In Ukraine, the US is dragging us towards war with Russia

a reply to: ALoveSupreme

The problem with Putin is that he is escalating a situation in a manner that harkens back to the very worst of the Cold War era, when USA and Soviet leaders both pushed things to the brink of annihilation. He is changing the 'rules of the game' in a retrograde way, also engaging in a type of authoritarianism and propagandistic agitation which is highly rooted in ideas of ethnic/national supremacy (aka 'fascism').

When Putin reacts to encroachment and subtle offenses towards his country then it is authoritarianism and fascism, however, when US forces similar agendas all over the world in different flavors, then it is NWO and democracy for all.

I am sure more than 100 times on ATS in various threads it has been pointed out by one side as to why is Putin really acting in such a bold and 'near war' like manner. No need to repeat that again.

However, what needs to be repeated is "Russia will not back down from Ukraine" and even if that means a war with anyone.

Why is US/West so concerned about 'immoral' gay rights in Russia when similar rights are violated in Islamic nations with the death penalty exercised with medieval brutality like stoning etc. And this only one example of double standards of the west.

The tensions, problems and nose poking practices arise from the West and this has to stop for the global peace and focus on the real issues of the humanity.

a reply to: Jalbrook

I tend to consider the BRICS "alliance" as a non-entity. I admit that this may turn out to be a grave error in the future, but for now there is just too little substance to the acronym to consider it a major influence in geopolitical affairs. If these nations formalize an alliance in the next couple of decades, then there could be consequences for the US to consider, but as of right now they have little in common beyond their extraordinary economic growth.

The major impediment to the BRICS alliance is China's demeanor towards both Russia and India. China is like a *snip* nation that tends to its own selfish interests only. Both Russia and India are afraid of China's commie mentality and expansionist and suppressive attitude. Brazil and South Africa are only "also ran" type participants when it comes to alliance.

Russia should focus "in parallel" to make an alliance with Middle Eastern nations and more so because a large percent of Russian population is Islamic. Iran, Egypt, Syria, Iraq etc. will be more loyal as allies.

Also, when looking in detail one can find that China is really a 'parasite' nation and seeks to benefit and feed upon the other nations. Making a trustworthy alliance with such powers is difficult and asking for betrayal type surprises during the critical times.

originally posted by: victor7
a reply to: ALoveSupreme


Why is US/West so concerned about 'immoral' gay rights in Russia when similar rights are violated in Islamic nations with the death penalty exercised with medieval brutality like stoning etc. And this only one example of double standards of the west.

The tensions, problems and nose poking practices arise from the West and this has to stop for the global peace and focus on the real issues of the humanity.

I do not think it is gay rights that are of a top concern at all. That is just a social issue which is popular in the media and which the masses can easily relate to. Few wars have ever been fought primarily over popular or humanitarian issues, and I doubt that will change anytime soon.

originally posted by: ALoveSupreme

originally posted by: victor7
a reply to: ALoveSupreme


Why is US/West so concerned about 'immoral' gay rights in Russia when similar rights are violated in Islamic nations with the death penalty exercised with medieval brutality like stoning etc. And this only one example of double standards of the west.

The tensions, problems and nose poking practices arise from the West and this has to stop for the global peace and focus on the real issues of the humanity.

I do not think it is gay rights that are of a top concern at all. That is just a social issue which is popular in the media and which the masses can easily relate to. Few wars have ever been fought primarily over popular or humanitarian issues, and I doubt that will change anytime soon.

That's true, such immorality is not a big concern but in Russia's case, it was made a global media issue, so much so that Olympics boycotts and similar high profile threats were used.

It is like the drug addicts who offer free drugs to sober people in order to make them addicts also. EVILNESS !!

Good morning, Jalbrook.
I'm sorry I couldn't answer sooner, and my answer will also have to be a short one:

originally posted by: Jalbrook
How would antagonizing Russia and cutting off access to trade routes in the Black Sea be beneficial for the US?

Because territorial control over the Black Sea (and subsequently access to the mediterranean area's "honeypot") sets the terms for the next century.

originally posted by: Jalbrook
NATO as a whole would suffer by the increased price of oil when Russia either refuses to trade with member states or passes on the increased price of transport to them.

