Iraq

UK and US depleted-uranium weapons for Ukraine

Posted by

0

From Beyond Nuclear
3-21-23

From Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament: 
The UK government is sending depleted uranium shells for use in the Challenger 2 tanks gifted to Ukraine, a move the longtime British peace and disarmament organization, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) has condemned as an additional environmental and health disaster for those living through the conflict.

Defence Minister Baroness Goldie admitted in the answer to a written question that armour piercing rounds containing depleted uranium (DU) were included in its tank package for Kiev. She added that the rounds “are highly effective in defeating modern tanks and armoured vehicles.”

A byproduct of the nuclear enriching process used to make nuclear fuel or nuclear weapons, DU emits three quarters of the radioactivity of natural uranium and shares many of its risks and dangers. It is used in armour piercing rounds as it is heavy and can easily penetrate steel. However on impact, toxic or radioactive dust can be released and subsequently inhaled.

DU shells were used extensively by the US and British in Iraq in 1991 and 2003, as well as in the Balkans during the 1990s…

CND General Secretary Kate Hudson said:

“Like in Iraq, the addition of depleted uranium ammunition into this conflict will only increase the long-term suffering of the civilians caught up in this conflict. DU shells have already been implicated in thousands of unnecessary deaths from cancer and other serious illnesses. CND has repeatedly called for the UK government to place an immediate moratorium on the use of depleted uranium weapons and to fund long-term studies into their health and environmental impacts. Sending them into yet another war zone will not help the people of Ukraine.” 

from Military Watch Magazine

American Depleted Uranium Weapons For the Ukrainian Army: Why is Russia So Worried?

1-30-23

Russia has issued a strong warning against the supply of depleted uranium weapons to the Ukrainian Military, amid concerns that a wide range of Western tanks and armoured vehicles set to be delivered to the country are designed specifically to use such munitions. Head of the Russian delegation to the Vienna Negotiations on Military Security and Arms Control Konstantin Gavrilov cautioned to this effect on January 25: “We know that Leopard 2 tanks, as well as Bradley and Marauder armoured fighting vehicles, can use depleted uranium shells, which can contaminate terrain, just like it happened in Yugoslavia and Iraq. If Kiev were to be supplied with such munitions for the use in western heavy military hardware, we would regard it as the use of ‘dirty nuclear bombs’ against Russia, with all the consequences that entails.” Regarding the possible responses Russia could take, Gavrilov elaborated: “If Washington and NATO countries provide Kiev with weapons for striking against the cities deep inside the Russian territory and for attempting to seize our constitutionally affirmed territories, it would force Moscow to undertake harsh retaliatory actions. Do not say that we did not warn you.” A number of analysts took this to be an implied threat of a Russian nuclear response.

Depleted uranium is prized as one of the heaviest elements on the planet, and is made from low-level radioactive waste left over from the manufacture of nuclear fuel or nuclear warheads which makes it affordable to produce in large quantities. Although it has been used in the armour of American M1 Abrams tanks, those intended for the Ukrainian Army will not have this armour the composition of which is a sensitive Pentagon secret. Aside from armour, however, depleted uranium is more widely used in anti armour weapons including the rounds fired by tanks and other combat vehicles to provide a greater penetrative capability. A notable example is the M829 armour fin-stabilised discarding sabot round which is compatible with M1 Abrams and Leopard 2 tanks, older versions of which were employed extensively by the Abrams during the Gulf War. Such munitions could be particularly useful in the Ukrainian theatre as Russia has continued to improve the capabilities of its frontline armour. The potential environmental impacts of their use, however, can be calamitous, with the radioactive particles emitted into the air when depleted uranium rounds are used having half-lives of over four billion years. The easily inhalable dust can travel for well over 40km from the site of each impact, creating a mass area effect. 

