NATO

NATO authorizes new NATO headquarters in Central and Eastern European states

Posted by

0

UNIAN
January 23, 2015

NATO to create offices in six countries of Central and Eastern Europe

NATO’s Military Committee on Thursday approved the establishment of international headquarters in Lithuania and another five countries of Central and Eastern Europe and intends to submit the proposal to defense ministers, Chief of the Armed Forces of Lithuania Major General Vytautas Jonas Žukas told Baltic news agency BNS on Thursday.

The decision is positive. These headquarters will be established,” the general told the agency by phone from Brussels, according to Baltic online news site Delfi.

“The headquarters, which will be directly subordinated to the head of the Allied forces in Europe, is proposed to be set up in Vilnius near the building of the Joint Staff. The staff will consist of 50% Lithuanians and 50% international forces.

The general also said that other similar offices should be established in Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria. They are to be set up this year.

The establishment of offices should be approved by NATO defense ministers in early February.

“It’s good news for Lithuania. We were able to achieve what we wanted,” Žukas said.

The offices will liaise between national forces, NATO forces in Lithuania, and NATO leadership in Europe.

“During the discussions we also approved plans to create a Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) and raised the question of NATO rethinking its strategy and assessing new threats,” he said.

 

Re-posted on https://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2015/01/23/military-chiefs-new-nato-headquarters-in-six-eastern-european-states/

Kolomoisky is preparing a massive private army for a coup in Kiev

Posted by

0

Posted on Fort Russ:

<iframe width=”480″ height=”270″ src=”//www.youtube.com/embed/YdX5dqMIyvQ” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen>

January 22, 2015
Phillip Ekozyanz – Oplot
Translated from Russian by Kristina Rus

Good evening, this is important and urgent information for all the Ukrainian people. Right now on the territory of our country there is a diversion operation taking place. What is it about, and what is its goal?

Active military operation along the entire front in South East. Bombing of residential neighborhoods. Soaked in incredible cynicism scenes of crying Poroshenko family on the graves of the people, killed by himself. New mobilization and callous forcing of peaceful people to war. Clear demonstration of helplessness of the Ukrainian army. All of this is just a curtain that is hiding the really important events.

Here is what is hidden from us. You may have noticed that just recently the pages of Boris Filatov’s (the right hand of Igor Kolomoisky) disappeared from social networks. At the same time appeared the rumors that the head of the European Jewry is folding. Exiting the game in Ukraine. And these rumors considering whats’ happening seem believable. But it is not truth. As one respected person said: “Benya is folding? You must be idiots!”

So what is happening in reality? Now, behind the scenes of Ukrainian theater, namely in Dnepropetrovsk, a powerful military formation is in the final stages of preparation.  It consists of foreign military battalions, and has a strong skeleton from NATO specialists. Dnepropetrovsk needed time to prepare, and a good smoke screen. This is why we see what we see. We observe the highest activity at all the areas of military-political field of Ukraine, all except for Dnepropetrovsk. It is hot in Donbass, Kiev, Kharkov, Odessa. Even Western Ukraine is heating up. Only Dnepropetrovsk is quiet. One does not hear from the masters of fate or the stars of Skype anymore . But as soon as Dnepropetrovsk ripens it will capture the power in Verkhovnaya Rada along with the right to institute a martial law. Dnepropetrovsk doesn’t need the Ukrainian army which exists now, created by hoarding the factory workers, peasants and shop keepers. In front of us it is being spent on the territory of Donbass, which is desperately defending itself.

In the next several weeks a new phase of Ukrainian crisis will begin – a destruction of Ukraine, and it will begin from Dnepropetrovsk. Everything is almost ready there. Repeating the words of Boris Filatov: “the time for promises is over, the time has come to hang all of us, Ukrainians”..

 

http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/01/kolomoisky-is-preparing-massive-private.html

Alert: Beginning January 6-7, Christmas false flag events may be planned in Ukraine

Posted by

0

Remember the multiple warnings in late November and in December about a false flag event that could involve tactical nuclear explosions? Such an event would be used to justify attacking Russia.

One of the warnings was from Russia’s State Advisor, Director of The Institute of Problems of Globalization, Doctor of Economics, author Mikhail Delyagin[i]

He said:

“And it is unlikely to happen right now, in mid-December. Because for a shock value it must happen on a Holy day. So I think that the threat exists before Christmas. The strongest threat.”

Christmas is celebrated in January in Ukraine and Russia. January 6 is Christmas Eve, and January 7 is Christmas Day. The holiday goes until January 19. So, “for shock value it must happen on a Holy day” would mean January 6 or 7, as the soonest.

