Pages: << 1 ... 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 ... 1261 >>
Reckless US Provocation in Chinese Waters
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
Imagine the following scenario. One or more Chinese or Russian warships provocatively enter the Gulf of Mexico, or perhaps intrude close to America’s east or west coast, sailing into its territorial waters - after being warned not to.
Washington would likely consider the intrusion an act of war - with full media support. Yet US warships provoke Russia in the Black Sea and China near its Xisha and Nansha Islands repeatedly - showing its own sovereignty matters, no one else’s.
In response to Washington’s latest intrusion, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang responded sharply, saying:
“Under the (phony) pretext of ‘freedom of navigation,’ the US side once again sent a military vessel into China’s territorial waters off the Xisha Islands without (its) approval.”
The Reason Behind the U.S. Government’s Secret Hatred of Europeans
Eric Zuesse
The reason for the U.S. government’s hostility — at least since 4 February 2014 —toward Europeans, has been a mystery, until now.
This hostility wasn’t even publicly recognized at all, until it leaked out, on that date, from a tapped phone-line of arguably the most powerful person at the U.S. State Department, the person whom American President Barack Obama had personally entrusted with running his Administration’s most geostrategically sensitive secret foreign operations (and she did it actually throughout almost the entirety of Obama’s eight years in office, regardless of whom the official U.S. Secretary of State happened to be at the time): Victoria Nuland.
Her official title was “Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs” and she was appointed to that post by the President himself, but nominally she reported to him through the Deputy Secretary of State William Joseph Burns, who reported to the Secretary of State, who, in turn, reported to the President.
She ran policies specifically on Ukraine (and, more broadly, against Russia). In the famous leaked phone call that she made on 4 February 2014 to the U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt, she instructed him to place in charge of Ukraine’s government, once America’s coup in Ukraine would be completed (which then occurred 18 days later and overthrew the democratically elected Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, entirely in violation of Ukraine’s own Constitution), “Yats” or Arseniy Yatsenyuk. He did, immediately after the coup was completed, receive this crucial appointment — basically, the power to control all other top appointments in the new Ukrainian government. With this appointment, the coup, which had started by no later than 2011 to be planned inside the U.S. State Department, was effectively completed.
US-Called Security Council Meeting on North Korea
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
Washington requested a closed-door session, scheduled for July 5 at around 3PM New York time - to discuss North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
The Trump administration wants China cracking down hard on Pyongyang, including tough sanctions, severing economic ties, and isolating the DPRK - policies far more extreme than anything Beijing and Russia will agree to.
Nor should any country support Washington’s imperial agenda. It’s the root cause of conflicts in multiple theaters, risking others - endless wars of aggression to advance its imperium.
On July 4, a joint Sino/Russian statement on the Korean peninsula reflects what both countries will propose to America and other Security Council members Wednesday afternoon - virtually certain to fall on US, UK and French deaf ears, these countries fundamentally opposed to conflict resolution anywhere.
Trump’s Reckless Korean Peninsula Brinksmanship
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
Trump’s belligerent unpredictability could embroil East Asia in devastating conflict.
America’s rage to impose its will on all other nations risks unthinkable nuclear war.
Trump earlier said “we could end up having a major, major conflict with North Korea. We’d love to solve things diplomatically, but it’s very difficult.”
He called the DPRK his biggest diplomatic challenge - “an urgent national security threat and top foreign policy priority,” according to administration officials.
China rejects belligerence. War is “not acceptable,” its Foreign Minister Wang Yi stressed. “The Korean peninsula is not the Middle East. If war breaks out, the consequences would be unimaginable.”
Provocative US Response to Latest North Korean Missile Test
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
Here’s what’s most important to understand. Following cessation of hostilities on the Korean peninsula in late July 1953, an uneasy armistice persisted to this day.
A heavily fortified 2.5 mile Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) separates North and South. Occasional incidents occur.
Truman’s war never ended. Its origin was misreported.
Repeated US-orchestrated cross-border provocations by South Korea against Pyongyang got the DPRK to respond in self-defense - its legitimate right under international law.
Peace on the peninsula hasn’t existed since 1950. Trump’s bullying and provocative behavior threatens Korean war 2.0.
He’s risking an unthinkable nuclear conflict, one nuclear power against another, assuring devastating consequences if war on the peninsula is launched - assuring losers, not winners.
The Economic Motive for America’s Current Wars
Eric Zuesse
Russia has long been the chief seller of energy — mainly gas and oil — in the world’s largest energy-market: the EU, or Europe. This means that U.S.-based energy companies, such as Exxon and Halliburton, aren't the ones who dominate in supplying oil, gas, pipelines, and other energy-supplying needs, to the consumers and businesses in the world’s largest energy-market: Europe.