The effects of depleted uranium shelling were seen in the Gulf War, with British Royal Navy Commander Robert Green reporting: “a surge of unexplained illnesses, cancers and children born with genetic deformities among the Iraqi people, especially in the south near the battlefields.” A confidential UN report leaked in May 1999 similarly concluded regarding depleted uranium weapons: “this type of ammunition is nuclear waste, and its use is very dangerous and harmful.” In the subsequent Iraq War the following decade the city of Fallujah was particularly heavily bombarded by depleted uranium weapons by U.S. forces, with Professor Chris Busby. One of the authors of a survey of 4,800 Fallujah residents wrote regarding the connection between these attacks and the rapid increase in cancers and birth defects that followed: “to produce an effect like this, some very major mutagenic exposure must have occurred in 2004 when the attacks happened.” He concluded that some kind of uranium weapon had to have been the cause.

The Fallujah survey by 11 experts, which covered over 700 households, concluded that the effects on the population were “similar to that in the Hiroshima survivors who were exposed to ionising radiation from the bomb and uranium in the fallout.” Depleted uranium weapons were found to have had highly similar effects in Yugoslavia, and were also used for limited strikes by U.S. forces in Syria. Although Operation Desert Storm was authorised by the United Nations Security Council, the 2003 invasion of Iraq and bombings of Syria and Yugoslavia were widely considered by legal experts to be acts of aggression in violation of international law. This only increased the controversy surrounding depleted uranium attacks in these conflicts and the contamination that resulted. Legal arguments against supplying depleted uranium weapons to Ukraine, by contrast, are limited, and while Russia considers Ukraine’s ethnically Russian Donbas regions to be part of its territory, this is not internationally recognised meaning use of depleted uranium rounds there would constitute an internal Ukrainian affair. How Russia may respond to such weapons being used against the Russian population however, or against its own forces, remains to be seen. 

Note: Many of the details on previous depleted uranium attacks, and the causes of the U.S.-led military campaigns in which such weapons were widely used, were taken from the upcoming book by international security scholar A. B. Abrams: ‘Atrocity Fabrication and Its Consequences: How Fake News Shapes World Order.’

https://beyondnuclear.org/depleted-uranium-weapons-to-ukraine/

militarywatchmagazine(dot)com/article/hiroshima-uranium-ukraine-russia-worried
militarywatchmagazine(dot)com/

Iraqi Holocaust; 20th Anniversary of Iraq invasion, five million people dead since 1990

Posted by

0

From Global Research

Iraq Invasion 20th Anniversary: Five Million Dead in Iraqi Holocaust 1990 Onwards

by Gideon Polya
March 20, 2023

The 20th anniversary of the war criminal US, UK and Australian invasion of Iraq in 2003 will fall on about 20 March 2023. On this occasion mendacious and racist Western media will at best remember the Iraq War as a US policy mistake. However decent people will remember the carnage. From 1990 onwards Iraqi deaths from US-imposed violence and deprivation have totalled about 5.0-5.5 million, similar to deaths in the WW2 Jewish Holocaust (5-6 million).

(A) Some important prefatory comments on violent deaths, avoidable deaths from imposed deprivation, and culpability.

One notes that “holocaust” implies a large number of deaths whereas  “genocide” is precisely defined by Article 2 of the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the UN Genocide Convention) thus:

“In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such: a) Killing members of the group; b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group” [1].

Further, deaths in war and occupation come from violence and from imposed deprivation. Whether a child dies from violence (bombs, bullets or bashing) or from being deprived of life-sustaining requisites (food, potable water and medicine), the death is just as final, and the culpability of the perpetrator just as real. However while deaths in war from violence are often hard to assess, avoidable deaths from imposed deprivation can be estimated from comparative demographic data (that have been provided for the years from 1950 onwards by the UN Population Division). The methodology used to estimate avoidable deaths from deprivation is described in detail  in my book “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950” [2].

Culpability for avoidable deaths from imposed deprivation is set out by Articles 55 and 56 of the Fourth Geneva Convention ( the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons In Time of War) that state that the  Occupying Power  is obliged to supply the conquered Subjects with life-sustaining food and medical requisites “to the fullest extent of the means available to it”.These key injunctions of International Law have been grossly violated by the US and its degenerate and serial war criminal allies (notably the UK, Apartheid Israel, France and US lackey Australia) in the post-9/11 US War on Muslims [3, 4].

