From The Ukraine To War With Russia?

109 posts in this topic

Posted

I saw an interview with one of those patrolling Kiev and guarding the Govt buildings.  The reporter said it was a right wing group which had about 240 members. The said they were Ukkranian nationalists, but denied the were fascist. Although he had a swastika cut into his cap and a picture of Hitler on his wall.  He said the enemies of Ukraine were Russians and Jews,  

John81 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I thought that, at one time, too swath.  However, the eagle is also a representative of Rome.  

 

And Germany, I believe.  

John81 and candlelight like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Early on in the reporting of the demonstrations in Ukraine there were some reports showing what they called neo-nazi involvement. However, since things didn't go the way the media wanted they have turned it into a simplistic "Putin evil" story and spinning the reporting in an effort to bring about American and EU intervention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hillary, Hitler & Cold War II
By Patrick J. Buchanan
 
 
Friday - March 7, 2014

In assessing the motives and actions of Vladimir Putin, Hillary Clinton compared them to Adolf Hitler's. Almost always a mistake.

After 12 years in power, Hitler was dead, having slaughtered millions and conquered Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals.

And Putin? After 13 years in power, and facing a crisis in Ukraine, he directed his soldiers in the Crimea to take control of the small peninsula where Russia has berthed its Black Sea fleet since Napoleon.

To the Wall Street Journal this is a "blitzkrieg."

But as of now, this is a less bloody affair than Andrew Jackson's acquisition of our Florida peninsula. In 1818, Gen. Jackson was shooting Indians, putting the Spanish on boats to Cuba and hanging Brits. And we Americans loved it.

Still, there are parallels between what motivates Putin, a Russian nationalist, and what motivated the Austrian corporal. Hitler's war began in blazing resentment at what was done to Germany after Nov. 11, 1918.

The Kaiser's armies had defeated the Russian Empire, and the Italians at Caporetto, and fought the Western Allies to a stand still in France, until two million Americans turned the tide in 1918. When Berlin accepted an armistice on President Wilson's Fourteen Points, not a single Allied soldier stood on German soil.

But, at Paris, the Allies proceeded to tear a disarmed Germany apart. The whole German Empire was confiscated. Eupen and Malmedy were carved out of Germany and given to Belgium. Alsace-Lorraine was taken by France. South Tyrol was severed from Austria and given to Italy. A new Czechoslovakia was given custody of 3.25 million Sudeten Germans.

The German port of Danzig was handed over to the new Poland, which was also given an 80-mile wide strip cut out of Germany from Silesia to the sea, slicing her in two.

The Germans were told they could not form an economic union with Austria, could not have an army of more than 100,000 soldiers, and could not put soldiers west of the Rhine, in their own country.

Perhaps this Carthaginian peace was understandable given the Allied losses. It was also madness if the Allies wanted an enduring peace.

Gen. Hans Von Seeckt predicted what would happen. When we regain our power, he said, "we will naturally take back everything we lost."

When Hitler came to power in 1933, he wrote off the lands lost to Belgium, France and Italy -- he wanted no war with the West -- but set out to recapture lost German lands and peoples in the East.

He imposed conscription in 1935, sent his soldiers back into the Rhineland in 1936, annexed Austria in 1938, demanded and got the return of the Sudeten Germans from Czechoslovakia at Munich in 1938.

He then sought to negotiate with the Polish colonels, who had joined in carving up Czechoslovakia, a return of Danzig, when the British issued a war guarantee to Warsaw stiffening Polish spines.

Enraged by Polish intransigence, Hitler attacked.

Britain and France declared war. The rest is history.

What has this to do with Putin?

He, too, believes his country was humiliated and shabbily treated after the Cold War, and sees himself as protector of the ethnic Russians left behind when the Soviet Union came apart.

Between 1989 and 1991, Mikhail Gorbachev had freed the captive nations of Eastern Europe, allowed the Soviet Union to dissolve into 15 nations, and had held out a hand of friendship to the Americans.

What did we do? Moved NATO right onto Russia's front porch. We brought all the liberated nations of Eastern Europe into our military alliance, along with three former Soviet republics.

The War Party tried to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO, which was established to contain and, if necessary, fight Russia. Had they succeeded, we could have been at war with Russia in 2008 over Georgia and South Ossetia, and today over Crimea.

Now we hear new calls for Ukraine and Georgia to be brought into NATO. Are these people sane?

