s dominant role as lender of last resort, a role that has enhanced the power of the wealthy countries and their industries. The new bank creates the basis for real institutional change, albeit, still within the pervasive capitalist framework.

Russian politician and economist, Sergei Glazyev, summarized Moscow’s approach to the US-Russia conflagration in an essay titled “US is militarizing Ukraine to invade Russia.” Here’s an excerpt:

“To stop the war, you need to terminate its driving forces. At this stage, the war unfolds mainly in the planes of economic, public relations and politics. All the power of US economic superiority is based on the financial pyramid of debt, and this has gone long beyond sustainability. Its major lenders are collapsing enough to deprive the US market of accumulated US dollars and Treasury bonds. Of course, the collapse of the US financial system will cause serious losses to all holders of US currency and securities. But first, these losses for Russia, Europe and China will be less than the losses caused by American geopolitics unleashing another world war. Secondly, the sooner the exit from the financial obligations of this American pyramid, the less will be the losses. Third, the collapse of the dollar Ponzi scheme gives an opportunity, finally, to reform the global financial system on the basis of equity and mutual benefit.”

Washington thinks “modern warfare” involves high-tech weaponry, well trained soldiers and covert use of secret armies made up of mercenaries and Islamic extremists. Meanwhile, Moscow understands modern warfare as undermining the enemy’s ability to wage war through sustained economic attacks on it’s currency, its institutions, its bond market, and its ability to influence its allies that it is still a responsible world leader.
by tomretterbush August 12, 2014.

 Filed under: Movements


You must be logged in to comment

Site Statistics