Scrupulously ignored by mendacious Mainstream media (M3) journalist, editor, politician, academic and commentariat presstitutes is the horrible reality that the ongoing Iraqi Genocide and Iraq Holocaust actually commenced 109 years ago with the British invasion of Iraq in 1914 for oil and imperial hegemony [2, 5]. The deaths in the various stages of the 109-year and ongoing Iraq Holocaust are succinctly set out below.

(B) Deaths from violence and deprivation in the ongoing, 109-year Iraqi Holocaust.

(1) British rule or hegemony (1914-1950): 4 million.

British interest in invading and conquering Iraq came from discovery of oil in adjacent Iran in 1908. Western violation of Iraq commenced with the British invasion for oil and imperial hegemony a mere 6 years later, in 1914 during WW1.  Churchill had forced the Ottoman Empire (1517-1924 Ottoman Caliphate) into WW1  by seizing British-built battleships that the Turks had already paid for. Assuming excess mortality of Iraqis under British rule or hegemony (1914-1950) was the same as for Indians under the British – interpolation from available data indicate Indian avoidable death rates in “deaths per 1,000 of population per year” of 37 (1757-1920), 35 (1920-1930), 30 (1930-1940) and 24 (1940-1950) –  one can estimate from Iraqi population data that Iraqi avoidable deaths from deprivation under British occupation and hegemony from 1914-1950 totalled about 4 million [2, 4-7].

(2) Gulf War (1990-1991) and Sanctions period (1990-2003): 1.9 million.

Violent deaths and avoidable deaths from violently-imposed deprivation in the Gulf War (1990-1991) and the Sanctions period (1990-2003) totalled  0.2 million and 1.7 million, respectively. During the Sanctions period the US, UK an Israeli air forces relentlessly bombed Iraqi infrastructure with consequent huge avoidable deaths from deprivation. On May 12, 1996, Madeleine Albright (US UN Ambassador and later US Secretary of State) defended UN sanctions against Iraq on a “60 Minutes” segment in which Lesley Stahl asked her “We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?” Madeleine Albright replied “We think the price is worth it” [6]. This was a singular instance in which the US admitted to its genocidal carnage. Back in 1990 eminent Australian medical scientist  Professor Fred Mendelsohn (his industrial chemist father Oscar Mendelsohn befriended and employed my Jewish Hungarian refugee father,  Dr John Polya, in about 1940) argued for peace and warned in a letter published by The Age (Melbourne) that huge numbers of children would die in the looming Gulf War. This wonderful and inspiring pro-peace humanitarian  was right – Iraqi under-5 infant deaths under Sanctions totalled 1.7 million, a massive crime against Humanity.

Continue reading →

Russia Warns Depleted Uranium Will be Considered a Nuclear Weapon

Posted by

0

M242 gun mounted on Bradley Fighting Vehicles going to Ukraine fire depleted uranium rounds.

Kurt Nimmo
January 27, 2023

Russia announced it will consider the use of depleted uranium akin to a nuclear attack.

Konstantin Gavrilov, head of the Russian delegation to the Vienna Negotiations on Military Security and Arms Control, said during a plenary meeting of the OSCE Forum for Security Cooperation,

“We know that Leopard 2 tanks, as well as Bradley and Marder armored fighting vehicles, can use depleted uranium shells, which can contaminate terrain, just like it happened in Yugoslavia and Iraq,” he said. “If Kiev were to be supplied with such munitions for the use in western heavy military hardware, we would regard it as the use of ‘dirty nuclear bombs’ against Russia, with all the consequences that entails.”

The USG and NATO have stocked depleted beryllium and uranium ammunition in Europe. Bradley Fighting Vehicles, according to the CIA’s propaganda conduit, Voice of America, will soon arrive in Ukraine. The M242 gun mounted on the Bradleys uses Depleted Uranium (DU) ammunition. Additionally, the Challenger tanks the UK is sending use 120 mm sabot rounds surrounded by a jacket of DU.

