U.S. Foreign Policy

Simple Minded

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Simple Minded »

Endovelico wrote:
Simple Minded wrote:I'm trying to help out Endo. If the problem is Europe's leaders, and if a majority of European voters feel that they have been America's bitch, then I have handed him or a like minded candidate a winning campaign theme. If he is wrong, about either the leaders or the populace, then my advice is worthless.
We may not have come that far yet, but when the issue becomes either more taxes to pay for professional soldiers, or bringing back the draft, I guess the draft will suddenly become more attractive...
When the time is right, feel free to uncork this bottle of whine that I sent you. In fact, I will even donate to your campaign. :)

We disgruntled old farts need to stick together! We're becoming obsolete.

The young'uns whine about all the wrong stuff! ;)

I suspect that being the world's policeman is rapidly becoming another job that most Merikans are not willing to do.

I'm looking forward to that day.
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11567
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

.


US, Turkey part ways over Syria


President Barack Obama’s strategy in the fight against the Islamic State in Syria gets considerable clarity with the 4-line announcement by the US Central Command that American military aircraft have made multiple drops of weapons, ammunition and medical supplies to the Kurdish fighters defending the northern Syrian city of Kobane facing the Turkish border.

In sum, Washington has parted ways with Ankara. Obama telephoned President Recep Erdogan on Saturday and discussed “steps that could be taken to counter” the IS offensive against Kobane. Presumably, he took Erdogan into confidence about the need to arm and support the Kurdish fighters in Kobane.

But Erdogan stuck to his guns and on Sunday reiterated that Turkey considered the Syrian Kurdish group [PYD] as every bit a “terrorist organization like the Iraqi Kurds belonging to the PKK”. He took a tough stance: “It would be very wrong for America — with whom we are allies and with whom we are together within the NATO — to expect us to say ‘yes’ after openly announcing such support for a terrorist organization. It [US] cannot expect such a thing from us and we cannot say ‘yes’ to such a thing either.”

Erdogan also parried on the pending issue of Ankara making available Turkish air bases on the Syrian-Iraqi border for the US operations. He said, “What are they [US] asking for with regard to Incirlik [air base]? That’s not clear yet. If there is something we deem appropriate, we would discuss it with our security forces and we would say ‘yes’. But if it is not appropriate, then saying ‘yes’ is not possible for us either.” (Hurriyet).

Suffice to say, Obama made a last-ditch attempt to carry Erdogan along, but the endeavor failed, and he has since left the Turkish leader behind on his own.

To be sure, the Kurdish fighters in Kobane are in dire straits and US supplies have become vital. Time is of the essence of the matter.

But there are political dimensions, too, to Obama’s decision to arm the Syrian Kurds. One, Obama has openly rejected Erdogan’s notion of the Syrian Kurds being ‘terrorists’ who allegedly enjoyed the covert backing of the Syrian regime.
Two, Obama is unwilling to link the fight against the IS with the Turkish agenda of ‘regime change’ in Syria. Three, Obama disfavors Erdogan’s pet idea of creating a ‘buffer zone’ and a ‘no-fly zone’ in Syria from Aleppo northward to the Turkish border.

Indeed, Obama is wary of getting entangled with Erdogan’s pipe dream of riding the wings of Arab Spring and bringing about a democratic transformation of the Middle East spearheaded by the Muslim Brotherhood — under Turkish tutelage, of course.

Broadly speaking, the above put together would suggest that Obama is finessing his Syrian strategy to one of containment of IS in immediate terms rather than getting into grandiose plans of seeking political settlements in Iraq and Syria. (See my blog Crunch time for Obama in Syria.)

But the interplay of the above three dimensions will still impact the future developments in a major way. The open US backing for the PYD (which is no doubt allied with the PKK and is fighting Turkey, US’ NATO ally) will resonate all over the Kurdish homelands in Iraq, Syria and Turkey and could give fillip to the Kurdish national aspirations of self-determination. That is to say, Ankara may soon have to grapple with a resurgent Kurdish insurgency.

The bottom line is that Turkey is having to pay a heavy price for its dubious role in fomenting the civil war in Syria over the past 3-year period and for its covert support of the IS in particular. In last week’s bid for the ‘European seat’ in the UN Security Council, Turkey suffered a humiliating defeat ending with just 60 votes. Turkey’s regional and international credibility has hit rock bottom.

Obama would see that an overt Turkish military role would trigger disquiet in the Arab minds, given the huge backlog of Ottoman history in the region’s collective consciousness. However, the most important point here is as regards Obama’s game plan for the Syrian regime. Evidently, he has so far neatly sidestepped the Syrian regime and has gone for the IS.
The ‘missing link’ here so far has been the Iran nuclear deal and the removal of sanctions against Iran, which will open the way for a US-Iranian effort to seek a political settlement in Syria in a near future.