Not if you consider what they're aiming for in the long-run, or what the west risks to lose if Russia can ensure its foothold in the struggle for the hegemony in the energy sector.
Also, how do the latest western sanctions fit your premise?

originally posted by: Jalbrook
The US's economic stability comes from its nature as a free floating currency coupled with its strong central bank and expansive banking system. As a plus, it has strong ties to other economic powerhouses like Germany and Japan, allowing it to manipulate markets to manufacture stability in times of crisis (the Plaza Accord).

See, I don't subscribe to the idea that floating exchange rates between paper currencies equal stability. Quite the opposite. The propagated "flexibility" of floating paper currencies is just a cover for running deficits, while avoiding the consequence of a negative cash flow.
In reality, the currencies do not “float”, they just sink at different rates relative to each other.
That is the overall problem with the fiat-scheme: the "money" is only borrowed into existence, and the bill is in the mail... guess who's going to pay?
Also, the plaza accord doesn't exist anymore (at the latest with the end of the DM), and - although it saddens me as a German - I wouldn't bet on "strong US-German ties" lately, given how the US under Obama are trampeling on our "alliance".

originally posted by: Jalbrook
I tend to consider the BRICS "alliance" as a non-entity.[...]

BRICS doesn't have to be a real fix "alliance".
It is enough if just two or three of them decide to trade in Ruble, Renminbi or Gold, instead of USD.

originally posted by: victor7

originally posted by: ALoveSupreme

originally posted by: victor7
a reply to: ALoveSupreme


Why is US/West so concerned about 'immoral' gay rights in Russia when similar rights are violated in Islamic nations with the death penalty exercised with medieval brutality like stoning etc. And this only one example of double standards of the west.

The tensions, problems and nose poking practices arise from the West and this has to stop for the global peace and focus on the real issues of the humanity.

I do not think it is gay rights that are of a top concern at all. That is just a social issue which is popular in the media and which the masses can easily relate to. Few wars have ever been fought primarily over popular or humanitarian issues, and I doubt that will change anytime soon.

That's true, such immorality is not a big concern but in Russia's case, it was made a global media issue, so much so that Olympics boycotts and similar high profile threats were used.

It is like the drug addicts who offer free drugs to sober people in order to make them addicts also. EVILNESS !!

So you are actually suggesting that being homosexual is immoral and is a choice/habit?

a reply to: ALoveSupreme

Yes it is grossly immoral and 95% of gays are by choice i.e. they could not find opposite sex......being misfit or some personal trait etc.

Would not discuss on this anymore, thanks !!

I didn't create this thread to discuss homosexuality or whether
it is Immoral or otherwise.

The thread was created to discuss the contents of the article which is in the OP.



Sort yourselves out or go away ...

a reply to: rigel4

Hey man you do not see the connection and strategy that Putin has played brilliantly on this issue. War is on all fronts and issues not only on the battlefield and hence Putin pulled a master stroke on the US daily culture.

The Hate and DisLike of Russia is so big in the US that anything the Russians do to improve their country and culture will be immediately "bad mouthed" and "Opposed" by the US all across their own culture and daily way of life.

Hence Putin chose to oppose the "gay lifestyles" in his country and got two immediate benefits.

a) Cleaned up his country's culture and steered it into more moralistic path.

b) Anticipating the US reaction correctly he steered the US to more immoral path as US was quick and smooth to speak for the "glorious gay lifestyles" and even promoted its mass media ads and gay marriages across the society.

In other words, create a decay in opponent's society and win the battle from within, without fighting a war and all the related destruction etc.

Is not Putin a smart operator !!!!!!!!!!!!!! God is on his side !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

a reply to: ColCurious

I'm also rather limited on time these days, so no worries on the delayed reply.

I noted your point about shale gas/oil in one of your prior posts, but I didn't realize you considered it so central to your analysis. So rather than engage in the specific points of your most recent post, I'd just like to ask why you believe the United States wants anything to do with the Mediterranean "honeypot?" It would obviously be a boon if US based corporations could secure contracts to drill in Ukraine/the Black Sea. However, the United States currently has proven reserves that surpass every other country but China. It's now a net exporter of oil, and will be probably be so for the next couple of decades, decades which will continue to see the reliance on fossil fuels drop. Though Ukraine's reliance on Russian oil does highlight another reason for Russia to instigate the attack-- the US peacefully acquiring the rights to Ukraine's shale reserves/access to the Black sea reserves would end any chance for Russia to manipulate its way into acquiring them.