“DU is used throughout Afghanistan and Iraq, mostly in aircraft, tank, and Bradley Fighting Vehicle ammunition,” reports Iraq Veterans Against the War.

During the Iraq invasion, the USG fired DU rounds into civilian neighborhoods. “Coordinates revealing where US jets and tanks fired nearly 10,000 DU rounds in Iraq during the war in 2003 have been obtained by the Dutch peace group Pax,” The Guardian reported in 2014.[1]

According to [the IKV Pax Christi] report, which is due to be published this week, the data shows that many of the DU rounds were fired in or near populated areas of Iraq, including As Samawah, Nasiriyah and Basrah. At least 1,500 rounds were also aimed at troops, the group says.

It should be noted that an attempt to verify this information on the IKV Pax Christi website produces a page warning the site is dangerous and may have been hijacked. In other words, it was decided information about DU poisoning in Iraq and Afghanistan, including serious birth defects, is not something distracted plebs should be allowed to read.

In 2013, the World Health Organization attempted to downplay DU contamination in Iraq. Remarkably, and at odds with ample evidence, the WHO reported findings on spontaneous abortion, stillbirths, and congenital birth defects in Iraq “are consistent with or even lower than international estimates. The study provides no clear evidence to suggest an unusually high rate of congenital birth defects in Iraq.”

It really is amazing webpages posting this information disappear.[2] Instead, I will link to The Guardian’s post[3] on the topic which is, obviously, too controversial for the average citizen of the West. After all, if such information revealing the psychopathy of the USG and its national security state-created “defense” department were readily available, people may oppose, in far larger numbers than now, the USG’s role in Ukraine.

Iraq did not have WMDs, as Bush and his neocons insisted despite a complete lack of evidence, and therefore could not respond effectively to the invasion of its country. This is far from the case with Russia.

Both Gavrilov and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, along with Russian State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin, have warned that the delivery of long-range missiles to the Zelenskyy regime, as Volodin is quoted as saying by Sputnik International, “will lead to a global disaster and retaliatory measures from Moscow with the use of more powerful weapons.”

Gavrilov stressed Moscow will “undertake harsh retaliatory actions” if the USG persists in delivering long-range missiles and also depleted uranium, which Russia considers on par with a “dirty bomb.”

It is now manifestly apparent the West is eager to attack Russian cities. It will provide top-shelf weapons to accomplish its mission of destroying Russia, killing thousands if not millions of its people, and busting the country into malleable little dictatorships dutifully following neoliberal orders.

Russia will not do this. It remembers, every May 8, the “Great Patriotic War” that defeated the Nazi Wehrmacht as Operation Barbarossa, the largest invasion in history, came to a grinding halt amidst the brutal Russian winter.

The German Generalplan Ost to engage in ethnic cleansing, the genocide of “untermenschen,” and the colonization of Eastern Europe (lebensraum) failed miserably. It is conservatively estimated 26 million Russians died defending their country from Nazis who wanted nothing more than to kill them.

Is it possible the neocons driving this suicidal effort to “weaken” Russia are not capable of understanding that Russia, with its justifiable paranoia of invasion (before Hitler, there was Napoleon), will do everything in its power, as it did during WWII, to prevent what the neolibs and neocons have in mind?

I sincerely believe hubris, narcissism, and “exceptionalism” have warped the minds of people like Victoria Nuland and the despicable Senator Lindsey Graham. Nothing, short of nuclear war and its horrific consequence, will make these people think twice about the stupidity of a short-sighted Generalplan Ost of their own.

*

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Kurt Nimmo on Geopolitics.

https://kurtnimmo.substack.com/p/russia-warns-depleted-uranium-will

Also at

https://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-warns-depleted-uranium-will-considered-nuclear-weapon/5806185

Kurt Nimmo is a regular contributor to Global Research.