Meanwhile, the US-Iranian dealings over Iraq have ‘matured’ over a relatively short period of time already starting with the efforts to replace former Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki. Iraq became a test case of the efficacy of US-Iranian cooperation over issues of regional security and stability. And it stands to reason that the US is increasingly viewing Iran as a factor of stability in Iraq.

Interestingly, in Iraq the US is not being prescriptive about the exact composition of an “inclusive” government. If at all, the latest appointment of a Shi’ite politician from the Badr Organization to the post of Interior Minister in Baghdad and the visit by the Iraqi prime minister Haider al-Abadi leading a high-powered delegation to Tehran later today would suggest that Iran’s influence in Iraqi affairs has if anything only increased.

All in all, therefore, aside the profound symbolism of Obama’s decision to arm the Syrian Kurds even at the cost of annoying Turkey, he could be “dialing back” his Syria strategy, realizing that any escalation of US military action against the Syrian regime is fraught with the danger of triggering “chaos and unintended consequences” and, therefore, a political element, which is non-existent today, is ultimately needed.

It is only Iran that could provide that non-existent political element kickstarting a political settlement in Syria — not Turkey, not Saudi Arabia, not even Russia. The recent Iranian statements at different levels of leadership (Irna, FNA) would suggest that Tehran is positioning itself to play such a role in Syria.


.
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11567
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

.


Turkey is seen by its Nato allies as a lukewarm late-comer to the US-led coalition against Isis

Ankara’s attitude towards Kobani – and Mr Erdogan’s equation of its PKK-affiliated defenders to Isis – risks reigniting Turkey’s conflict with its own Kurds, when its most viable buffers against Isis are self-governed Iraqi Kurdistan and the emerging Kurdish entity in Syria.

Ultimately, the calculated and doctrinal barbarity of Isis towards all minorities – including the Kurds – may become a catalyst legitimising an independent Kurdistan. If so, the fallout will show scant respect for the increasingly notional borders of the Levant.

As a veteran former Turkish diplomat puts it, “the primary result of Isis is that it increases sympathy for the establishment of an independent Kurdish state”, which will bring “further bloodshed to this region”. That, he says, will have huge reverberations inside Turkey, which “is turning into a little Syria itself”.

When dust settles, big losers will be Turkey and KSA


.
User avatar
Endovelico
Posts: 3038
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Endovelico »

How to start a war and lose an empire
Dmitry Orlov via Club Orlov blog

A year and a half I wrote an essay on how the US chooses to view Russia, titled The Image of the Enemy. I was living in Russia at the time, and, after observing the American anti-Russian rhetoric and the Russian reaction to it, I made some observations that seemed important at the time. It turns out that I managed to spot an important trend, but given the quick pace of developments since then, these observations are now woefully out of date, and so here is an update.

At that time the stakes weren't very high yet. There was much noise around a fellow named Magnitsky, a corporate lawyer-crook who got caught and died in pretrial custody. He had been holding items for some bigger Western crooks, who were, of course, never apprehended. The Americans chose to treat this as a human rights violation and responded with the so-called “Magnitsky Act” which sanctioned certain Russian individuals who were labeled as human rights violators. Russian legislators responded with the “Dima Yakovlev Bill,” named after a Russian orphan adopted by Americans who killed him by leaving him in a locked car for nine hours. This bill banned American orphan-killing fiends from adopting any more Russian orphans. It all amounted to a silly bit of melodrama.

But what a difference a year and a half has made! Ukraine, which was at that time collapsing at about the same steady pace as it had been ever since its independence two decades ago, is now truly a defunct state, with its economy in free-fall, one region gone and two more in open rebellion, much of the country terrorized by oligarch-funded death squads, and some American-anointed puppets nominally in charge but quaking in their boots about what's coming next. Syria and Iraq, which were then at a low simmer, have since erupted into full-blown war, with large parts of both now under the control of the Islamic Caliphate, which was formed with help from the US, was armed with US-made weapons via the Iraqis. Post-Qaddafi Libya seems to be working on establishing an Islamic Caliphate of its own. Against this backdrop of profound foreign US foreign policy failure, the US recently saw it fit to accuse Russia of having troops “on NATO's doorstep,” as if this had nothing to do with the fact that NATO has expanded east, all the way to Russia's borders. Unsurprisingly, US–Russia relations have now reached a point where the Russians saw it fit to issue a stern warning: further Western attempts at blackmailing them may result in a nuclear confrontation.

The American behavior throughout this succession of defeats has been remarkably consistent, with the constant element being their flat refusal to deal with reality in any way, shape or form. Just as before, in Syria the Americans are ever looking for moderate, pro-Western Islamists, who want to do what the Americans want (topple the government of Bashar al Assad) but will stop short of going on to destroy all the infidel invaders they can get their hands on. The fact that such moderate, pro-Western Islamists do not seem to exist does not affect American strategy in the region in any way.