Five U.S. presidents who faced far more violent actions by a far more dangerous Soviet Union -- Truman, Ike, JFK, Johnson, Reagan -- refused even to threaten force against Russia for anything east of the Elbe river.

These presidents ruled out force during the Berlin Blockade of 1948, the Hungarian Revolution of 1956, the building of the Berlin Wall in 1961, the Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, and the smashing of Solidarity in Poland in 1981.

Yet, today, we are committed to go to war for Lithuania and Estonia, Obama is sending F-16s to Latvia where half a million Russians live, and the War Party wants Sixth Fleet warships moved into the Black Sea.

If there is a Cold War II, or a U.S.-Russia war, historians of tomorrow will as surely point to the Bushes and Clintons who shoved NATO into Moscow's face, as historians today point to the men of Paris who imposed the Versailles treaty upon a defeated Germany in 1919.
 

Read More At: http://buchanan.org/blog/hillary-hitler-cold-war-ii-6280

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

UKRAINE FORESHADOWS AMERICA WITHIN 30 YEARS

 

 

By Frosty Wooldridge
March 6, 2014
NewsWithViews.com

 

Don’t you find it interesting that Ukraine suffers a civil war right now? How did a united country become a disunited country? What occurred that caused enough people to lean toward Western thinking and democracy, while the other half leaned toward Mother Russia and authoritarian rule?

 

If you look around, it stems from mass immigration of Russians, their culture and their language into the Ukraine—slowly, but effectively throwing the edge toward Putin’s power.

 

Obama and Kerry can “high brow” and pontificate all they want, but they hold no power whatsoever in the outcome.

Don’t fool yourself, by 2042, Mexicans and Latinos in America will become the dominant demographic number at 51 percent, culture and language displacing American English. That’s correct, the current influx of Latinos into America will outnumber the current European-Americans within 29 years.

 

I am astounded that we think we shall escape the same fate of internal civil unrest now being experienced in the Ukraine.

If you want to see what it looks like, watch these two videos:

 

In a five minute astoundingly simple yet brilliant video, “Immigration, Poverty, and Gum Balls”, Roy Beck, director of www.numbersusa.ORG, graphically illustrates the impact of overpopulation. Take five minutes to see for yourself: “

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hillary Clinton compares Vladimir Putin to Adolph Hitler?  She must have conveniently forgot about her part in Benghazi.  HA!  Not to mention all the people that "conveniently" dropped dead in the Clinton Administration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

More about the Right in Ukraine from the BBC:

 

 

Not only against ethnic russians but jews.

 

God bless,

Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The right? Actually, the far, far, left...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The reason the Left claimes Nazis and neo-nazis' to be Rightists is because of their nationalist viewpoints. Other than that, the broad socialist aspects of the Nazis is strictly Leftist.

 

Rather ironic how the West promotes democracy as the answer to everything yet when a leader or political party they don't like get legally, democratically elected they fight and scheme to oust those they don't like so they can be replaced by those who will do their bidding; and all this in anything other than a democratic fashion.

 

As often happens, the West eventually finds out they have backed militants, nazis, Islamists and such like who make a mess of things yet the West never seems to learn.

 

America and the EU provoked the uprising expecting everything would somehow just follow their playbook and the Ukrainian president would cave in and do things their way or give in and hold new elections that could be swung in the EUs favor; all while expecting Putin to sit it out.

 

Our government, and those running the EU are obviously living in their own fantasyland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The right? Actually, the far, far, left...

Actually if one goes far enough left one will be on the right.  :blink:

 

God bless,

Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Actually if one goes far enough left one will be on the right.  :blink:

 

God bless,

Larry

I think that's the idea behind claiming Nazis are far right...Jews today in America don't want to support an agenda of "right-wingers" because of what happened in Germany, little realizing that it is the left they truly have to worry about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The reason the Left claimes Nazis and neo-nazis' to be Rightists is because of their nationalist viewpoints. Other than that, the broad socialist aspects of the Nazis is strictly Leftist.

 

The reason neonazis are called far-right is because of their nationalism, as you say, and their conservatism. Right-wing people call them far-right too and have done for years. If anything it just shows how the 'left' and 'right' political spectrum is redundant. People can be economically right but not conservative, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There are two key pillars to Nazism, that being Nationalism and Socialism. Nationalism wasn't always the domain of the Right. Those on the Left in America used to also be nationalists. It wasn't until the latter half of the 20th century that nationalism became a dirty word on the American Left.

 

Socialism, which from a traditional American view is clearly Leftist, permeates Nazism. Even their nationalism is promoted through socialism.