[1] theguardian(dot)com/world/2014/jun/19/us-depleted-uranium-weapons-civilian-areas-iraq

[2] emro(dot)who(dot)int/iraq/news/summary-report-on-the-congenital-birth-defects-study-in-iraq.html

[3] emro(dot)who(dot)int/iraq/news/summary-report-on-the-congenital-birth-defects-study-in-iraq.html

U.S. veteran intelligence advisors urge President Biden to change course now

Posted by

0

January 26, 2023

ALERT MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: VETERAN INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS FOR SANITY (VIPS)
SUBJECT: Leopards vs. the Russian Bear

Decisions in an Intelligence Vacuum

Dear President Biden:

We are aware that the just-reported decision to send Abrams tanks to Ukraine responds to Berlin’s coy insistence that “you go first.” Now Leopard tanks from Germany and other allies will also be sent. Trouble is that those few that make it into Ukraine will be late to the party.

What your advisers should have told you is that none of the newly promised weaponry will stop Russia from defeating what’s left of the Ukrainian army. If you have been told otherwise, replace your intelligence and military advisers with competent professionals – the sooner the better.

Poorly Served

It has long been clear that you have not been adequately briefed on two issues of major importance: (1) the war in Ukraine, and (2) the strategic partnership between Russia and China. We chose this genre of “ALERT MEMORANDUM” because we want to prepare you for a major shock. Russia’s winter offensive is about to roll over the Ukrainian army. At that point, unwelcome choices will have to be made. Off-ramps must be sought – again, the sooner the better.

Your intelligence advisers seem blissfully unaware of what is coming. Still less do they appear able to offer you options to head off further disaster for Ukraine without still more dangerous escalation. As for China, the partnership with Russia is now so close that there is now a risk of a two-front war with two strong nuclear powers strongly supporting each other against the U.S.

Escalation Dominance

President Obama conceded, in a 2016 interview with The Atlantic, that Russia has escalation dominance in Ukraine, adding that Ukraine is a core interest of Russia but not of the US Thus, he warned, “we have to be very clear about what our core interests are and what we are willing to go to war for.” Moreover, Obama’s warning came several years before the Russia-China entente took the solid shape it enjoys today.

Several of us undersigned were intelligence officers during Vietnam 55 years ago, when the Vietnamese Communists mounted a fierce country-wide offensive at Tet (late Jan. – early Feb. 1968). Earlier, smiley-face intelligence reporting from the military in Saigon left policymakers totally unprepared for the debacle. Recrimination was so widespread and bitter that President Johnson announced the following month that he would not run again for president.

VIPs’ Record on ‘Fixed’ (Corrupted) Intelligence

Twenty years ago, before the US/UK attack on Iraq, we warned President George W. Bush repeatedly that ‘justification’ for such an attack was based on false intelligence. (See, for example, “Today’s Speech By Secretary Powell At The UN” and “Iraq Intel: Forgery, Hyperbole, Half-Truth.”) Five years later, the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Jay Rockefeller, releasing the bipartisan conclusions of a 5-year committee investigation, summed them up with these words:

“In making the case for war, the [Bush] Administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent.”

‘Nonexistent’! Ponder that. Manufactured, fraudulent. In our Feb. 5, 2003 Memo on Secretary of State Colin Powell’s speech, we warned that the unintended consequences of an attack on Iraq were likely to be catastrophic. We also urged President Bush to widen the circle of his advisers “beyond those clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason.”

President Biden, please consider widening your circle now. Bring in new blood, with proven experience and the ability to weigh things dispassionately and understand the perspectives of other countries.

Continue reading →

Webinar on Ukraine: Conversation with Scott Ritter

Posted by

0

Presented by United National AntiWar Coalition – UNAC

A conversation with Scott Ritter

Hosted by Margaret Flowers and Joe Lombardo
Wednesday, April 6

Scott Ritter was the UN weapons inspector who, during the Iraq War told the truth that we found no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.  He became outspoken about this, which undercut the main reason the US used to invade and occupy Iraq. As with the Iraq War, Scott Ritter is outspoken about the present war in Ukraine, in which we are again hearing US lies about the reasons for, and the events happening in the Ukraine War. His vast experience and knowledge working in the military and with various international agencies helps expose the truth about what is happening in Ukraine.