Similarly, in Ukraine, the fact that the heavy American investment in “freedom and democracy,” or “open society,” or what have you, has produced a government dominated by fascists and a civil war is, according to the Americans, just some Russian propaganda. Parading under the banner of Hitler's Ukrainian SS division and anointing Nazi collaborators as national heroes is just not convincing enough for them. What do these Nazis have to do to prove that they are Nazis, build some ovens and roast some Jews? Just massacring people by setting fire to a building, as they did in Odessa, or shooting unarmed civilians in the back and tossing them into mass graves, as they did in Donetsk, doesn't seem to work. The fact that many people have refused to be ruled by Nazi thugs and have successfully resisted them has caused the Americans to label them as “pro-Russian separatists.” This, in turn, was used to blame the troubles in Ukraine on Russia, and to impose sanctions on Russia. The sanctions would be reviewed if Russia were to withdraw its troops from Ukraine. Trouble is, there are no Russian troops in Ukraine.

Note that this sort of behavior is nothing new. The Americans invaded Afghanistan because the Taleban would not relinquish Osama Bin Laden (who was a CIA operative) unless Americans produced evidence implicating him in 9/11—which did not exist. Americans invaded Iraq because Saddam Hussein would not relinquish his weapons of mass destruction—which did not exist. They invaded Libya because Muammar Qaddafi would not relinquish official positions—which he did not hold. They were ready to invade Syria because Bashar al Assad had used chemical weapons against his own people—which he did not do. And now they imposed sanctions on Russia because Russia had destabilized and invaded Ukraine—which it did not do either. (The US did that.)

The sanctions against Russia have an additional sort of unreality to them, because they “boomerang” and hurt the West while giving the Russian government the impetus to do what it wanted to do all along. The sanctions infringed on the rights of a number of Russian businessmen and officials, who promptly yanked their money out of Western banks, pulled their children out of Western schools and universities, and did everything else they could to demonstrate that they are good patriotic Russians, not American lackeys. The sanctions affected a number of Russian energy companies, cutting them off from Western sources of technology and financing, but this will primarily hurt the earnings of Western energy companies while helping their Chinese competitors. There were even some threats to cut Russia off from the SWIFT system, which would have made it quite difficult to transfer funds between Russia and the West, but what these threats did instead was to give Russia the impetus to introduce its own RUSSWIFT system, which will include even Iran, neutralizing future American efforts at imposing financial restrictions.

The sanctions were meant to cause economic damage, but Western efforts at inflicting short-term economic damage on Russia are failing. Coupled with a significant drop in the price of oil, all of this was supposed to hurt Russia fiscally, but since the sanctions caused the Ruble to drop in tandem, the net result on Russia's state finances is a wash. Oil prices are lower, but then, thanks in part to the sanctions, so is the Ruble, and since oil revenues are still largely in dollars, this means that Russia's tax receipts are at roughly the same level at before. And since Russian oil companies earn dollars abroad but spend rubles domestically, their production budgets remain unaffected.

The Russians also responded by imposing some counter-sanctions, and to take some quick steps to neutralize the effect of the sanctions on them. Russia banned the import of produce from the European Union—to the horror of farmers there. Especially hurt were those EU members who are especially anti-Russian: the Baltic states, which swiftly lost a large fraction of their GDP, along with Poland. An exception is being made for Serbia, which refused to join in the sanctions. Here, the message is simple: friendships that have lasted many centuries matter; what the Americans want is not what the Americans get; and the EU is a mere piece of paper. Thus, the counter-sanctions are driving wedges between the US and the EU, and, within the EU, between Eastern Europe (which the sanctions are hurting the most) and Western Europe, and, most importantly, they drive home the simple message that the US is not Europe's friend.

There is something else going on that is going to become more significant in the long run: Russia has taken the hint and is turning away from the West and toward the East. It is parlaying its open defiance of American attempts at world domination into trade relationships throughout the world, much of which is sick and tired of paying tribute to Washington. Russia is playing a key role in putting together an international banking system that circumvents the US dollar and the US Federal Reserve. In these efforts, over half the world's territory and population is squarely on Russia's side and cheering loudly. Thus, the effort to isolate Russia has produced the opposite of the intended result: it is isolating the West from the rest of the world instead.

In other ways, the sanctions are actually being helpful. The import ban on foodstuffs from EU is a positive boon to domestic agriculture while driving home a politically important point: don't take food from the hands of those who bite you. Russia is already one of the world's largest grain exporters, and there is no reason why it can't become entirely self-sufficient in food. The impetus to rearm in the face of NATO encroachment on Russian borders (there are now US troops stationed in Estonia, just a short drive from Russia's second-largest city, St. Petersburg) is providing some needed stimulus for industrial redevelopment. This round of military spending is being planned a bit more intelligently than in the Soviet days, with eventual civilian conversion being part of the plan from the very outset. Thus, along with the world's best jet fighters, Russia is likely to start building civilian aircraft for export and competing with Airbus and Boeing.