Around half of Russia’s gas and oil into the EU is transported there via pipelines that traverse Ukraine, and this is a major reason why the Obama Administration (which was in service to the owners of the U.S.-based international corporations and even to the Koch brothers who heavily fund the Republican Party against Obama’s Democratic Party) started, by no later than 2011, its preparations for a coup in Ukraine, which occurred in February 2014, to overthrow the democratically elected President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, who, as had been planned and expected by the U.S. government, turned down the EU’s offer of membership because the highly uneconomic arrangement that the EU was offering would have cost Ukraine an estimated $160 billion. The U.S. government knew he’d turn it down, which is why, when he did say no, on 21 November 2013, the Obama regime had everything prepared to launch, that day, the ‘anti-corruption’ demonstrations on the Maidan Square in Kiev, starting the execution of the Obama Administration's coup-plan. (Though it was an ‘anti-corruption’ and ‘pro-democracy’ ‘revolution’, to overthrow the democratically elected President of Ukraine, one of the key demands by the U.S. and the EU had been the release, from a Ukrainian prison, of America’s preferred leader of Ukraine, Yulia Tymoshenko, who had been convicted on corruption-charges — and this demand was, of course, a violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and taken by Ukraine’s government to be an insult, which was yet another reason why Yanukovych had to reject the deal.) The EU nations weren’t eager to take that $160B burden onto themselves, it was laid entirely upon Ukraine, take-it-or-leave-it, and Ukraine rejected it — and so rejected the rest of the U.S. team's offer. But Obama’s agent who handled Ukraine continued to run into resistance from the EU, because EU leaders weren’t as fascist as today’s U.S. leaders are. On 4 February 2014, in a phone call to the U.S. Ambassador in Kiev, Obama’s agent on Ukraine said “F—k the EU!” about Europe’s concerns, and to impose atop the post-coup government “Yats” or Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who would do what the U.S. government wanted and would ignore the needs of either Ukrainians or Europeans. “Yats” received the appointment 18 days later, and, immediately, accepted the EU’s uneconomic offer; so, Ukrainians were doomed. (And Crimea, which had voted 75% for Yanukovych, broke off from Ukraine, and so too did Donbass, which had voted 90% for Yanukovych.)
US Plans Permanent Iraq Occupation
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
In early May, Trump and US-installed puppet Iraqi prime minister Haider al-Abadi discussed keeping US troops in the country after the battle of Mosul ends.
Talks involved Defense Secretary Mattis and other Iraqi officials on how America’s permanent presence would affect the country.
An understanding was reached short of finalizing how things will work. Washington’s goal is preventing Russian influence in Iraq, along with assuring Big Oil profits from its oil.
Washington began raping and destroying Iraq during the Carter years. Its people suffered horrifically because of US imperial lawlessness - for 37 nightmarish years, millions of lives lost in the process.
It’s unclear what force-strength Washington intends maintaining in the country. Its sovereignty will never be regained or people liberated as US occupation continues.
Qatar Formally Rejects Outrageous Saudi-Led Demands
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt cut ties with Qatar, instituting a land, sea and air blockade, an undeclared act of war.
A baker’s dozen of outrageous demands were made to be rejected, not accepted by Qatar.
They include curbing ties with Iran, shutting down Al-Jazeera and other news outlets Qatar controls, ending military cooperation with Turkey, paying reparations to Riyadh and its rogue allies, among others - and comply in 10 days or they become invalid. Time expires today, extended by 48 hours, but it didn’t matter. As expected, Qatar rejected the ultimatum, replying by handwritten letter to the four countries.
They plan to meet in Cairo this week to decide their next moves. It’s unclear if they’ll impose illegal sanctions or something harsher.
America’s Deplorable Independence
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
When America gained independence from Britain, everything changed but stayed the same under new management.
Democracy was established in name only. Today a plutocratic police state at war on humanity at home and abroad runs things.
Independent America subjugates ordinary people at home and abroad, exploited by its ruling class for wealth and power - no matter the human cost.
Governance is of, by, and for its privileged few exclusively. We the People in the Constitution’s preamble refers to them, not us. Its general welfare clause means their interests alone, no one else’s.
American Samizdat: What happens when America’s top investigative journalist reports what its media-owners don’t want the public to know?
Eric Zuesse
This isn’t only about U.S. President Barack Obama’s secret policy on Syria; it’s also about his successor President, Donald Trump’s, adopting that secret policy, and about the U.S. press keeping this policy secret from the U.S. public — effectively blinding America’s voters so they can’t see, much less understand, the U.S. government’s ongoing international looting-operation, nor even the key parts of it:
Seymour Hersh used to have his important news-reports published in the New Yorker. Then in 2007, he reported there something that disturbed America’s aristocracy for it to be made public — “The Redirection”, about the U.S. government’s plan to bring “the United States closer to an open confrontation with Iran and, in parts of the region, propelled it into a widening sectarian conflict between Shiite and Sunni Muslims” — which raised a red flag on Hersh. More followed when he challenged the official story on “The Killing of Osame bin Laden”, which crossed the line so much that the New Yorker rejected it but he found a willing London Review of Books to pay his fee to publish it on 21 May 2015. Afterwards, yet again, the LRB published on 19 December 2013 his “Whose Sarin?” which raised serious questions as to whether U.S. President Barack Obama had lied to say that Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad was behind the 21 August 2013 East Ghouta sarin gas attack that crossed Obama’s famous “red line” and warranted the U.S. (as policeman, judge, jury and executioner, the international government, for the whole world) to bomb Syrian government forces as punishment. Next, on 17 April 2014 — also in LRB — came “The Red Line and the Rat Line”, reporting, about that sarin-attack, the study by:
<< 1 ... 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 ... 1261 >>