 

I absolutely agree that in America today there are few on the Right which are actually traditional, or paleo-conservatives. With much of the Right giving in to the advances of the Left, they have attempted to meld a bit of their Rightist philosophy with Leftism. This gives us so-called conservatives who are "fiscal conservatives but social liberals".

 

Meanwhile, as the Right moves more to the Left, the Left moves even further to the Left. True conservatives from the past would be viewed as extremists by most on the so-called Right today while past Leftists would be viewed as to conservative for the Leftists.

 

This is why today we can have those like Romney and Christie hailed as conservatives and we hear those to the right of them tagged as "far right wing", "extremists", and worse.

 

This is also why some Leftists today think Hillary Clinton isn't Left enough though in the 90s she was considered a far Leftist.

 

The term "conservative" is basically meaningless in America today. A true, traditional constitutionalist today couldn't be a conservative because there is nothing of that left to conserve! Nearly everything the conservatives have claimed to be fighting to conserve for the past several decades has been lost. This is why we see todays conservatives working to conserve the welfare state, to conserve big government with tiny reforms around the edges to suit their ideas, to conserve the influx of millions of illegal immigrants, to conserve unconstitutional court rulings as "settled law", etc.

 

Nazism isn't conservatism but then again, American conservatism today isn't traditional conservatism either.

swathdiver likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

In the UK, groups like the English Defence League and British National Party call for a return to 'traditional' England where 'traditional' English values are upheld and there are no foreigners are allowed. Such conservatism is considered right-wing, which is why groups like EDL are called 'far-right'. Perhaps that's why they get called far-right in Ukraine too, was all I was saying. I wasn't talking about USA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think I'll let Johnny splain the problem to yall.  :biggrin:

 

 

God bless,

Larry

John81 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I've spoken with over two dozen English WWII veterans who all said if they knew England would have become filled with all the foreigners like it is now they would have preferred to let the Germans win.

 

I know many English who came to America to escape the "foreign invasion" only to become dismayed at seeing the same thing occurring here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Here is a discussion (22 minutes) about why the Ukrainian problem is so dangerous.  I put this on here because the western governments and media are putting out the story that this power struggle in the Ukraine is all about FREEDOM.  It is not about Freedom it is all about MONEY and OIL and GAS and who controls the flow of it.

 

 

God bless,

Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That's exactly why the EU and US went to such lengths to stir up internal conflict. Their plan was that either the Ukrainian government would give in, turn from Russia and join with the EU but things soon got out of hand and we have the current mess.

 

Most conflicts come down to matters of resources; which means money and power for those who gain them, and less for those who don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What Would the GOP Do?
By Patrick J. Buchanan

 

Tuesday - March 11, 2014

Though Barack Obama is widely regarded as a weak president, is the new world disorder really all his fault?

Listening to the more vocal voices of the GOP one might think so.

According to Sen. Lindsey Graham, Vladimir Putin's move into Crimea "started with Benghazi."

"When you kill Americans and nobody pays a price, you invite this type of aggression," said Graham. Putin "came to the conclusion after Benghazi, Syria, Egypt" that Barack Obama is "a weak indecisive leader."

Also blaming Obama for Crimea, John McCain got cheers at AIPAC by charging, "This is the ultimate result of a feckless foreign policy in which nobody believes in America's strength anymore."

This "blatant act" of aggression "cannot stand," said McCain.

How McCain plans to force Putin to cough up Crimea was left unexplained.

Now Marco Rubio seems to be auditioning to replace the retired Joe Lieberman as third amigo. His CPAC speech is described by the L.A. Times:

"[Rubio] said that China is threatening to take parts of the South China Sea ... a nuclear North Korea is testing missiles, Venezuela is slaughtering protesters, and Cuba remains an oppressive dictatorship. He added that Iran continues to pursue nuclear weapons and regional hegemony and Russia is attempting to 'reconstitute' the former Soviet Union."

What all these countries have in common, said Rubio, is "totalitarian governments." Rubio proposes a U.S. foreign policy of leading the world to "stand up to the spread of totalitarianism."

Not quite as ambitious as George W. Bush's "ending tyranny in our world," but it will do.

Where to begin.

First, it is absurd to suggest Putin felt free to restore Crimea to Russia because of Obama's inaction in Benghazi. And while Castro's Cuba and Kim Jong-Un's North Korea are totalitarian, Putin's Russia is not Stalin's. Nor is Xi Jinping's China Mao's China.