… The sequel is coming. there will be another provocation. And what will the next provocation be? We got some information. .. I really hope that it’s a fake. I really hope that this is hostile propaganda. But you know, better be safe than sorry. The point is: Ukrainian army goes on the offensive. Yes, it doesn’t have the strength for the offensive and the level of demoralization is monstrous. Therefore it pretends to attack. Valiant soldiers carry out a massive artillery preparation. And all the Western media, not to mention Ukrainian, shout in unison about the liberation of another 300 square meters of Donetsk airport, for example. After that a tactical nuclear warhead explodes in the zone of the offensive of the Ukrainian army. Then everyone shouts that the monstrous Russia used nuclear weapons. Conversations about changing our military doctrine are moving in that direction. The liberal intelligentsia is already hysterically screaming about it. This is that which will be extremely difficult to clean up from. That which our military is not capable of, in principle, even theoretically. And that which is quite normal for the Americans, because both times of the use of nuclear weapons in the history of mankind it was them. To use it the third time is not so difficult.

Moreover, there were reports about wonderful Estonian port Paldiski – former Baltic, there is now a large warehouse of radioactive waste from all over Estonia, may be even from across the Baltic States. Spent x-ray medical devices and so on. And there NATO, U.S. military reportedly delivered some cargo, which also radiates, but in no case is it a waste to be disposed of. Just that the stock of radioactive waste is used as a disguise for the background.

…So [they] will explain to everyone that the damned Russian barbarians had used nuclear weapons against defenseless Ukrainian army. 

… – If possible, do you have information about how this warhead would be delivered to the zone of the Ukrainian army?

… In principle, it could be a cruise missile that will fly somewhere from afar, just on a low flight, below all of the locators. This could be a fixed delivery.

– Is the follow up script known?

It’s very simple. They all begin to shout, as we have just seen with the story of Malaysian Boeing that Putin is personally to blame. Actually no officer in the Russian Federation, no general of the Russian Federation, no last idiot in the Russian Federation can deploy a tactical nuclear weapon without the direct order from the Supreme Commander.

… Because they will be shown Ukrainian children burnt with radiation disease and all that is necessary to present in such cases. And this is not Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Because then the Americans were the winners. Now we will be the losers. That’s the difference. Global media is tightly controlled by the Americans.

Secondly, there are the apparent preparations by Kiev for a false flag event, with Ukrainian military vehicles being re-badged with Russian insignias and carrying Russian flags.[ii]

Thirdly, there have been a number of reports that the United States is planning to launch a nuclear first strike against Russia.[iii]

It is critical that information get to the public, to elected officials, and to the media on the real situation in Ukraine as well as information on a possible false flag attack happening this week.

These events could happen anywhere in Europe, too, since NATO leaders have been creating a high pitch of fear, even hysteria.

The only hope of preventing such foul deeds is to shine the bright light of publicity on the potential perpetrators so that the elements of surprise are gone. That is the only protection for the people of Ukraine, Russia, and Europe, as well as for all of us.

Be watchful and aware, learn, share, and build peace.

 

[i] http://delyagin.ru/articles/83509-zadacha-amerikantcev-otorvat-rossiyu-ot-evropy.html#.VIc493VQ2Jg.facebook
http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2014/12/is-ukraine-preparing-for-nuclear-false.html
Posted on my website: https://freeukrainenow.org/2014/12/14/are-ukraine-and-u-s-nato-preparing-for-a-nuclear-false-flag-to-frame-russia/

[ii] http://rusvesna.su/news/1418742084 http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2014/12/naf-intel-kiev-is-preparing-false-flag.html
Posted on my website: https://freeukrainenow.org/2014/12/19/naf-intel-kiev-is-preparing-false-flag-terrorist-attacks-on-strategic-facilities/

[iii] http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/06/indications-u-s-planning-nuclear-attack-russia.html Posted on my website: https://freeukrainenow.org/2014/12/14/indications-that-the-u-s-is-planning-a-nuclear-attack-against-russia/

http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-plans-first-strike-attack-on-russia-or-china/5384799

 

 

Yushchenko: More than half of Ukrainians will not support joining NATO or a single official language

Posted by

0

Posted on Fort Russ, December 30, 2014
Dnrespublika.info
Translated from Russian by J. Hawk

The former President of Ukraine gave Poroshenko and his advisors a lecture on how to end the civil war and how to start a national dialogue.

The former President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko stated in an interview that more than half of Ukrainians would not support the country joining NATO or enshrining the Ukrainian language as the only official language.

“If you are in favor of a single official language in Ukraine, please keep in mind that more than half of the people would not support this idea.”

Yushchenko also believes that the Poroshenko regime’s desire to push the country into NATO is likewise a measure to which 60% of Ukrainians are opposed.

“If you want to transform Ukraine’s security policy toward membership in a European collective security structures, keep in mind that 60% of the country will not understand why.”

In addition, Viktor Yushchenko argued in favor of a general national dialogue:

“Whenever we talk of policies that may be given the label “Yanukovych policies”, one has to remember that, in addition to Yanukovych, these policies were backed by 12-14 million of Ukrainians. So if we want to reach a national consensus, a national rapprochement, we shouldn’t speak of Yanukovych but rather those 14 millions who think along the same lines as Yanukovych. We have to understand our strategic interests and our past, all the while preserving a national dialogue.”