But this is only the beginning. The Russians seem to have finally realized to what extent the playing field has been slanted against them. They have been forced to play by Washington's rules in two key ways: by bending to Washington's will in order to keep their credit ratings high with the three key Western credit rating agencies, in order to secure access to Western credit; and by playing by the Western rule-book when issuing credit of their own, thus keeping domestic interest rates artificially high. The result was that US companies were able to finance their operations more cheaply, artificially making them more competitive. But now, as Russia works quickly to get out from under the US dollar, shifting trade to bilateral currency arrangements (backed by some amount of gold should trade imbalances develop) it is also looking for ways to turn the printing press to its advantage. To date, the dictat handed down from Washington has been: “We can print money all we like, but you can't, or we will destroy you.” But this threat is ringing increasingly hollow, and Russia will no longer be using its dollar revenues to buy up US debt. One proposal currently on the table is to make it impossible to pay for Russian oil exports with anything other than rubles, by establishing two oil brokerages, one in St. Petersburg, the other, seven time zones away, in Vladivostok. Foreign oil buyers would then have to earn their petro-rubles the honest way—through bilateral trade—or, if they can't make enough stuff that the Russians want to import, they could pay for oil with gold (while supplies last). Or the Russians could simply print rubles, and, to make sure such printing does not cause domestic inflation, they could export some inflation by playing with the oil spigot and the oil export tariffs. And if the likes of George Soros decides to attack the ruble in an effort to devalue it, Russia could defend its currency simply by printing fewer rubles for a while—no need to stockpile dollar reserves.

So far, this all seems like typical economic warfare: the Americans want to get everything they want by printing money while bombing into submission or sanctioning anyone who disobeys them, while the rest of the world attempts to resist them. But early in 2014 the situation changed. There was a US-instigated coup in Kiev, and instead of rolling over and playing dead like they were supposed to, the Russians mounted a fast and brilliantly successful campaign to regain Crimea, then successfully checkmated the junta in Kiev, preventing it from consolidating control over the remaining former Ukrainian territory by letting volunteers, weapons, equipment and humanitarian aid enter—and hundreds of thousands of refugees exit—through the strictly notional Russian-Ukrainian border, all the while avoiding direct military confrontation with NATO. Seeing all of this happening on the nightly news has awakened the Russian population from its political slumber, making it sit up and pay attention, and sending Putin's approval rating through the roof.

The “optics” of all this, as they like to say at the White House, are rather ominous. We are coming up on the 70th anniversary of victory in World War II—a momentous occasion for Russians, who pride themselves on defeating Hitler almost single-handedly. At the same time, the US (Russia's self-appointed arch-enemy) has taken this opportunity to reawaken and feed the monster of Nazism right on Russia's border (inside Russia's borders, some Russians/Ukrainians would say). This, in turn, makes the Russians remember Russia's unique historical mission is among the nations of the world: it is to thwart all other nations' attempts at world domination, be it Napoleonic France or Hitleresque Germany or Obamaniac America. Every century or so some nation forgets its history lessons and attacks Russia. The result is always the same: lots of corpse-studded snowdrifts, and then Russian cavalry galloping into Paris, or Russian tanks rolling into Berlin. Who knows how it will end this time around? Perhaps it will involve polite, well-armed men in green uniforms without insignia patrolling the streets of Brussels and Washington, DC. Only time will tell.

You'd think that Obama has already overplayed his hand, and should behave accordingly. His popularity at home is roughly the inverse of Putin's, which is to say, Obama is still more popular than Ebola, but not by much. He can't get anything at all done, no matter how pointless or futile, and his efforts to date, at home and abroad, have been pretty much a disaster. So what does this social worker turned national mascot decide to do? Well, the way the Russians see it, he has decided to declare war on Russia! In case you missed it, look up his speech before the UN General Assembly. It's up on the White House web site. He placed Russia directly between Ebola and ISIS among the three topmost threats facing the world. Through Russian eyes his speech reads as a declaration of war.

It's a new, mixed-mode sort of war. It's not a total war to the death, although the US is being rather incautious by the old Cold War standards in avoiding a nuclear confrontation. It's an information war—based on lies and unjust vilification; it's a financial and economic war—using sanctions; it's a political war—featuring violent overthrow of elected governments and support for hostile regimes on Russia's borders; and it's a military war—using ineffectual but nevertheless insulting moves such as stationing a handful of US troops in Estonia. And the goals of this war are clear: it is to undermine Russia economically, destroy it politically, dismember it geographically, and turn it into a pliant vassal state that furnishes natural resources to the West practically free of charge (with a few hand-outs to a handful of Russian oligarchs and criminal thugs who play ball). But it doesn't look like any of that is going to happen because, you see, a lot of Russians actually get all that, and will choose leaders who will not win any popularity contests in the West but who will lead them to victory.