http://www.unacpeace.org/

Scott Ritter on repression and censorship in the United States – Pity the nation

Posted by

0

From Consortium News


Pity the nation whose people are sheep

And whose shepherds mislead them…

Pity the nation oh pity the people

Who allow their rights to erode

and their freedoms to be washed away

– Lawrence Ferlinghetti

by Scott Ritter

March 09, 2022: –  In the past few months, the United States has undergone a kind of transformation that one only reads about in history books — from a nation which imperfectly, yet stolidly, embraced the promise, if not principle, of freedom, especially when it came to that most basic of rights — the freedom of expression. Democracies live and die on the ability of an informed citizenry to engage in open debate, dialogue and discussion about difficult issues. Freedom of speech is one of the touch-stone tenets of American democracy — the idea that, no matter how out of step with mainstream society one’s beliefs might be, the retained right to freely express opinions thus derived without fear of censorship or repression existed.

No more.

In the aftermath of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Russophobia which had taken grip in the United States since Russia’s first post-Cold War president, Boris Yeltsin, handed the reins of power over to his hand-picked successor, Vladimir Putin, has emerged much like the putrid core of an over-ripe boil. That this anti-Russian trend existed in the United States was, in and of itself, no secret. Indeed, the United States had, since 2000, pushed aside classic Russian area studies in the pursuit of a new school espousing the doctrine of “Putinism,” centered on the flawed notion that everything in Russia revolved around the singular person of Vladimir Putin.

The more the United States struggled with the reality of a Russian nation unwilling to allow itself to be once again constrained by the yoke of carpetbagger economics disguised as “democracy” that had been prevalent during the Yeltsin era, the more the dogma of “Putinism” took hold in the very establishments where intellectual examination of complex problems was ostensibly transpiring — the halls of academia which in turn produced the minds that guided policy formulation and implementation.

Outliers like Jack Matlock, John Mearsheimer and Stephen Cohen were cashiered in favor of a new breed of erstwhile Russian expert, led by the likes of Michael McFaul, Fiona Hill and Anne Applebaum. Genuine Russian area studies was supplanted by a new field of authoritarian studies, where the soul of a nation that once was defined by the life and works of Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Gorky, Lenin, Stalin, Sakharov, and Gorbachev was distilled into a shallow caricature of one man — Putin.

We had seen this play before, in the buildup to the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Iraq, when the national identity of a people who traced their heritage back to the Biblical times of Babylon was encapsulated in the person of one man, Saddam Hussein. By focusing solely on a manufactured narrative derived from a simplistic understanding of one man, the United States papered over the complex internal reality of the Iraqi nation and its people, and in doing so set itself up for defeat. It was if Iraq’s long and storied history ceased to exist.

The impact this erasure of context and relevance from the national discourse was felt in the lead up to the decision to initiate what was, by all sense and purposes, an illegal war of aggression — the greatest war crime of all, according to U.S. Supreme Court justice and U.S. chief prosecutor during the Nuremburg War Crimes Tribunal, Robert H. Jackson.

My own personal experience serves as witness to this reality. As a former chief weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991-1998, I was uniquely positioned to comment on the veracity of the claims made by the United States that Iraq retained weapons of mass destruction capability in violation of its obligation to be disarmed of such. When my stance was deemed convenient to a narrative attacking a Democratic president, Bill Clinton, I was readily embraced. However, when my fact-based narrative ran afoul of the regime-change policies of Clinton’s successor, George W. Bush, I was cast aside as a pariah.

Politics of Personal Destruction

The politics of personal destruction were employed in full, and I was attacked for being a shill of Saddam and, perhaps worst of all for someone who served his nation proudly and honorably as an officer of U.S. Marines, anti-American. It didn’t matter that, without exception, the fact-based arguments I made challenging the case for war with Iraq proved to be accurate — at the time and place where the arguments could have, and should have, resonated greatest (during the buildup to the invasion) — that my voice had been effectively silenced.