The former president underscored the need for the national dialogue to compel Poroshenko and his supporters to take into consideration the interests of all citizens of Ukraine, so that Ukraine’s diversity would never again become the source of conflict:

“The diversity of our country cannot simply be a set of contradictions, but rather a distinguishing feature, and once we realize that these differences exist then the next step is to plan how to reconcile these differences.”

Translator’s Note:

Given the mounting pressure from the West to come to terms with Russia (as evidenced by newly announced IMF conditions for the next loan to Ukraine, which include Russia’s postponement of Ukraine’s repayment of its debt to Russia), it may be that Yushchenko, while an opponent of Yanukovych in the presidential elections, is nevertheless being seen both by Ukrainians and (especially) the West as someone more capable of effectively enforcing a more conciliatory Ukrainian policy toward Russia. This is something that Poroshenko (due to the absence of his own political team) is incapable of doing (which is reflected by the cold shoulder he has received from the EU) and the Yatsenyuk/Turchinov clique is unwilling to do, preferring instead to attempt extorting billions of euros by threatening Ukraine’s collapse—which would be very difficult to avoid in the absence of the resumption of favorable Russian economic policies toward Ukraine. Yushchenko represents a substantially pro-Western political tilt without the virulent anti-Russian rhetoric that the current Kiev government excels at, which arguably makes him the most qualified to move Ukraine out of its current crisis.

http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2014/12/yushchenko-more-than-half-of-ukrainians.html

Original: http://dnrespublika.info/yushhenko-bolshe-poloviny-ukraincev-ne-podderzhat-kurs-v-nato-edinyjj-gosyazyk/

Saker: End of 2014 report and a look at what 2015 might bring

Posted by

0

http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2014/12/2014-end-of-year-report-and-look-into.html

Introduction:
By any measure 2014 has been a truly historic year which saw huge, I would say, even tectonic developments. This year ends in very high instability, and the future looks hard to guess. I don’t think that anybody can confidently predict what might happen next year. So what I propose to do today is something far more modest. I want to look into some of the key events of 2014 and think of them as vectors with a specific direction and magnitude. I want to look in which direction a number of key actors (countries) “moved” this year and with what degree of intensity. Then I want to see whether it is likely that they will change course or determination. Then adding up all the “vectors” of these key actors (countries) I want to make a calculation and see what resulting vector we will obtain for the next year. Considering the large number of “unknown unknowns” (to quote Rumsfeld) this exercise will not result in any kind of real prediction, but my hope is that it will prove a useful analytical reference.

The main event and the main actors
A comprehensive analysis of 2014 should include most major countries on the planet, but this would be too complicated and, ultimately, useless. I think that it is indisputable that the main event of 2014 has been the war in the Ukraine. This crisis not only overshadowed the still ongoing Anglo-Zionist attack on Syria, but it pitted the world’s only two nuclear superpowers (Russia and the USA) directly against each other. And while some faraway countries did have a minor impact on the Ukrainian crisis, especially the BRICS, I don’t think that a detailed discussion of South African or Brazilian politics would contribute much. There is a short list of key actors whose role warrants a full analysis. They are:

  1. The USA
  2. The Ukrainian Junta
  3. The Novorussians (DNR+LNR)
  4. Russia
  5. The EU
  6. NATO
  7. China

I submit that these seven actors account for 99.99% of the events in the Ukraine and that an analysis of the stance of each one of them is crucial.  So let’s take them one by one:

1 – The USA

Of all the actors in this crisis, the USA is by far the most consistent and coherent one.  Zbigniew Brzezinski, Hillary Clinton and Victoria Nuland were very clear about US objectives in the Ukraine:

Zbigniew Brzezinski: Without Ukraine Russia ceases to be empire, while with Ukraine – bought off first and subdued afterwards, it automatically turns into empire…(…)  the new world order under the hegemony of the United States is created against Russia and on the fragments of Russia. Ukraine is the Western outpost to prevent the recreation of the Soviet Union.

Hillary Clinton: There is a move to re-Sovietise the region (…) It’s not going to be called that. It’s going to be called a customs union, it will be called Eurasian Union and all of that, (…) But let’s make no mistake about it. We know what the goal is and we are trying to figure out effective ways to slow down or prevent it.

Victoria Nuland: F**k the EU!

Between the three, these senior US “deep-staters” have clearly and unambiguously defined the primary goal of the USA: to take control of the Ukraine to prevent Russia from becoming a new Soviet Union, regardless of what the EU might have to say about that.  Of course, there were other secondary goals which I listed in June of this year (see here):

As a reminder, what were the US goals in the Ukraine: (in no particular order) [Editor: I’ve substituted Saker’s colors for words]

  1. Sever the ties between Russia and the Ukraine [Still possible ]
  2. Put a russophobic NATO puppet regime in power in Kiev [Still possible ]
  3. Boot the Russians out of Crimea [Failed ]
  4. Turn Crimea into a unsinkable US/NATO aircraft carrier [Failed ]
  5. Create a Cold War v2 in Europe [Compromised ]
  6. Further devastate the EU economies [Still possible ]
  7. Secure the EU’s status as “US protectorate/colony” [Still possible ]
  8. Castrate once and for all EU foreign policies [Still possible ]
  9. Politically isolate Russia [Failed ]
  10. Maintain the worldwide dominance of the US dollar [Compromised ]
  11. Justify huge military/security budgets [Achieved ]

I have color-coded these objectives into the following categories:
Achieved – black 
Still possible – too early to call – blue
Compromised – pink
Failed – red

Current “score card”: 1 “achieved”, 5 “possible, 2 “compromised” and 3 “failed”.