Given the realization that the US and Russia are, like it or not, in a state of war, no matter how opaque or muddled, people in Russia are trying to understand why this is and what it means. Obviously, the US has seen Russia as the enemy since about the time of the Revolution of 1917, if not earlier. For example, it is known that after the end of World War II America's military planners were thinking of launching a nuclear strike against the USSR, and the only thing that held them back was the fact that they didn't have enough bombs, meaning that Russia would have taken over all of Europe before the effects of the nuclear strikes could have deterred them from doing so (Russia had no nuclear weapons at the time, but lots of conventional forces right in the heart of Europe).

But why has war been declared now, and why was it declared by this social worker turned national misleader? Some keen observers mentioned his slogan “the audacity of hope,” and ventured to guess that this sort of “audaciousness” (which in Russian sounds a lot like “folly”) might be a key part of his character which makes him want to be the leader of the universe, like Napoleon or Hitler. Others looked up the campaign gibberish from his first presidential election (which got silly young Americans so fired up) and discovered that he had nice things to say about various cold warriors. Do you think Obama might perhaps be a scholar of history and a shrewd geopolitician in his own right? (That question usually gets a laugh, because most people know that he is just a chucklehead and repeats whatever his advisers tell him to say.) Hugo Chavez once called him “a hostage in the White House,” and he wasn't too far off. So, why are his advisers so eager to go to war with Russia, right now, this year?

Is it because the US is collapsing more rapidly than most people can imagine? This line of reasoning goes like this: the American scheme of world domination through military aggression and unlimited money-printing is failing before our eyes. The public has no interest in any more “boots on the ground,” bombing campaigns do nothing to reign in militants that Americans themselves helped organize and equip, dollar hegemony is slipping away with each passing day, and the Federal Reserve is fresh out of magic bullets and faces a choice between crashing the stock market and crashing the bond market. In order to stop, or at least forestall this downward slide into financial/economic/political oblivion, the US must move quickly to undermine every competing economy in the world through whatever means it has left at its disposal, be it a bombing campaign, a revolution or a pandemic (although this last one can be a bit hard to keep under control). Russia is an obvious target, because it is the only country in the world that has had the gumption to actually show international leadership in confronting the US and wrestling it down; therefore, Russia must be punished first, to keep the others in line.

I don't disagree with this line of reasoning, but I do want to add something to it.

First, the American offensive against Russia, along with most of the rest of the world, is about things Americans like to call “facts on the ground,” and these take time to create. The world wasn't made in a day, and it can't be destroyed in a day (unless you use nuclear weapons, but then there is no winning strategy for anyone, the US included). But the entire financial house of cards can be destroyed rather quickly, and here Russia can achieve a lot while risking little. Financially, Russia's position is so solid that even the three Western credit ratings agencies don't have the gall to downgrade Russia's rating, sanctions notwithstanding. This is a country that is aggressively paying down its foreign debt, is running a record-high budget surplus, has a positive balance of payments, is piling up physical gold reserves, and not a month goes by that it doesn't sign a major international trade deal (that circumvents the US dollar). In comparison, the US is a dead man walking: unless it can continue rolling over trillions of dollars in short-term debt every month at record-low interest rates, it won't be able to pay the interest on its debt or its bills. Good-bye, welfare state, hello riots. Good-bye military contractors and federal law enforcement, hello mayhem and open borders. Now, changing “facts on the ground” requires physical actions, whereas causing a financial stampede to the exits just requires somebody to yell “Boo!” loudly and frighteningly enough.

Second, it must be understood that at this point the American ruling elite is almost entirely senile. The older ones seem actually senile in the medical sense. Take Leon Panetta, the former Defense Secretary: he's been out flogging his new book, and he is still blaming Syria's Bashar al Assad for gassing his own people! By now everybody else knows that that was a false flag attack, carried out by some clueless Syrian rebels with Saudi help, to be used as an excuse for the US to bomb Syria—you know, the old “weapons of mass destruction” nonsense again. (By the way, this kind of mindless, repetitive insistence on a fake rationale seems like a sure sign of senility.) That plan didn't work because Putin and Lavrov intervened and quickly convinced Assad to give up his useless chemical weapons stockpile. The Americans were livid. So, everybody knows this story—except Panetta. You see, once an American official starts lying, he just doesn't know how to stop. The story always starts with a lie, and, as facts emerge that contradict the initial story, they are simply ignored.

So much for the senile old guard, but what about their replacements? Well, the poster boy for the young ones is Hunter Biden, the VP's son, who went on a hookers-and-blow tour of Ukraine last summer and inadvertently landed a seat on the board of directors of Ukraine's largest natural gas company (which doesn't have much gas left). He just got outed for being a coke fiend. In addition to the many pre-anointed ones, like the VP's son, there are also many barns full of eagerly bleating Ivy League graduates who have been groomed for jobs in high places. These are Prof. Deresiewicz's “Excellent Sheep.”

