March 23, 2017 – Fort Russ News –
– QPress.de, translated from German by Tom Winter, who observes “satire is truth; truth is satire.”
Moos kauen [“Chewing moss” like a Moscow dateline –tr]: This is the hammer! NATO could never have expected such an asynchronous low blow! This is equivalent to a declaration of war before 1 April! And it has caught the North Atlantic Terror Organization completely flat-footed.
No, the Russians have not choked off the air for murder and manslaughter to NATO, but to their own military. From now on, they want about 25 percent less for this nonsense. This unique measure has made for completely perplexed faces in the western military forces, which they either perceive as vicious cunning or hot air, as can be seen in the jet exhaust in the above picture.
The security situation has become so mixed that the West is considering increasing armament spending by at least as much as the Russians pare it down. It contradicts every logic of a good enmity, simply wanting nothing more to do for the eclat. Can even the most doofus enemy be so doofed? But let’s try to collect the facts first and read on to this enmity: Aggression light: Russia shortens its military by more than 25 percent … [RT-Deutsch]. Undoubtedly, the bread can be used for some better purposes but for the Russians. This is disturbing.
Apart from this, this reduction of the Russian military budget comes at a at a very untimely time: The US has announced plans to expand its potential for murder and homicide by an annual $ 54 billion … [N-TV]. That would then be an increase greater than the total annual amount that the Russians would be spending. Can it be that Putin wants to punish Trump’s lies? Or does Putin want to maneuver into the victim’s role? Perhaps this is also the reason that the US under Trump again directed their hostility more towards China and Iran. These seem to be more grateful enemies. After all, their armament expenditures are still increasing.
NATO is now gravely concerned whether Russia can still maintain the “Russian threat” to Finland, Sweden, and the whole of the Baltic States at all. Not to mention Montenegro! The same applies to Syria and also to the leading role in the Eastern Ukraine. Because here, too, the insurrection against Kiev could collapse in the absence of a commitment by the Russians. The reactive thinking is even going so far as to offer Russia military aid, just so it does not fulfill these announcements. It must continue to invest a large portion of its gross social product in armaments, according to the good and profitable tradition.
Russia is threatening NATO with the drastic cutbacks on armaments spending. It can only be a matter for the NATO members to massively reduce the bad-role drama about the Russians in other countries. Where would one go from here? This could be a bad example. We all know the need for armament spending and its social function to secure the profits of our elites.
To place similar amounts into the development of mankind, the struggle against hunger, or in global infrastructure would be completely counterproductive. In contrast to the war machine, the profit prospects tended towards zero, or at least, comparatively too small.
What can emerge from the threat of disarmament?
We have to wait and see how this terribly terrible situation will develop. Is NATO likely to react with a first strike? With a bit of luck, such an act would only lead to an increasing threat from Russia. The most terrible realization from this is that NATO’s eastward expansion has been almost completely and uselessly wasted … unless the Russians are bluffing. The threatening position of the deleted armor expenditures is as novel as it is unambiguous and therefore must to be taken seriously.
It will take weeks or even months before the Western military forces have strategically analyzed the true extent of this new threat of disarmament. Nothing would be worse from a moral point of view than to lose to a disarmed enemy. Well, this may now be a bit exaggerated, because morality has never had a serious place in the strategy and also has no other value.
By Tony Cartalucci
“Bringing Real Muscle to Bear Against Syria”
But recently revealed CIA documents drawn from the US National Archives portrays recent efforts to undermine and overthrow the Syrian government and the Syrian conflict’s relationship with neighboring Lebanon and its ally Iran as merely the most recent leg in a decades-long campaign to destabilize and overturn regional governments obstructing US interests.
A 1983 document signed by former CIA officer Graham Fuller titled, “Bringing Real Muscle to Bear Against Syria” (PDF), states (their emphasis):
Syria at present has a hammerlock on US interests both in Lebanon and in the Gulf — through closure of Iraq’s pipeline thereby threatening Iraqi internationalization of the [Iran-Iraq] war. The US should consider sharply escalating the pressures against Assad [Sr.] through covertly orchestrating simultaneous military threats against Syria from three border states hostile to Syria: Iraq, Israel and Turkey.
The report also states:
If Israel were to increase tensions against Syria simultaneously with an Iraqi initiative, the pressures on Assad would escalate rapidly. A Turkish move would psychologically press him further.
The document exposes both then and now, the amount of influence the US exerts across the Middle East and North Africa. It also undermines the perceived agency of states including Israel and NATO-member Turkey, revealing their subordination to US interests and that actions taken by these states are often done on behalf of Wall Street and Washington rather than on behalf of their own national interests.
Aleppo Starts Uncovering Washington’s Design in Support of ISIS and Al Qaeda | Global Research – Centre for Research on Globalization
By Jean Périer
It won’t be an exaggeration to state that the White House and its European allies have made a step too far in a bid to obstruct the successful liberation of the town of Aleppo by the Syrian government forces and Russia’s pilots providing close fire support to them. This development has been widely commented by various analysts and experts across the globe, with some of them claiming that Washington is determined to prevent the complete destruction of ISIS at all costs, since it created and nurtured this terrorist group to overthrow Assad just like the Taliban and Al-Qaeda was created to fight Soviet troops in Afghanistan back in the 1980s.
A few days ago new facts about Washington’s sponsorship of ISIS appeared in the Bulgarian media, along with the pictures and video made in eastern Aleppo by the Nova TV journalists. The crew stumbled upon a warehouse that was used by the Jabhat al-Nusra militants, where they discovered munitions for the BM-21 “Grad” self-propelled multiple rocket launchers, bearing visible indications that they were produced by the Bulgarian manufacturer VMZ (Vazovskaya Heavy Machinery). It’s curious that in spite of the ban on arms sales to Syria, missiles and shells of Bulgarian production, however, fell into the hands of terrorists. The Bulgarian crew indicated that the munitions were supplied by the company known as Arcus from Lyaskovets, while all labels were written in Bulgarian.
The channel has been consulting military experts ever since and the latter have already stated that the radical militants could have been fighting for another two years with the munitions they had.
Members of the U.S. military-industrial establishment are getting nervous about President-elect Trump’s plans for world peace and ending the New World Order’s program of endless war.
Ordinary citizens of countries around the world do not want war. It is the elites who profit from the military-industrial complex. It is the elites stoking violence and bloodshed and sending working class young people into battle.
Trump’s plans to govern according to the wish of the people is already coming under fire by members of the establishment who view peace as a threat to their livelihood.
Ron Paul Institute reports:
Sit down. This is going to shock you. (Not). We reported yesterday on the telephone call between US president-elect Trump and Russian president Putin, where the current and future presidents discussed the need to set aside differences and look to more constructive future relations. With serious observers of this past year’s increasing tensions between US and Russia openly worrying about a nuclear war breaking out, with some 300,000 NATO troops placed on Russia’s border, with sanctions hurting average businesspersons on both sides, a normal person might look at the slight thaw in Cold War 2.0 as an early positive indicator of the end of the Obama Era.