Here is how I would re-score the same goals at the end of the year:

  1. Sever the ties between Russia and the Ukraine [Achieved ]
  2. Put a russophobic NATO puppet regime in power in Kiev [Achieved ]
  3. Boot the Russians out of Crimea [Failed ]
  4. Turn Crimea into a unsinkable US/NATO aircraft carrier [Failed ]
  5. Create a Cold War v2 in Europe [Still possible ]
  6. Further devastate the EU economies [Achieved ]
  7. Secure the EU’s status as “US protectorate/colony” [Achieved ]
  8. Castrate once and for all EU foreign policies [Achieved ]
  9. Politically isolate Russia [Failed ]
  10. Maintain the worldwide dominance of the US dollar [Compromised ]
  11. Justify huge military/security budgets [Achieved ]

New score card: 6 “achieved”, 1 “possible”, 1 “compromised” and 3 “failed”

At first glance, this is a clear success for the USA: from 1 achieved to 6 with the same number of “failed” is very good for such a short period of time.  However, a closer look will reveal something crucial: all the successes of the USA were achieved at the expense of the EU and none against Russia.  Not only that, but the USA has failed in its main goal: to prevent Russia from becoming a superpower, primarily because the US policy was based on a hugely mistaken assumption: that Russia needed the Ukraine to become a superpower again.  This monumental miscalculation also resulted in another very bad fact for the USA: the dollar is still very much threatened, more so than a year ago in fact.

This is so important that I will repeat it again: the AngloZionist Empire predicated its entire Ukrainian strategy on a completely wrong assumption: that Russia “needed” the Ukraine.  Russia does not, and she knows that.  As we shall see later, a lot of the key events of this year are a direct result of this huge miscalculation.

The US is now facing a paradox: “victory” in the Ukraine, “victory” in Europe, but failure to stop a rapidly rising Russia.  Worse, these “victories” came at a very high price which included creating tensions inside the EU, threatening the future of the US shale gas industry, alienating many countries at the UN, being deeply involved with a Nazi regime, becoming the prime suspect in the shooting down of MH17 and paying the costs for an artificially low price of gold.  But the single worst consequence of the US foreign policy in the Ukraine has been the establishment of a joint Russian-Chinese strategic alliance clearly directed against the United States (more about that later). Continue reading →

Are weather warfare assaults devastating noncompliant countries around the globe?

Posted by

0

For more on the subject of geoengineering, climate engineering, and weather modification programs, a few references are listed below following this article.

From Geoengineering Watch, December 9, 2014

Was Slovenia a target of a completely engineered catastrophe?
by Dane Wigington

Slovenia Ice Store 2The photo above was taken in Slovenia, 80% of the forests there were devastated by this completely unprecedented ice storm in February 2014. I was in regular communication with a contact in Slovenia just after the event. This individual made clear the fact that many of the citizens were absolutely convinced this destruction was the result of climate modification/weather warfare. Again, this magnitude of extreme ice storm is historically unprecedented, up to 6 inches of ice accumulation occurred. This is exactly the result that would be expected with massive chemical ice nucleation elements sprayed into a storm system. Is it just coincidence that many countries in recent years are annihilate by “natural cataclysms”? In 2010 Pakistan was resisting US policy just prior to record floods covering 20% of the country with water.

Pakistan Flooding

Record flooding in Pakistan shortly after the country showed resistance to US/NATO policies.

In 2011 Thailand refused an air base for the US government , shortly afterward Thailand was inundated with devastating floods.

Thailand-floods-007

Industry in Thailand was devastated during the floods of 2011 which came shortly after Thailand refused to allow a US air base in its borders.

Just over one year ago record strength typhoon Haiyan cut a swath through the Philippines. The US military went into the country under “humanitarian” pretexts, now the US is setting up military bases there.

Cyclone Haiyan

Cyclone Haiyan underwent intense and extremely anomalous strengthening just prior to it making landfall.

Available science data on the global ionosphere heaters (HAARP and SBX rf installations) indicate that they are capable of triggering seismic activity if the energy they transmit is concentrated in a seismically sensitive zone for a long enough duration. Even MIT confirmed the fact that there was extremely anomalous and unprecedented atmospheric heating directly over the epicenter of the Japanese quake of 2011. The Japanese were beginning to drift from their long alliance with the US prior to the quake, but have since completely solidified their alliance with the US. Is there a connection?

164537.MN.0314.japanquake.1.BRV.jpg

The devastation in Japan is far from over as the Fukushima meltdown still threatens the entire world.