I see the same template in play again today when it comes to the difficult topic of Russia. Like every issue of importance, the Russian-Ukraine conflict has two sides to its story. The humanitarian tragedy that has befallen the citizens of Ukraine is perhaps the greatest argument one can offer up in opposition to the Russian military incursion. But was there surely a viable diplomatic off ramp available which could have avoided this horrific situation?

To examine that question, however, one must be able and willing to engage in a fact-based discussion of Russian motives. The main problem with this approach is that the narrative which would emerge is not convenient for those who espouse the Western dogma of “Putinism,” based as it is on the irrational proclivities and geopolitical appetite of one man — Vladimir Putin.

The issue of NATO expansion and the threat it posed to Russian national security is dismissed with the throw-away notion that NATO is a defensive alliance and as such could pose no threat to Russia or its leader. The issue of the presence of the cancer of neo-Nazi ideology in the heart of the Ukrainian government and national identity is countered with the “fact” that Ukraine’s current president is himself a Jew. The eight-year suffering of the Russian-speaking citizens of the Donbass, who lived and died under the incessant bombardment brought on by the Ukrainian military, is simply ignored as if it never happened.

The problem with the pro-Ukrainian narrative is that it is at best incomplete, and worse incredibly misleading. NATO expansion has been consistently identified by Russia as an existential threat. The domination of the hate-filled neo-Nazi ideology of the Ukrainian far-right is well documented, up to and including their threat to kill the incumbent president, Volodymyr Zelensky, if he did not do their bidding. And the fact that the former president of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, promised to make the Russian-speaking population of the Donbass cower in the basements under the weight of Ukrainian artillery fire is well documented.

Unfortunately for those seeking to have an informed, fact-based discussion, dialogue, and debate about the complex problem that is Ukraine-Russian relations is the reality that facts are not conducive to the advancement of the “Putinism” dogma that has gripped American academia, government, and mainstream media today.

The Saddam-era tactics of smearing the character of anyone who dares challenge what passes for conventional wisdom when it comes to Russia and its leader is alive and well and living in the land of the free and the home of the brave. The age-old tactic of boycotting such voices by the mainstream media is in full-swing — the so-called news channels are flooded with the acolytes of “Putinism,” while anyone who dares challenge the officially sanctioned narrative of “Ukraine good, Russia bad” is excluded from participating in the “discussion.”

‘Russian Misinformation’

And, in this age where social media has, in many ways, supplanted the mainstream media as the source of choice for most Americans, the U.S. government has colluded with the commercial providers of the major platforms used to share information to label anything that deviates from the official line as “Russian misinformation,” going so far as to label data derived from Russian sources as “state-sponsored,” along with a warning that supposes the information within is somehow flawed and dangerous to normal democratic discourse.

The ultimate sanction, however, came when the U.S. government pressured the corporate internet providers to shut down all Russian-affiliated media, leading to the closure of RT America and other media outlets whose accuracy and impartiality, upon examination, far exceeded that of their American counterparts.

Now America is taking it to the next level when it comes to the pandemic of Russophobia that is sweeping across the country, purging everything Russian from the national discourse and experience. Russian books are being banned and Russian restaurants boycotted and worse, attacked. The massive economic sanctions enacted against Russia and the Russian people has extended to what amounts to an erasure of all things Russian from the American experience.

Where will this stop? History shows that America is capable of healing itself — the national shame that was the treatment of Japanese- Americans during World War II is a clear demonstration of this phenomenon. However, the politics of cancellation which has emerged in the American body politic has never carried with it the kind of potential blow-back that exists in the case of Russia.

In the pell-mell rush toward cancelling Russia in the name of defeating Putin, emotion has replaced common sense, to the point that people are ignoring the fact that Russia is a nuclear power willing and able to use its Armageddon-inducing arsenal in defense of what it views as its legitimate national security interests.

There has never been a time when a national discussion has been more essential to the continued survival of the American people and all humanity. If this discussion could occur armed with the full range of facts and opinions relating to Russia, there might be hope that reason would prevail, and all nations would walk away from the abyss of our collective suicide. Unfortunately, the American experiment in democracy is not conducive for such near-term embrace of sanity and reason.

