“If [Putin] gets Ukraine, Belarus comes in, Kazakhstan falls in, and the Soviet Union is reassembled,” Clark said. “It’s always been a part of [Putin’s] big plan.” He said Ukrainians believe significant Russian action in Ukraine will happen sometime between May 9 and May 11.

Clark said that although the U.S. has “no real obligation” to militarily defend Ukraine because it is not a NATO country, it is in America’s interest to be proactive. The crisis in Ukraine “will still be viewed in the context of U.S. versus Russia,” he said. “It will be taken as a litmus of America’s strength and resolve.”

He said the U.S. has not intervened in Syria, and is reluctant to do so in Ukraine because Americans prioritize trade and economic development over military conflict. The same is not true of Russia, he said.

“If you talk to Russians, they see the world as a chessboard -- ‘This is my country, that’s your country, this country we can fight over,’” Clark said.'


Thanks, Purveyor.

Drat! I had reservations for dinner in Donetsk on May 10.

in the eastern part of the country to continue at least until then. It's hard to imagine election monitors wanting to work there in light of what happened to the OSCE monitors a few days ago. Another 95% vote (as in Crimea) in favor of independence/becoming part of Russia would play well in Putin's PR bag. There is nothing to be gained by a Russian invasion prior to the election. Afterwards, who knows.



Apparently the only part of Ukraine that has a majority ethnic Russian population is Crimea. Much of eastern Ukraine is majority Russian-speaking (aside from the northeastern and east-central parts) but not ethnic Russian. (I speak English but I am not English. If I moved to Austria, I would learn German but I would not become an ethnic German. My children would speak German but they would not be ethnic Germans, either nor would they necessarily want parts or all of Austria to unite with Germany just because they spoke the same language.)



I'm not sure that Putin really believes in the concept of self-determination for ethnic groups within old national boundaries. Russia has several regions self-determination for ethnic groups could impact the borders of Russia in a negative way.

My guess is the "Putin doctrine" is that the country with the larger army gets to decide where self-determination votes are held and where such votes should be considered as interference in the internal affairs of sovereign nations and an affront to territorial sovereignty that opens the door to chaos in many parts of the world.

Finally, since Putin seems to like to reference history as to why Russia's territory should include much of what is not Ukraine, here is a map of which people lived where just before the start of WWI. Note that "Ukrianians" covered a much larger area (including parts of western Russia) then they do today.



I realize that certain historical dates are more 'magical' to Putin than others in terms of where modern borders should be drawn. Presumably whatever historical date shows the maximum territory for Russia will serve his purposes best. I suppose we all want to recreate a history that serves our present goals the best.

Is there really a predominantly Jewish enclave in far eastern Russia?

So it would seem. It would also seem to be a ghetto of sorts.

Interesting info. Thanks for sharing.

he understands more than most, and he was probably not 'with' wolfowitz by his own choosing.

In this stunning but little-known speech from 2007, Gen. Wesley Clark claims America underwent a “policy coup” at the time of the 9/11 attacks. In this video, he reveals that, right after 9/11, he was privy to information contained in a classified memo: US plans to attack and remove governments in seven countries over five years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.

He was told: “We learned that we can use our military without being challenged …. We’ve got about five years to clean up the Soviet client regimes before another superpower comes along and challenges us.”

- See more at: http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/08/31/classic-why-real-reason-for-syria-war-plans-from-gen-wesley-clark/#sthash.v1Oztq9v.dpuf

Bush slipped.

Remember Bush's "Axis of evil?" North Korea, Iran and Iraq, I think it was. Well, one day, when Dimson was giving us his talking points, he slipped. He substituted Syria for one of the three. And I thought, I hope Syria heard that and figures it out.

Iraq, Iran and Libya we know what happened and what's been happening.

Somalia is the subject of a movie starring one of America's most beloved actors. Who's going to like those damned Somalians after they were so mean to Tom Hanks?

Lebanon, we've been invading since at least Eisenhower. Indeed, Bin Laden once cited blood of Lebanese children running in the streets when Poppy invaded as the day he vowed revenge on us.

Are we the ones who have been stirring the pot in Sudan, too?

With the exception of Lebanon, which is on the cusp, aren't these all Muslim countries? Middle Ages deja vu all over again.

That is what I would like to know.

Somebody's MIC profits must be down.