What about Haiti? Is it just another coincidence that the US military went into the country under “humanitarian” pretexts and then occupied the country? Was the Haiti disaster just another convenient catastrophe?

bp1

Haiti has never recovered from the quake and the US military occupation continues.

Hungary has just been hit hard by a unprecedented ice storm and deadly “freezing fog”. Is it a just another coincidence that the relations between Hungary and the US/NATO powers have been steadily worsening, and just recently came to a head? Is Hungary only one of the latest victims for a global military industrial complex that is totally out of control?

Downed power lines

Downed power lines from the “freakish” ice storm that just decimated Hungary.

Militaries around the globe and throughout history have always desired weather and nature as the ultimate weapon. Are there wars now being waged around the globe without firing a shot? All available evidence says yes. Though there have always been climate related disasters, much of what we see today is unprecedented and seems to occur in correlation with geopolitical events or subsequent  occupations. The US military has boots on the ground in over 150 countries. The leaders of Iran have spoken out on the floor of the UN about NATO weather modification programs causing unprecedented drought in their country, are we to think Iran is the only country being covertly attacked with weather warfare? Many African countries have been devastated by drought for decades, most of those countries are now occupied by the US military. Is all this just coincidence? I think not.
DW
geoengineeringwatch.org

REFERENCES

US Military Weather Warfare Experiments
Owning the weather for military use
US occupies African countries
Additional references –Videos:What in the World are They Spraying?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9VcWkFrXWY

Climate Engineering, Weather Warfare, and the Collapse of Civilization
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/climate-engineering-weather-warfare-and-the-collapse-of-civilization/

Shasta County Board of Supervisors, Geoengineering presentation and comments, July 2014
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/geoengineering-investigation-demanded-by-shasta-county-residents/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4WhYKP83zo

Articles:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-ultimate-weapon-of-mass-destruction-owning-the-weather-for-military-use-2/5306386
The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: “Owning the Weather” for Military Use
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, January 12, 2014

http://worldvisionportal.org/wvpforum/viewtopic.php?t=296
Weather Weapons – A Present Reality; Excerpts from
“Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025
A Research Paper Presented To Air Force 2025, August 1996”
Posted on 08 Oct 2004

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/WOR406A.html
Chemtrails: Aerosol and Electromagnetic Weapons in the Age of Nuclear War
by Amy Worthington, June 2004

http://www.etcgroup.org/content/retooling-planet-new-etc-group-report-geoengineering
Report on Geoengineering: Retooling the Planet, 2000

Source:
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/are-weather-warfare-assaults-devastating-noncompliant-countries-around-the-globe/

NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander General Philip Breedlove warns about militarization of Crimea, but not about NATO’s expansion and military activities

Posted by

0

General Philip Breedlove’s philosophy, along with the U.S. and British government, is that the U.S. and NATO can take any action they want, right up to a country’s borders, and no country is allowed to take a responsive action. Even raising an eyebrow is condemned. In July, there was repeated shelling of border posts and over the border into Russia by Ukrainian government forces . A Russian citizen was killed in a  town on the other side of the border, as well as several injured, but this causes no condemnation, though it is as act of war. [1]

Illogical? Absolutely.  This is American and Western entitlement and arrogance at its worst. Every country of the world must realize the threat of “manifest destiny” which is at the root of American history and values. Independent countries are perceived as an unallowable encroachment on American dominance — territorial, commercial, financial, militarial. “Sea to shining sea” means everywhere — full spectrum dominance.[2]

Americans who find this utterly repugnant, who want respectful and harmonious relations with all nations, must stand up, expose, and condemn these racist, ultra-nationalist, and predatory American values.

We must build something different, and we must do it now.

From NSNBC, November 27, 2014
By Christof Lehmann
http://nsnbc.me/2014/11/27/nato-saceur-breedlove-warns-militarization-crimea/

General Philip Breedlove, NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) and commander of the U.S.’ European Command warned against what he described as Russia’s militarization of the Crimean peninsula and provocative Russian military flights through NATO airspace. Breedlove did not mention NATO’s sustained expansion of its presence in eastern Europe, the Baltic and the Black Sea. 

USS Ross, participated in NATO’s Sea Breeze drills hosted by Ukraine in the Black Sea in September and used Turkish ports to circumvent the Montreux Convention.

After meetings with Ukrainian government officials in Kiev, NATO SACEUR Breedlove addressed the press, warning about Moscow’s military buildup which includes cruise missiles as well as surface to air missiles, adding that this upgraded profile projects military power and influence throughout the region. General Breedlove added:

“We are very concerned with the militarization of Crimea. We are concerned that the capabilities in Crimea that are being installed will bring an effect on almost the entire Black Sea”.

Breedlove also expressed concerns about what he described as “the provocative Russian military flights” being flown over NATO countries, but added, that these flights all took place in international airspace.

Not mentioning any legal arguments, Breedlove would rather make use of strategic argumentation, saying:

“The number and the pattern has changed, maybe as much as three times as much as we have seen before. … Also, we see that some of these flights have increased in size, normally before seeing only one or two airplanes and now seeing a group of airplanes”.

