I pointed out the other day that it was very odd that Ukraine "officials" were using the term "terrorism" to describe the secessionist movements in the east of the country. It was a very strange term to use in a conflict that is clearly developing into a civil war, but also does not have any of the hallmark "terrorist" actions such random bombings, suicide or non-suicide at places that are not government property.
Recent events show that this use of "terrorism" is not accidental at all.
The CIA director was sent to Kiev to launch a military suppression of the Russian separatists in the eastern and southern portions of Ukraine,
Why is the director of the CIA going to Ukraine? Seriously. Why?
The CIA director instructed Washington’s hand-picked stooge government in Kiev to apply to the United Nations for help in repelling “terrorists” who with alleged Russian help are allegedly attacking Ukraine. In Washington’s vocabulary, self-determination is a sign of Russian interference. As the UN is essentially a Washington-financed organization, Washington will get what it wants.
This was also reported in RT.com and The Guardian UK. Why would the UN involve itself in what is currently a peaceful civil war? Furthermore why would the UN take the side of an coup government? Does Ban Ki Moon have any self respect whatsoever?
It is clear here that there are parties who wish to have war with Russia. Perhaps there is a wish to give the new Railgun a go. Perhaps there is intelligence telling US military commanders that they could prevail in a war with Russia. I don't know, but it is clear that there are enough people pushing for a war and that Obama currently is incapable or unwilling to to put a stop to those actors.
Mike Whitney pointed his readership to the
Wolfowitz doctrine:
The U.S. must show the leadership necessary to establish and protect a new order that holds the promise of convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests. In non-defense areas, we must account sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership or seeking to overturn the established political and economic order. We must maintain the mechanism for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role.
You know what we call someone who attempts to keep another person from protecting their legitimate interests? Bullies. And depending on what they do, we call them criminals.
It is clear what NATO is for and what it is trying to do in Ukraine. The question is whether or not the so called anti-war left has the guts to stand up to Obama and the Democrats and let them know that they are out of office should it happen. From the e-mail I get from the usual suspects, that is not going to happen.