Jesus H. Christ, the US has had wars since I was a kid and I'm a fucking old man now. IT NEEDS TO STOP!!!!!!!!

nm

Russians in the Ukraine are disturbed by the coup d'etat against the government they had overwhelmingly backed in the 2010 elections and the coup government's use of Ukrainian ethnic identity. So they're clamoring for protection from the Russian government, which is treating this opportunistically and of course is provoked by the drive to push the borders of NATO all the way to Russia's. Both of these morons are war criminals -- Clark nearly set off World War III in Kosovo. Unless the State Department is planning to sponsor similarly anti-Russian ethnic coups in other former Soviet Republics, there is no fear of this insane scenario. It's straight out of the 1950s anti-communist propaganda book.

With Madeleine Albright's encouragement, Wes Clark helped end the mess in Kosovo as quickly as possible, with as few casualties.

As to the World War III b.s., General Clark checked with the NATO chief Javier Solana about his obligations vis a vis the British commander, who appeared to be exhausted and hysterical as the Russians approached the Pristina airport. General Clark complied with Solana's decision. It was the Brit who was hyper, as Clark sought to preempt a Russian advance on the Pristina airport.

I think plumbers are an admirable profession. They know a lot of shit. Fuck generals. This is supposed to be a democracy, not a military regime. Fuck the authoritarian respect for generals. What the fuck do they know? They specialize in mass murder. Fuck the American generals, fuck the Russian ones, fuck'em all. It's pretty sick that this is a respected profession. Anyone who pursues high military ranks is by definition a sick fucker. Not that military brass iredeemable, of course. We do have Smedley Butler as a counterexample.

It's no surprise that Clark lines up here with the monster Wolfowitz. Very funny that your citation of an associate to exonerate the war criminal Clark is the even bigger war criminal Albright, of "the price is worth it" fame with regard to Iraqi deaths from the US-UK sanctions regime.

There were many times in American history when this particular class was not lionized or taken seriously when they started talking up new wars. I guess it's an argument for having draft armies. Or none whatsoever. There is no threat to the United States that requires bases and deployments and blowing shit up around the world (which of course makes the "enemies" we then pretend to "defend" against).

Again, using an old, stupid, debunked RIGHTWING smear against Clark says everything about you.

He is one of the few of the true insiders who spoke out about PNAC.

Seems to be nothing but air and venom coming from the opposing viewpoint.

I'm crashing your view of how one should react to the profession of mass murder.

That is what "generals" are: people who prepare and execute murder on behalf of state goals. By definition. It needs to become a curse word. It is no different morally from "terrorist." They don't deserve better than air and venom. I don't give a shit if he's a "professional" who can explain in sober terms why he burned people with fire from the air on behalf of a big lie.

I can certainly see how someone who doesn't like the concept of national interests would feel that way.

I do wonder what the alternative would be.... preferably realistic...

I love it. The national interests of the world in 2014 indisputably lie with peace worldwide. That is in the national interest of every nation, a nation being a people who live in a country (and not an imagined entity for nationalists to exploit). The "national interest" would mean an end, for example, to the U.S. empire and its policy of interference everywhere, and a devotion of U.S. resources to real problems ($82 billion buys you another year murdering people in Afghanistan, or the tuition at every public university in the U.S., plus $20 bn left over).

National interest would mean summits and negotiations to disarm everywhere, and to shut down the arms race, the trade of arms, and the practice of covert warfare: everywhere. The biggest dog on the military pile is the only one who can lead such a rational course into the global future. National interest would mean dealing with the underlying burdens of national and personal debts, and an ecocidal economy. These are real problems to all nations, unlike the various illusions they have left over from their ancient histories that lead to the ethnic antagonisms and hatreds.

Thus our dispute is not about "national interest" -- I deny that you have any right to claim that more than I. Not "national interests" but insane ideologies and class interests rule. Thus you have washed-up old murder generals like Clark and unindicted war criminal architects like Wolfowitz trying to figure out how to involve the U.S. in yet another idiotic international mess, invoking "national interest," waving that fucking piece of cloth as if this is what binds us as humans. As long as they and their cronies and their class get to profit, of course. Fuck them. They are not your compatriots. They are your ruling class. They don't care about you. They don't give a shit about "nation," except insofar as they get to run an imaginary one in their power fantasies.

You seem to hold them very near and dear but you shouldn't confuse them for anything resembling reality.

Until you take human nature out of the equation you can forget worldwide disarmament. That's not even something to have a serious conversation about.

Humans fight... It's what we do...

Even now... especially now...