There just isn't much that such people, young or old, can be made to respond to. International embarrassment, military defeat, humanitarian catastrophe—all these things just bounce off them and stick to you for bringing them up and being overly negative about their rose-colored view of themselves. The only hit they can actually feel is a hit to the pocketbook.

Which brings us all the way back to my first point: “Boo!”

http://cluborlov.blogspot.pt/2014/10/ho ... mpire.html
A pretty crude text, at times, but which shows how many Russians are presently feeling about the US and the US Government. Obama seems to fail to see that the US is much more vulnerable than Russia, that Russians may feel some discomfort in the near future but that the US may be heading for disaster. Americans are much more likely to rebel against their government if things go sour than Russians. Americans have a lot to lose, but not Russians. In a new cold war Americans will freeze to death while Russians will feel only a little discomfort. I hope I will be around long enough to see how it goes...
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Typhoon »

The SU was careful not to accumulate an external trade debt. Didn't do it any good in the end.

8.3% inflation in Russia

Russia's export economy is resourced based. It imports value added manufactured goods

The prices of commodities have recently experienced a significant drop. The drop in the value of the ruble has made it more expensive to import.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11567
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12561
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Doc »

Heracleum Persicum wrote:.


The Pakistanization of Turkey
.
More like the balkanization of Turkey. The way they are treating the Kurds will bring blowback for generations.
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11567
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

Doc wrote:
Heracleum Persicum wrote:.


The Pakistanization of Turkey
.
More like the balkanization of Turkey. The way they are treating the Kurds will bring blowback for generations.

IMVHO, down the road, not Russia but Turkey will be the headache for west

Turkey has many "unresolved" issues .. internally and externally

.
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12561
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Doc »

Heracleum Persicum wrote:
Doc wrote:
Heracleum Persicum wrote:.


The Pakistanization of Turkey
.
More like the balkanization of Turkey. The way they are treating the Kurds will bring blowback for generations.

IMVHO, down the road, not Russia but Turkey will be the headache for west

Turkey has many "unresolved" issues .. internally and externally

.
Turkey is an Islamist state and will act accordingly.
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11567
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

Doc wrote:
Heracleum Persicum wrote:
Doc wrote:
Heracleum Persicum wrote:.


The Pakistanization of Turkey
.
More like the balkanization of Turkey. The way they are treating the Kurds will bring blowback for generations.

IMVHO, down the road, not Russia but Turkey will be the headache for west

Turkey has many "unresolved" issues .. internally and externally

.
Turkey is an Islamist state and will act accordingly.

.

For nations, when fundamentals at stake, neither a factor nor matter whether they Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jewish or Islamic .. in final analysis all is economics .. anybody arguing otherwise either fool (illiterate) or "charlatan" (tryin to fool Joe)

.
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12561
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Doc »

Heracleum Persicum wrote:
Doc wrote:
Heracleum Persicum wrote:
Doc wrote:
Heracleum Persicum wrote:.


The Pakistanization of Turkey
.
More like the balkanization of Turkey. The way they are treating the Kurds will bring blowback for generations.

IMVHO, down the road, not Russia but Turkey will be the headache for west

Turkey has many "unresolved" issues .. internally and externally

.
Turkey is an Islamist state and will act accordingly.

.

For nations, when fundamentals at stake, neither a factor nor matter whether they Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jewish or Islamic .. in final analysis all is economics .. anybody arguing otherwise either fool (illiterate) or "charlatan" (tryin to fool Joe)

.
Business is war..
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11567
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

Doc wrote:
Heracleum Persicum wrote:
Doc wrote:
Heracleum Persicum wrote:
Doc wrote:
Heracleum Persicum wrote:.


The Pakistanization of Turkey
.
More like the balkanization of Turkey. The way they are treating the Kurds will bring blowback for generations.

IMVHO, down the road, not Russia but Turkey will be the headache for west

Turkey has many "unresolved" issues .. internally and externally

.
Turkey is an Islamist state and will act accordingly.

.

For nations, when fundamentals at stake, neither a factor nor matter whether they Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jewish or Islamic .. in final analysis all is economics .. anybody arguing otherwise either fool (illiterate) or "charlatan" (tryin to fool Joe)

.
Business is war ..

.

Should not be .. don't mistake "rubbery" with Business .. business should be win-win


.
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11567
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

.


Isis sells smuggled oil to Turkey says US Treasury

.

An oil smuggling network created to evade UN sanctions on Saddam’s Iraq is being exploited

Mr Cohen stressed that while the Kurdish regional and Turkish governments were committed to stopping Isis’ oil flow – the mainstay of its income – the group was still able to tap into a “longstanding and deeply rooted black market” to line its coffers that had not yet been adequately disrupted.

“[Isis] has amassed wealth at an unprecedented pace,” Mr Cohen said, outlining measures the US government would be taking in the future to punish anyone who is found to have bought Isis-extracted oil.