Breedlove stressed that there has been observed “an unusual spike” in Russian military flights over the Black Sea as well as over the Baltic and North Sea and over the Atlantic Ocean.

Asked by several reporters, Breedlove consistently dodged questions whether the U.S. administration of President Obama should supply Ukraine with arms and other questions about NATO’s eastwards expansion and its increased presence in the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea. Breedlove’s answer, coming most closely to a response to such questions was:

“We continue to look at the requirements here in Ukraine. We continue to advise and offer thoughts on these, and nothing at this time is off the table“. (emphasis added)

The Obama administration has approved of a $118 million non-lethal aid package for Ukraine which reportedly includes body armor, that can be used by offensive forces, night vision devices which can be used by offensive forces, as well as three portable anti-mortar radar systems, which also can be used by offensive forces.

The U.S. administration consistently alleged that Russia is “fomenting an insurgency” in Ukraine’s Donbass region and that Russian forces, including Speznaz (Special Forces) crossed the border and are among the local self-defense forces in the Donbass region.

Not one Russian soldier, however, has been captured, documented to be killed, nor has it otherwise been “documented” with evidence that was made available to independent media for independent verification, that could support these claims. This is particuarly noteworthy in a time and age where almost everybody has cell-phones with both photo and video cameras. Russia vehemently rejects these claims.

To understand the bearing of General Breedlove’s statement it is necessary to understand NATO’s structure.

The vast majority of western Europeans are unaware of of the actual structure of NATO and that all key decisions are made in Washington.

It is a common misconception, especially in western Europe, that NATO is led by its Secretary-General. NATO’s Secretary-General is usually a European, which leads western Europeans to assume that Europe plays a significant role with regard to NATO policy.

The actual command structure of NATO in Europe, however, is led by the SACEUR, which is, and which always has been a U.S. general. The role of the Secretay-General is ceremonial and to some degree diplomatic, with NATO’s diplomatic posturing being determined in and by Washington. The selection of a Secretary-General can, however, help to determine which policies NATO plans to implement over a given period of years.

Breedlove did not mention that NATO has increased its presence in Poland and the Baltic countries; has increased its patrol activities over the Baltic Sea in cooperation with Sweden; has deployed missiles and jest as close to the Russian border as possible, has violated the agreement not to expand NATO beyond East Germany; has chosen Poland as base for the newly established “Rapid Response Force” which is directed against Russia; and has significantly, and in circumvention of the Montreux Convention increased its Navy presence in the Black Sea.

UNA-UNSO Marching in Ukraine.

NATO’s Black Sea vessels are predominantly vessels of the Arleigh Burke Destroyer Class which is capable of launching cruise missiles.

The Russian naval base in Sevatopol has, in other words, come under an increased and direct threat of cruise missile attacks, which would explain that Russia is forced to deploy strategic countermeasures.

It is also noteworthy that NATO’s covert warfare and covert “stay-behind” armies in Europe, a.k.a. GLADIO, are under the supervision and command of NATO’s SACEUR,

It is a well known fact that the Ukrainian UNA-UNSO, which is associated to the overtly NAZI Pravy Sector, and which has been re-dubbed into “special regional military units” also works in liaison and under the command of the at any time functioning NATO SACEUR. That is, for the time being, General Philip Breedlove.

CH/L – nsnbc 27.11.2014

Source:

[1] http://www.uacrisis.com/ukrainian-army-shoot-at-russian-territory-again-trying-to-provoke/

[2] from the American patriotic hymn, “America the Beautiful”

Nuland says Americans are ready to die for Latvia

Posted by

0

Worrisome increase in war hype from the West.

From the Institute of Modern Russia[i]
Paul Goble, November 22, 2014

Staunton, November 22 – When the Ukrainian crisis began, some commentators in the West suggested that NATO would not in the end fight to defend the Baltic countries even though the latter are full members of NATO by asking “who is prepared to die for Narva?” But now a senior US State Department has given a clear and unequivocal answer: Western countries are.

During a visit to Latvia this week, Victoria Nuland, US assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, said that “when NATO and the US as part of NATO took new members into the alliance, this means that we are ready to participate in the defense of the security of these countries, and this means that we are ready to give our lives for the security of these countries.”

That is why there are young American soldiers in Latvia now, she continued, suggesting that there should be “absolute clarity” that if someone attacks Latvia, we will be here to help defend Latvia” because “no one has the right to shoot at Latvia because no one has the right to shoot at the territory of NATO.”

In other comments, Nuland said that the sanctions the West had imposed on Russia were having an effect, “unfortunately” on the Russian people as well as the regime. But she said that the reason for that lies “in the actions of the Russian government” and not in the ill intentions of the West. If Russia lives up to its commitments on Ukraine, the West will lift the sanctions.

The assistant secretary added that “not only Americans but all people who consider themselves part of the North Atlantic space, including the European Union, are extremely disappointed by Russian actions which have undermined the territorial integrity of Ukraine,” actions that have continued “even after the signing of the Minsk accords.”[ii]

Russia has continued to send “arms and fighters to Ukraine,” Nuland said, and now “Russia must make a choice” about what kind of a future it will have.