What you are talking about is the same reason communism fails. Perfect in it's ideal. Terrible and resulting in a horrific reality, all because those pesky human beings do what they do.

is another ideological construct, usually employed to justify a permanent state of war between "nations" as well as individuals. You don't get to define it either, or to use it as though it justifies anything you support.

Humans do not just fight, that is not "what we do." Usually, it's what the stupidest and least spiritually developed among us do, but guess what? They haven't always made all the decisions. They haven't won all the battles, or we'd still be without a civilization, shitting in the bush, and raping our own children.

Human nature is not just a matter of tribes murdering each other to see who comes out on top. The same human nature has produced art, music, philosophy and all kinds of high-minded ideals with enormous impacts on our lives today. It's those who were called dreamers and utopians whose ideas keep coming out on top, in the end. This is why we abjure slavery and child rape, once acceptable institutions.

Your ideal of "human nature" as accommodating preparations for mass murder is what's no longer a serious one. In 2014, with nuclear weapons and all the rest of our technologies, it's just stupid and easily the biggest threat to humans and their imagined nations.

Of course, finally, modern state-level "communism" was never tried - a few capitalist states attempted one-party dictatorships (while they were under attack from the other capitalist states). Hardly an effort.

Of course, communism in the sense of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" is everywhere -- nothing would function without it, including this machine we use to talk to each other. The naive idea is that the human race and its civilization can survive another round of where your acceptance of war will inevitably lead.

... then wouldn't they be the ones in charge?

A quick glance around the stage shows that to be the case in virtually all cases.

Ruthless and calculating with a big ass ol' stick tends to win out over idealism. For example please refer to the entire history of mankind.

We'd still have legal slavery and child rape.

That's right, assholes are in charge everywhere... and yet over the longest term, things keep changing for the better. Thanks to the dreamers and fighters for justice. Thanks to the real realists, who can envision a future that doesn't end with another world war.

You like to reduce human history to the wars and triumphs of the strong, that's your decision. That's your lack of imagination, Mr. Rogers of the 15 posts, arrived to give a boost to the war criminals Clark and Wolfowitz of all people. Hmph!

I can comfortably say that human history is a long list of conflicts. One after another that lead up to today.

Many of those conflicts resulted in the aforementioned changes for the better.

starting WW III is an old debunked RIGHTWING smear.

It shows how little integrity some DU'ers have that anyone would bring that up.

while they instigate unrest and provoke false flag Ops?

What an interesting pair. And there were DU'ers who were huge advocates of Wes Clark for President. One is known by the company one keeps.

Very sad to see this pair up. And, to see the pot being stirred for Ukraine to join Nato so that Putin is surrounded...and the cheering for more war continues.

OH! For some inane reason you meant the USA.

And Clark is one of the rare, few insiders to talk openly and expose the PNAC.

So yeah, we are known by the company we keep.

This thread could expose quite a bit.

Report to pick up your uniform. Bring the imbecile Krystol with you too. Romney may want to go fight the great bear as well.

Wolfie, McCain, Cheney, Neuland the PNAC wife.

and the people that support them.

The worst propaganda.

Its a flashback to 2000 with a big dose of the 1980's.

is doing (economic targeting). I have seen a lot of military moves already. Moving ships into place, bumping up troops on the EU side, etc. All short of actually sending our soldiers into Ukraine. We used to call this saber rattling - showing the other side what we have.

Personally I think the economic targeting is much better. It is hitting the target. After the USSR went broke trying to rule the world Russia have been regrouping. But I doubt that they are rich enough to withstand hits on their oil industry and their banking system - they are not rich enough to last out a real economic war for long.

However, these two military men are just part of the strategy. They yell for troops and it is heard in Russia.

I'm grateful that I see Russian troops are backing away from the Ukraine border today after yesterday's sanctions and troop presence in nearby countries. Maybe I'm naive, but I think this is working way better than what "the Supreme Allied Commander" wants. And if it has the name of comber licker paulie, then I KNOW I'm against whatever they have to say.

Remember, Clark was the pretend opposition to the neocons. He's been upheld as a real hero on this site, for his criticism of the Bush regime.

Here we see the two formerly antagonistic wings of the war faction seeking a mutual arrangement. Fuck them both. Humanitarian imperialists and neocon world-domination dreamers, hand-in-hand as they belong.

The question is, can enough of the people recognize their enemy - the domestic enemy, the one that consists of their power elite and especially the institutions of Wall Street on the one hand and the Pentagon/MIC/Top Secret America on the other?