“The middlemen, traders, refiners, transport companies, and anyone else that handles ISIL’s oil should know that we are hard at work identifying them, and that we have tools at hand to stop them,” he added. “We will target for financial sanctions anyone who trades in [Isis’] stolen oil.

“We not only can we cut them off from the US financial system and freeze their assets, but we can also make it very difficult for them to find a bank anywhere that will touch their money or process their transactions.”

As well as oil sales, the US intelligence community believes Isis is earning “several millions” a month from extortion activities and, so far this year, has netted over $20m through the ransom of foreign hostages – including several European journalists.

While disrupting the Isis oil-trading network is likely to significantly reduce the group’s wealth, Mr Cohen was clear that such measures alone could not completely incapacitate its fundraising capabilities.

“The campaign against Isis’s finances will require more than just financial tools,” he said. “Isis is enriching itself locally, cutting off one key source of funds will require dislodging it from territory in which it operates.”
Related Topics

.

.
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12561
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Doc »

Yawn
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11567
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

.


Putin says United States destabilizing the world order of checks and balances for its own gains ..


For sure it feels that way

.

“The system of international relations needed some changes, but the USA, who believe they were the winners of the Cold War, have not seen the need for this.” He added that the US has been trying to create the world “for their own gains." The Russian President added that because of this, regional and global security had been weakened.

Putin also touched on the issue of the growth of Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, while also accused the West of, "turning a blind eye," to the encroachment of international terrorism into Russia and Central Asia. Putin believes the US has played a considerable role in sponsoring the growth of Islamic extremism, using the example of Washington's funding of the Mujaheddin in the Afghan-Soviet war in the 1980's, which eventually gave birth to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

“It never ceases to amaze me how our partners have been guilty of making the same mistakes time and again. They have in the past sponsored Islamic extremists who were battling against the Soviet Union, which took place in Afghanistan. It was because of this the Taliban and Al-Qaeda was created,” the president added.

Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) is the latest terrorist organization, which is destabilizing the world and Putin was scathing of countries that have been helping to fund the Islamist militants by buying cut price oil they are selling.

“Terrorists have been selling oil at really low prices and those countries who have been buying it and then selling it on, are financing terrorism, which will eventually come back to bite them,” the Russian President said.

Relations between Russia and the US have been plummeting for months, however Vladimir Putin accused the US of using the EU to further their own gains against Russia. He hit out at the numerous sanctions that had been imposed on Moscow, saying, "This was a mistake, which has a knock-on effect on everyone."

“The USA, which has implemented sanctions against Russia, is cutting down the branches, upon which they are sitting,” President Putin added.

The reduction of nuclear arsenals was another issue, which was high on the agenda for the Russian President and once again, he was not afraid of having a dig at Washington for their reluctance to cut the number of nuclear missiles. He mentioned that unfortunately many countries see the only way to preserve their sovereignty is, "To make a nuclear bomb."

The reduction in nuclear arsenals was initially proposed by the Obama administration and Putin admitted it had potential, before talks about decreasing weapons stockpiles collapsed.

"Russia has been all for the continuation of talks about the reduction of nuclear arsenals," and according to President Putin, "Moscow is ready for serious talks, but without “double standards."

Perhaps Putin's harshest criticism was reserved for the West's creation of color revolutions and "controlled chaos," which he a likened to "letting the genie out of the bottle," with particular reference to Ukraine.

"We have been trying to discuss with the Ukraine issue with the EU for a long time, but we were told this was none of other business. They then put two countries against each other, which has led to countless destruction of infrastructure. When I asked why did they do this, they just shrug their shoulders and don’t have an answer," Putin added.

The Russian President said that there is no truth whatsoever in claims from the West that Russia is interested in Empire building and that Moscow is looking to destabilize the world order. With relations between Russia and the West at a very low ebb, Putin also hinted Russia will look to develop allies further afield.

"Russia has made it’s choice – we want to develop our economy and develop democratic values. We work with our counterparts in the Shanghai Cooperation, the BRICS union for example. We want our opinions to be respected likewise. We all need to be cautious to not make hasty and dangerous steps. Some of the players on the global front have forgotten about the need for this," he said in another barb directed at Washington.

.
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12561
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Doc »


Duh!!! That is a hell of a lot better than jumping out of burning buildings.

Image
Image
Image
Image
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Endovelico
Posts: 3038
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Endovelico »

Doc,

I believe you crossed a line that shouldn't be crossed! And I'm not even American...
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Natural result of obama Presidency.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12561
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Doc »

Endovelico wrote:Doc,

I believe you crossed a line that shouldn't be crossed! And I'm not even American...
No I didn't. Just saying things the way they are. You know I could not go into DC for years after 911 without feeling angry. I took someone to Arlington National cemetery right after while it was still smoking. You can just see the Pentagon from the end of the path from Lee's old mansion. Just across a gulley from the tomb of the Unknown soldier. I pointed it out to the person I was with. The was a woman walking down the path just as I said "there is the Pentagon." The woman immediately burst into tears turned and ran away.