Source: http://www.interpretermag.com/americans-are-prepared-to-die-for-latvia-nuland-says/
See opinion below about the purpose of this organization before risking a visit to this website.

——————————————————————————————

[i] WikiSpooks says IMR “is a typical example of what is referred to in domestic Russian policy circles as “Russia’s 6th Column” – ie those ex-patriot organisations working against the domestic Russian establishment…The president of IMR is Pavel Khodorkovsky, the son of Russian former multi-billionaire Mikhail Khodorkovsky (who was released from prison in Dec 2013).

…A 2013 Commonwealth Club of California seminar-note said that Pavel Khodorkovsky (President, Institute of Modern Russia) maintains close relationships with many Russian opposition leaders and will relay his thoughts on the current political situation and how Americans can support the democratic process.”[1]

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/The_Institute_of_Modern_Russia

 

[ii] Who torpedoes the Minsk peace agreement?
See http://nsnbc.me/2014/09/22/ukraine-general-breedhate-another-sabotage-sortie/
Ukraine: General ‘Breedhate’ in Another Sabotage Sortie
A very different opinion.

 

Dozens of “near miss” incidents have brought NATO and Russia to the brink of war

Posted by

0

From World Socialist Website, November 11, 2014
By Alex Lantier

According to a report published yesterday by the London-based European Leadership Network think tank (ELN), there have been at least 40 “near misses” in which the Russian military and NATO forces, sent to Eastern Europe following last February’s far-right, NATO-backed putsch in Kiev, came close to military conflict.

The ELN writes that NATO-Russian relations since March 2014, have been in “a situation in which mistrust, fear, and shortened leadership decision times characterize a volatile stand-off between a nuclear-armed state and a nuclear-armed alliance.” The report continues: “To perpetuate that reality in the circumstances described in this report is risky at best. At worst, it could prove catastrophic.”

The ELN is comprised of top-level security officials from a number of European imperialist countries. Its board includes Munich Security Conference Chairman Wolfgang Ischinger, former NATO Secretary General Javier Solana, former Defense Secretaries Des Browne and Malcolm Rifkind (UK), Volker Ruehe (Germany), and Alain Richard (France), and former UN Special Commissioner on Iraq Rolf Ekeus. In its report, it carefully selects the incidents it describes to falsely cast Russia as the aggressor.

Nonetheless, the reported incidents clearly illustrate the immense dangers posed to the survival of humanity by NATO’s reckless escalation in Eastern Europe in the aftermath of the US-led NATO regime-change operation in Ukraine.

Armies worldwide are on a hair trigger, with NATO jets patrolling the skies of the Baltic republics and other Eastern European states as little as a quarter hour’s flight time from Russian cities. Minor miscommunications between Russian forces and the NATO troops, fighter jets and warships flooding into Eastern Europe—or deployed in North America and the Pacific, where other “near misses” occurred—could rapidly escalate into a global nuclear conflagration.

One so-called “high-risk” incident occurred on September 5, two days after US President Barack Obama visited Estonia to assure it of Washington’s “eternal support” against Russia. “On 5 September 2014, an Estonian security service operative, Eston Kohver, was abducted by Russian agents from an Estonian border post. He was later taken to Moscow and accused of espionage,” the ELN writes. “Had the incident resulted in loss of life, there could have been a dangerous and uncontrolled escalation.”

As with most of the incidents the ELN reports, this event shows that the main war danger comes from NATO’s aggressive policies. Estonia is a tiny, non-nuclear Baltic country of 1.3 million people near the Russian city of St. Petersburg. It would use diplomatic channels to resolve the matter and not risk military escalation against Russia, if it were not receiving encouragement and strong assurances of support against Russia, including direct military support, from NATO and the United States.

Another “high-risk” incident was Sweden’s bellicose but fruitless hunt for a Russian submarine it believed to be in its territorial waters between October 17 and October 27. “Supreme Commander General Sverker Goranson underlined that Sweden was ready to use ‘armed force’ to bring the vessel to the surface if necessary,” the ELN writes. “Had the submarine been found and force used by Swedish authorities, this may have resulted in casualties and a further Russian military response.”

The last “high-risk” incident was the near-collision on March 3 of an SAS passenger plane and a Russian reconnaissance aircraft that was not transmitting its position to civilian air authorities. According to the ELN, a collision leading to passenger deaths would have led NATO to classify “further un-logged or blind air activity over Europe as a possible threat to life requiring forceful pre-emptive interdiction.”

That is, NATO would adopt the incendiary policy of tracking and destroying all unidentified flying objects in European air space—rapidly risking war with Russia.

The conflicts and the danger of nuclear war raised in this report underscore the catastrophic implications of the crisis of world capitalism. A quarter century after the fall of the Berlin Wall, followed by the Stalinist bureaucracy’s dissolution of the Soviet Union and the restoration of capitalism, a new world war is being prepared as the imperialist powers manipulate ethnic divisions within the former USSR to encircle and divide Russia.