“Pity the nation,” Ferlinghetti wrote, “whose leaders are liars, whose sages are silenced, and whose bigots haunt the airwaves.”

Pity America.

Scott Ritter is a former U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union

https://consortiumnews.com/2022/03/07/pity-the-nation/

Remember 2003’s ‘weapons of mass destruction’ fraud?

Posted by

0

From Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space.

Remember this time?
February 14
By Bruce Gagnon

Yes, remember

2003

shock and awe

WMD in Iraq

the mushroom cloud

the smoking gun

bio-logical weapons

Turned out to be all lies

Media,

White House,

Congress

hand-in-hand

pushed the war

No WMD ever

found in Iraq

Today same MO,

every criminal

has one

Modus Operandi,

a way of

repeating the same

bad behavior

In this case 

we can call it

western,

US-UK-NATO,

insanity,

pure depravity, 

pure evil

Virtually no one

in the Congress

mouthing

a mumbling word,

the Dems have gone

warmongering….

An election coming

soon you know,

can’t make any waves

in Washington,

can’t piss off

the MIC either

Democracy

is dead.

The wedding

of Mr. Big

and government

is complete.

Friendly Fascism 

it’s called,

three-piece suit,

Wall Street

variety.

But the liberals

don’t want to 

hear it,

got to support Biden 

and hold onto the

Senate and House.

Forget about 

holding onto 

democracy,

it’s already

drifting away

with the rising 

Atlantic waters.

http://space4peace.blogspot.com/2022/02/remember-this-time.html

Victoria Nuland’s role in 30 years of U.S. invasions and interference

Posted by

0

“Progressives in Congress and their partners in the media, think tank world, and among grassroots activists should join forces with the growing caucus of anti-interventionist Republicans on the Hill and vigorously oppose her nomination.” — James W. Carden
theamericanconservative.com/articles/stop-bidens-neocon-nominee-to-the-state-department/

“Victoria Nuland is highly dangerous and should not be confirmed.”

From MintPressNews
February 11, 2012
Rick Sterling

As the Senate prepares to confirm Nuland for Under Secretary for Political Affairs, a reflection of her last 30 years in government shows how she was connected to nearly every foreign policy disaster undertaken by the United States.

President Joe Biden’s nomination of Victoria Nuland for Under Secretary for Political Affairs, the third-highest position at the State Department, is a dangerous sign. Nuland exemplifies the neoconservatives who have led American foreign policy from one disaster to another for the past 30 years, all while evading any shred of accountability.

As a top-level appointee, Nuland must still be confirmed by the Senate. And while pro-peace groups have waged a campaign to stop her confirmation, reflecting on her career in public service makes clear why she is incompetent, highly dangerous, and should not be confirmed.

Afghanistan and Iraq

From 2000 to 2003, when the Bush administration attacked and then invaded Afghanistan, Nuland was serving as Bush’s permanent representative to NATO. The Afghan government offered to work with the Americans to remove al-Qaeda, but the offer was rejected. After al-Qaeda was defeated, the U.S. could have left Afghanistan but instead stayed, established semi-permanent bases, splintered the country, and is still fighting there two decades later.

From 2003 to 2005, Nuland was principal foreign policy advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney who “helped plan and manage the war that toppled [Iraqi leader] Saddam Hussein, including making [the] Bush administration’s case for preemptive military action based on Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction.” The foreign policy establishment, including Nuland, insisted that removing Saddam Hussein and installing a U.S. “ally” would be simple.

The invasion and continuing occupation have resulted in over a million dead Iraqis, many thousands of dead Americans, hundreds of thousands with PTSD, and a bill for American taxpayers of 2 to 6 trillion dollars.

Continue reading →

Gen. Wesley Clark 2007 interview: U.S. planned to take out 7 countries in 5 years, finishing with Iran

Posted by

0

From Democracy Now

Interview with retired Gen. Wesley Clark
March 2, 2007

Excerpt:

About 10 days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon, and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military, and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”

So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the secretary of defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”

For the full interview:
https://www.democracynow.org/2007/3/2/gen_wesley_clark_weighs_presidential_bid