Afterwards I walked over to the tomb. In the amphitheater in front of the tomb I met some members of US special forces. I asked them if they needed anything. They were getting ready to "go overseas" Lots of "Yes sirs" and "no sirs" while addressing me. Compare that to the "Allah fukbars" as Islamist kill people including innocents by any and all perverted means they can think of.

Muslims extremists are the Nazis of our time and in fact their decedents. I hope they all die horrible deaths. They deserve it.
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Endovelico
Posts: 3038
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Endovelico »

Doc wrote:
Endovelico wrote:Doc,

I believe you crossed a line that shouldn't be crossed! And I'm not even American...
No I didn't.
The people you showed falling from the Twin Towers deserve more than being used so that you could make your point. Just like any "collateral damage" in Iraq or Afghanistan after one of those "pinpoint" drone attacks... We all know what happened or happens, we don't have to see the pictures. Besides, I believe the victims deserve a bit more of respect.
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12561
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Doc »

Endovelico wrote:
Doc wrote:
Endovelico wrote:Doc,

I believe you crossed a line that shouldn't be crossed! And I'm not even American...
No I didn't.
The people you showed falling from the Twin Towers deserve more than being used so that you could make your point. Just like any "collateral damage" in Iraq or Afghanistan after one of those "pinpoint" drone attacks... We all know what happened or happens, we don't have to see the pictures. Besides, I believe the victims deserve a bit more of respect.
I am sure you do. If My post had come out of the blue I would agree with you. However it was in response to this:
Putin says United States destabilizing the world order of checks and balances for its own gains ..


For sure it feels that way
I can't think of anything more disrespectful than ignoring what the point is concerning what is done to prevent more victims of such tragedies. Ignoring the victims and what happened to them is to kill them all over again.
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11567
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

.


" Right now China's biggest goal is to deflate American dominance, and what better way than to partner with Russia ? "

" The biggest risk is to the U.S. dollar. "

..

"As China and Russia pivot toward each other, American businesses—and their universal economic values—will struggle to maintain a global foothold," Bremmer wrote.

Only time will tell if there will be a major rebalance in geopolitics and global trade due to the strengthening alliance between China and Russia. Chang sums it up nicely: "If they do in fact form an enduring partnership, it could mean the end of the post–Cold War era. What follows next, for better or worse, will surely be momentous."


Cutting off Iran from SWIFT, preventing from holding Dollar, blocking/interfering in payment routes, preventing exporting and importing regular merchandize (including medicine or passenger plane parts) .. and and .. was a red light, warning sign to CHINA, Russia, Brazil Argentina, India and all free trade loving nations who do not want to be bullied by powers who have monopolized key positions in world economic infrastructure .. Even Swiss and French were Blackmailed to pay (big fine) or be f*cked .. that NSA economic spying had penetrated all Swiss bank Data centers and SWIFT controlled who does what

well, this was a big mistake for America

Reason is, no matter what, any kind of sanctions, Iran will do what gotta do, be ready to build the "Pumpkin" in short notice, cat already in the bag

but

In the meantime, Chinese (And Russians and and were watching) .. they thought, push comet to shove, same thing could happen to them .. suddenly the egghead could say China can not use SWIFT (they were saying this with Russia), or can not hold U$ or even freez Chinese U$ holdings .. this already standard and could be applied to India, Argentina, Brazil, Russia and and .. come up with some rubbish excuse and voila .. a la Ukraine, shoot down a passenger plane and spin it on Russia

Result is, China established "equivalent to" IMF of that hemisphere & BRICS nations .. China systematically building up the infrastructure to scale down American dominance

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-2 ... ralia.html

http://www.voanews.com/content/brics-la ... 10633.html

and

Russia & China are developing their own payment infrastructure , SWIFT and and

Main victim here will be the Dollar .. as money talks, the biggest economy will take over

The big boys saw west misused their "fiduciary" position .. all action re SWIFT and banking and freezing funds for political purpose were act of war .. (picolo) Iran could not counter, but China and Russia and Brazil and India and Argentina and and can, in making


.
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12561
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Doc »

Heracleum Persicum wrote:.


warning sign to CHINA, Russia, Brazil Argentina, India and all free trade loving nations .
That sums it up pretty nicely.

:lol:
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11567
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: U.S. Foreign Policy

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

.


Reuters


According to all accounts, the Iranians had delivered on all their promises and commitments. They had not dragged their feet. They had not tried to cheat. Six months of continued good news had cleared much of the poison out of the atmosphere in Congress and rendered anti-Iran measures far more difficult to pass.

The hawks in Congress have learned their lesson. They now fear more good news coming out of the nuclear talks in Vienna. To kill these negotiations and pave the way for war, they need a vote now. Not later.
.
Post Reply