Russia and China are great power rivals and antagonists, not the monster regimes of the Cold War that massacred millions. We must deal with them, and they don't take direction from Uncle Sam.

As for Iran, 17 U.S. intelligence agencies say it has no nuclear weapons program. Moreover, Hassan Rouhani is an elected president now presiding over the dilution of his 20-percent-enriched uranium in compliance with our November agreement.

McCain points to Obama's failure to enforce his "red line" in Syria with air and missile strikes, when Bashar Assad used chemical weapons, as the reason Obama is not respected.

But a little history is in order here.

While John Kerry and Obama were ready to attack Syria, it was the American people who rose up and said "no." It was Congress that failed to give Obama the authorization to go to war.

If McCain, Graham and Rubio think Obama should attack Syria, why don't they get their hawkish Republican brethren in the House to authorize war on Syria? See how that sits with the voters in 2014.

Last fall, Lindsey Graham was shopping around a resolution for a U.S. war on Iran. What became of that brainstorm? After Iraq and Afghanistan, Americans are weary of what all this bellicosity inevitably brings.

Is Russia really reconstituting the Soviet Union?

True, Putin seeks to bring half a dozen ex-Soviet republics, now nations, into an economic union to rival the EU. But where the state religion of the USSR was Marxism-Leninism, i.e., communism, Putin is trying to restore Russian Orthodox Christianity.

There is a difference, as there is a difference between Stalin murdering priests and Putin prosecuting Pussy Riot for blasphemous misbehavior on the high altar of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior.

How do we think King Abdullah would have handled the women, had they pulled their stunt in the Great Mosque in Mecca?

While China is indeed moving to claim the East and South China seas, bringing her into possible conflict with Japan over the Senkakus, the GOP is not without culpability here.

It was a Bush-led Republican Party that voted to throw open America's markets to China. Result: In the last two years, China ran up $630 billion in trade surpluses at our expense, a figure larger than the entire U.S. defense budget for 2015.

Our trade deficits with China provide her annually with enough dollars to finance her own defense budget twice over. Twenty years of such U.S. trade deficits have given the Middle Kingdom the trillions it needed to build the armed forces to drive us out of East Asia.

Are U.S. sailors and Marines now to die defending the Senkakus against a menacing China that the Bush free traders helped mightily to create?

If Sen. Rubio wants to "stand up" to China, why not call for a 50 percent tariff on all Chinese-made goods. Try that one out on the K Street bundlers and U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Yet Marco Rubio in the primaries would be healthy for America. A showdown between non-interventionists and the neocon War Party, to determine which way America goes, is long overdue. Let's get it on.
 

Read More At: http://buchanan.org/blog/gop-6286

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Possibilities in the Ukraine as well as the U.S economy by Paul Craig Roberts in interview on USAWatchdog.com. 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=AhxZxL56B00

 

God bless,

Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's rather ironic that America believes giving Ukraine a billion dollars is a good answer and something that works against Russia. Ukraine is in great debt to Russia which means that most, if not all of that billion dollars will end up in Russia.

 

At the same time America is over 17 trillion dollars in debt, with China owning most of our debt, which means America is borrowing a billion dollars from China, plus interest, in order to give it to Ukraine so it looks like America is doing something, which will then hand over that money to Russia as debt payment.

ASongOfDegrees likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'm still dubious about all these reports coming out of the Ukraine and what is really going on. The truth usually doesn't come out until long after all the lies have died off.

 

I do believe Russia has special interest in that pipeline going through Crimea and that's the main reason they moved in there.

 

By the way, has anyone read the book "Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg? The "far left" is really the "far right" in their practice and method.  I've read portions of it and heard an interview with him on Glenn Beck's show when he was on FOX (only time I think I ever watched his show). It sounds like quite telling read.

Edited by ASongOfDegrees

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's rather ironic that America believes giving Ukraine a billion dollars is a good answer and something that works against Russia. Ukraine is in great debt to Russia which means that most, if not all of that billion dollars will end up in Russia.

 

 

My first thought too when I heard this. I'm sure Putin is already using some of that money to go bear hunting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Not surprising but something one does not like to contemplate.  I have for a long time thought that the U.S might be taken out before the final conflict in the middle east takes place.  I sure hope this isn't the time for that to happen.  Only God knows the future our leaders will take us into.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/state-tv-says-russia-could-turn-us-radioactive-212003397.html

 

God bless,

Larry

Edited by ThePilgrim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now