The central danger to the working class is the aggressive policy of the NATO powers, led by the United States and Germany. They backed a putsch in Kiev spearheaded by forces of the Ukrainian fascist Right Sector militia. They then seized upon the resulting civil war that broke out between the far-right Kiev regime and ethnic Russian areas in eastern Ukraine to denounce Russia and dispatch military forces to Poland, the Baltic republics, the Black Sea region and Ukraine itself.

This offensive was justified in the NATO countries with lying claims that the US-led military alliance was intervening to support freedom. The risk of nuclear war resulting from the offensive against Russia was concealed from working people in America and Europe.

Recognizing the central role of NATO aggression in the Ukraine crisis does not imply support for reckless policies the Kremlin might employ as it tries to work out a new modus vivendi with Western imperialism. Representing a layer of super-rich oligarchs that emerged from the looting of public property in the Soviet Union, the regime of Russian President Vladimir Putin can make no appeal to opposition to war in the global working class.

Its Russian nationalist appeals are reactionary. They aid the imperialists in their efforts to stir up divisions between Russian and Ukrainian workers and within the international working class more generally.

Significantly, the ELN avoids mentioning nuclear weapons in the incidents it describes. However, both NATO and Russia are preparing their nuclear forces.

Washington has never issued a so-called “no-first-use” pledge, i.e., a guarantee that it will not be the first power to use nuclear weapons in a conflict. Top Russian officers are pushing for the Kremlin to explicitly define scenarios in which they would launch nuclear strikes against NATO countries.

In May, Russian and US strategic nuclear forces carried out dueling exercises. According to Kremlin outlet Russia Today, the Russian drills “demonstrated how the missile corps, artillery, aviation, and anti-aircraft defenses can be used—for instance, to destroy troops on the ground or to counter massive missile, aviation, or nuclear strikes by an enemy. Plus, it was shown how to inflict a launch-through-attack strike with nuclear missiles”—that is, a retaliatory Russian nuclear strike carried out as a NATO nuclear attack on Russia took place.

In September, as Russia carried out a further round of nuclear exercises, Russian General Yury Yakubov told Interfax: “In my view, our primary enemy is the US and the North Atlantic bloc … it is necessary to hash out the conditions under which Russia could carry out a preemptive strike with the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces.”

The ELN does report the following incident:

“In early September 2014, Russian strategic bombers in the Labrador Sea near Canada practiced cruise missile strikes on the United States. The Russian aircraft stayed outside of Canada’s ADIZ, but this was still a provocative move in light of the NATO summit ongoing at the time. Cruise missiles launched from the Labrador Sea would have Ottawa, New York, Washington, Chicago, and the Norfolk Naval Base in range.”

The cruise missiles the Russian bombers could fire at these cities could be armed with nuclear warheads.

Prior to the ELN report, this event was reported only in a Washington Free Beacon article by journalist Bill Gertz. Otherwise, this event—which illustrates all too clearly the risks posed by US policy in Ukraine—was totally blacked out by the US media.

Source:
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/11/11/nato-n11.html

Re-posted at
http://www.globalresearch.ca/dozens-of-near-miss-incidents-have-brought-nato-and-russia-to-the-brink-of-war/5413371

Posted under Fair Use Rules.

Operation Gladio and NATO’s stay-behind armies — a timeline of events

Posted by

0

From Anomalies.Net

Secret Warfare: Operation Gladio and NATO’s Stay-Behind Armies

Posted on Global Research, September 03, 2012

1940 In England Prime Minister Winston Churchill creates the secret stay-behind army Special Operations Executive (SOE) to set Europe ablaze by assisting resistance movements and carrying out subversive operations in enemy held territory. After the end of World War Two the stay-behind armies are created on the experiences and strategies of SOE with the involvement of former SOE officers.

1944 London and Washington agree on the importance of keeping Western Europe free from Communism. In Greece a large Communist demonstration taking place in Athens against British interference in the post war government is dissolved by gunfire of secret soldiers leaving 25 protesters dead and 148 wounded.

1945 In Finland Communist Interior Minister Leino exposes a secret stay-behind which is being closed down.

1947 In the United States President Harry Truman creates the National Security Council (NSC) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The covert action branch of the CIA, the Office of Policy Coordination (OPC) under Frank Wisner sets up stay-behind armies in Western Europe.

1947 In France Interior Minister Edouard Depreux reveals the existence of a secret stay-behind army in France codenamed „Plan Bleu“.

1947 In Austria a secret stay-behind is exposed which had been set up by right-wing extremists Soucek and Rössner. Chancellor Körner pardons the accused under mysterious circumstances.

1948 In France the “Western Union Clandestine Committee” (WUCC) is being created to coordinate secret unorthodox warfare. After the creation of NATO a year later the WUCC is being integrated into the military alliance under the name “Clandestine Planning Committee” (CPC).

1949 The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) is founded and the European headquarters is established in France.

1951 In Sweden CIA agent William Colby based at the CIA station in Stockholm supports the training of stay-behind armies in neutral Sweden and Finland and in the NATO members Norway and Denmark. Continue reading →