As for currency, nations run deficits AND surpluses. So it's not necessarily true that currencies sink concurrently. Similarly, nations can either restrict or expand the money supply at will. It's hard to see how that's not incredibly flexible, especially as compared to commodity money, which could be sent spiraling in value if new deposits of the commodity are found, for example. I use the Plaza Accord merely as an example, and while I won't presume to know your nation better than you do, I would imagine Germans would find it more pleasing to work with the United States ahead of Russia or China.

As for BRICS, only China really matters, but even if it frees the yuan, the majority of its exports go to the US. The problem is obvious. When China manages to effectively diversify, well, who knows what will happen. But until it does acquire a more robust list of trading partners, it is going to have to suck it up and pay to play with the petrodollar. Of course, China will also need to figure out a way to keep its economy rolling, seeing as how they have or soon will have reached a point of diminishing returns as far as employing rural workers for cheap labor. The nation's urbanization is going to lead to higher wages and an eventual rise in the cost of producing goods beyond the threshold of what certain outsourcers are willing to pay.

a reply to: rigel4 I find it refreshing that there's as many, if not more stupidity, world wide, and not "just" in the U.S.....

It is the true "commonality" of mankind.

a reply to: Jalbrook

First off, thank you for your understanding in terms of limited time.
I guess nowadays we have to consider ourselves fortunate to have to work alot.

originally posted by: Jalbrook
I'd just like to ask why you believe the United States wants anything to do with the Mediterranean "honeypot?"

Control over the vast untapped ressource's mining- and sales rights (and thus the currency they are sold in) in the mediterranean area ensures the hegemony of the petro-dollar (and energy security for the €U).

originally posted by: Jalbrook
It would obviously be a boon if US based corporations could secure contracts to drill in Ukraine/the Black Sea.

US and British based corps. have indeed done just that. Namely Exxon mobile, Chevron and Shell.

originally posted by: Jalbrook
However, the United States currently has proven reserves that surpass every other country but China.

The reserves alone (or their mere volume) are not even the point. The supremacy of the petro-dollar is.

originally posted by: Jalbrook
[...] the US peacefully acquiring the rights to Ukraine's shale reserves/access to the Black sea reserves would end any chance for Russia to manipulate its way into acquiring them.

I'm not so sure about "peaceful", but yes - that is exactly the play I was talking about earlier.

originally posted by: Jalbrook
As for currency, nations run deficits AND surpluses. So it's not necessarily true that currencies sink concurrently. Similarly, nations can either restrict or expand the money supply at will. It's hard to see how that's not incredibly flexible, especially as compared to commodity money, which could be sent spiraling in value if new deposits of the commodity are found, for example.

Well, that is your opinion on currency, and you're entitlet to have it of course.
I'd prefer a commodity money based economy, because it forces Governments to have much more sound budget management.
As I said, I believe floating fiat currencies is a cover for Governments to run huge deficits, and borrowing more money into existence comes with very costly consequences (corrections and subsequently crises) - usually for the people to pay, and not their Governments or the oligarch overlords behind them.

originally posted by: Jalbrook
I use the Plaza Accord merely as an example, and while I won't presume to know your nation better than you do, I would imagine Germans would find it more pleasing to work with the United States ahead of Russia or China.

I believe Germans are known to be pragmatic (and we are often even ridiculed because of that characteristic), and we would find it more pleasing to work with whomever WE choose.
We learned due to our history to value peaceful relations (trade-relations) over war, and don't appreciate to be told with whom we trade. That is all.

originally posted by: Jalbrook
As for BRICS, only China really matters, but even if it frees the yuan, the majority of its exports go to the US. The problem is obvious. When China manages to effectively diversify, well, who knows what will happen. But until it does acquire a more robust list of trading partners, it is going to have to suck it up and pay to play with the petrodollar

Even a multi-global-reserve-currency-system would threaten the petro-dollar and the US economic hegemony.
But you're right - subsequently also China, because of weaker sales markets in the US, but not as much - and China is indeed diversifying.

The US doesn't need control over the Mediterranean precisely because of its own vast reserves and the proven difficulties of actually reaching the Mediterranean reserves. Any other nation is also hard pressed to actually tap the reserves in the Mediterranean due to most having restrictive mineral rights- if Russia were to acquire the Mediterranean, the state would own rights to drill there and no one else could make a penny from these reserves unless Russia allowed it, disincentivizing anyone to explore the area and actually extract the reserves. To distill this analysis:

The Mediterranean reserves are not a reason for the United States to undertake covert action in Ukraine. If the US wanted to acquire the rights to the reserves it could do so peacefully by directly negotiating with the standing government. If Ukraine refused, the US still has no reason to subvert their authority because it has its own reserves. The threat of these natural gas fields falling into the hands of another nation are also not a reason to take covert action because any nation that acquired the rights in the US' stead would have to vastly reform their legal system to make tapping the reserves profitable.

Beyond that, many other nations are discovering their own reserves, limiting the overall importance of oil and natural gas in the international economy. It's doubtful that any pocket of oil or gas reserves will dictate the terms of the economy for the next fifty years. This goes back to my point on currency. Whether you regard it as opinion or valid theory, the fact that nations aren't moving from the petrodollar (despite the fact that the Euro was a pretty valid option prior to the crisis) suggests that they also believe in the value of the current system compared to others.

German pragmatism is precisely why you should prefer the US over China or Russia-- Russia is dependent on exporting energy, and if China lost the US as a customer the US would hurt for a while but recover quick enough, but China would collapse.

A multiple reserve currency system wouldn't, in and of itself hurt the US. As with most things in economics, there are trade offs. Here, if the US has to compete against other currencies, it could embrace the devaluation of the dollar and use it to make its exports more competitive and increase job growth.

There are betrayers in European family and they are Swedes.
Sure thing, you remember that disgusting case with Merkel bugged by American spooking agency. Sadly enough, her phone calls were also listened in by British and South Korean secret services. It appears, German intelligence is helpless to guarantee safe communications of the top German leaders! Rather an unpleasant revelation for Germans and other Europeans, it is!
But the greatest irritant in the context< in my perception at least, were those Swedes, who shared sensitive bugged info with Americans.... Well.... to undermine unity and safety of the EU! I guess we should sort it out with those Swedes! Their parliament approved bugging bill making it possible to listen in on all wired traffic that crosses Sweden borders "to protect the country against external threats". Do they see Merkel as such threat, I wonder?
Interestingly, a civilian organization Swedish Defense radio Establishment abbreviated FRA is doing bugging and it shared some sensitive info on Merkel with Americans. Now, Merkel is not quite relevant imo. She has failed to make any weighty foreign policy decisions lately though there are some areas where there's acute need in such steps, say in Ukraine (those Ukrainians are our ball and chain now). Merkel is staying idle and many other EU pols too. Maybe they are also being manipulated by Americans the same way like Merkel.... Maybe they were also bugged on by FRA..... And must be really "thankful" to those damned Swedes!! What they did amounts to anti-EU conspiracy.

Every time tensions flare up in a region people jump onto ATS and say the same thing over and over again "The US is preparing to go to war" but in the end the us never does. The US isn't going to go to war with russia being as we just got of a war in Iraq and the war in Afghan is coming to a close. People will continue to come on ATS and say that the US is going to go to war with Russia but in the end that war will not happen. People need to calm down and take there tin foil hats off.

i would be the first to condemn russia , if the world condemn NATO for their illegal invasion of Libya and the killing of Ghaddafi..

how can NATO get a pass on this warcrime ? and what a north atlantic defense treaty doing in mediterran ? is NATO now a world wide police force?

a reply to: MrSpad
As a Russian in US. This whole bull# political flexing making me sick!!!!!!! This is not a little game! This would be a apocoliptical war! This nonsense needs to stop btw Russia and Obama!

originally posted by: russiandatruth
a reply to: MrSpad
As a Russian in US. This whole bull# political flexing making me sick!!!!!!! This is not a little game! This would be a apocoliptical war! This nonsense needs to stop btw Russia and Obama!

Why, exactly do you feel Obama has anything to do with the situation in Ukraine? The most vocal supporters of Kyiv in the United States are criticizing him for not doing enough!