Posts Tagged ‘Invasion’

Islamist Death Cult Propaganda: Destructive To Truth, Humanity

December 30, 2017

A university professor in Northern Ireland, historically a place of religious hatred, wrote an essay for Aeon which is pro-Islam in what supposed to be a smart way: Beyond Liberal Islam. Western liberalism is not the apex and terminus of human history, and it ought not to serve as the measure of Islam. Can Islam help to produce an appealing alternative to liberal societies? Is it time to look beyond the idea of liberal Islam?”

The author keeps sneaking in as obvious, enormously debatable, not to say deeply erroneous concepts. Such as: “The fallacious arguments of Islamophobes”, “the fact Muslim regimes are backwards for historical rather than metaphysical reasons”.

Of course not true. Islam is an extremely dangerous and reductive superstition. All too many people are ignorant of the fact the “West” was NOT Christian. The Frankish empire pretty much covered all of Europe, including Britain after 1066 CE… except for southern Spain.

The West was not just “Christian”. Whereas Islamist countries were just Islamist. More exactly, and differently from Islamist countries, where law and governance were Islamist, law and governance was not “Christian” in the West. The fundamental laws of Europe under the Franks were mostly Roman law plus (Latin written) Salic law. Both were secular laws. The leadership was also secular (although Charlemagne gave to the Pope some territories in Italy in 800 CE).

The superstition wants to kill or subject most of humanity:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2009/06/22/some-violence-in-holy-quran/

Islamist law, the Sharia, contradicts UN law, itself an extension of “Western” law. It is, literally, outlaw.

K Vora answered my preceding comment in Aeon. Before I get to that reply, let me add the following map:

548 invasion main battles by Islam Jihad in 250 years. Initially, the green area, Islamist by 900 CE, was Greco-Roman (or associated civilizations, Seleucid, Etruscan, Latin, and, or Punic) for more than a millennium. After the invasions, non-Muslims were the subjugated, oppressed majority for many centuries, causing what’s paradoxically, and misleadingly known as the “Golden Age of Islam“!

I listened to the following video, which is accurate on its main points:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_To-cV94Bo

(There were other crusades, against non-Muslims, such as cathars and Prussians, that’s the main inaccuracy of the video, which is irrelevant to its main message.)

***

K Vora

I appreciate your well reasoned comment. Unfortunately, it will be distorted by well known probably paid commenters (one can search the names and see how many well reasoned comments have been obfuscated by them). We must accept Islam for what it is: A tool for the rogue elements of humanity (mostly males) to subjugate all others, in person and in thought. I hope Aeon does not block this response because we must confront our genetics in our evolutions (many paths) and if we critically analyse the behaviors of islamic regimes and societies, we have to explore rogue genes, whether y, or x, or corrupted.

***

Thanks K Vora! Yes, those paid commenters are a problem, and not just with Islam, or religion.

Paid commenters are a problem all over the Internet. And not just the Internet: universities and governments too. Legislation needs to be drawn, because what we have now is a sort of Orwellian 1984 of greed, where “Big Brother” is a compendium of the worst demons of our nature, and rules our information system.

Yes, we must confront our genetics, or, more exactly, the misuse of our genetics by our massively changed circumstances, namely the rise of civilization. (The word “mass” is literal here: the mass of humanity has gone up by a factor of a thousand from what it was during the evolution of the genus Homo…)

The very rise of Islam was entangled with a military strategic observation. Muhammad considered that the tremendous war between the Greco-Roman and the Sassanids, which had just concluded, had weakened both civilizations so much, that, for the first time in 1,000 years, Arabs could hope to raid the Fertile Crescent. Again. The Prophet was right. Desert raiders went according to rougher morals. For example, they used to kill girls liberally. When not enslaving them crudely (for future sale). Muhammad condemned the practice of killing girls, and encouraged slavers to impregnate their girl captives. Both measures led to a population explosion of young males, who became the young, fanaticized warriors of the invading Muslim Arab armies.

So not all is negative about Fundamental Islam. But even the positive, inasmuch as it reinforces Islam, can be negative. Because, indeed, as you said, Islam is about making the rogue, or at least, hyper-violent side of humanity into a religion. The most intriguing part is that the individual devoted to Fundamentalist Islam doesn’t perceive that way. Instead what they perceive is a totally organized life, dawn to dusk. One should read “the final rituals” (and the full three parts description of travelling to Medina and Mecca):

“Hasan stopped me on my way to the lavatory carrying a roll of tissue; he explained with lively gestures – words not sufficing – that I should cleanse myself with water after defecation. Islamic toilet etiquette calls for pouring water with the right hand and wiping oneself with the left. I nodded to him in agreement and continued on my way, with the paper. It felt like a small victory for Western civilization.

On a related subject, Mina has the most appallingly inadequate sanitation facilities. They are plentiful but so filthy that most pilgrims prefer the outdoors. Mecca and Muna both being located on hills and in valleys, streams of urine and waste water flow across great distances at considerable speeds. The Grand Mosque, where some 75,000 pilgrims sleep each night of the hajj, has no public water facilities except the Zamzam well. While no one excretes in the mosque itself, many do so just outside it, even against its walls. I myself did this once; though feeling terribly conspicuous and expecting a reprimand, in fact no one paid me any attention. I found it strange that the Grand Mosque and the Hill of Mercy, Islam’s two holiest spots, also serve as lavatories for the faithful.”

The reason for that totally organized life in Fundamental Islam is exactly the reason why military life is totally organized: it is the most basic training for obedience, core of the ability of the warrior. It’s why some view the Foreign Legion as a death cult. https://aeon.co/essays/why-young-men-queue-up-to-die-in-the-french-foreign-legion

This being said, there are 100 variants of Islam. Many are well aware of the preceding and ended up as far removed as possible from Salafism (=Wahhabism = Fundamentalism). However, those types of Islam are unknown in the West, and oil money has done its best to suppress them. So now, when talking about “Islam” what the ignorant mean, especially in the West, is Salafism… A type of Fundamentalism thoroughly discredited in Egypt by 1200 CE (it was subjected to the death penalty), and de facto ignored in the best parts of the “Golden Age of Islam”.

(What happened next is that savage invaders, the Mongols and Turks, decapitated the Middle East and North Africa, as they massacred the elites, and took possession of the lands: Arabic speaking intellectual guidance was lost, only illiterate peasants survived.)

Another video, a sort of baby version of what I have long written (albeit with the major blemish of ignoring the ravages of fanatical Christianism in the Greco-Roman empire):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y

The thesis that the islam and invasion caused the collapse of civilization is known as “Pirenne’s thesis”. Pirenne was a famous historian of the 1930s, who wrote “Mohammed and Charlemagne”.  

Henri Pirenne’s remarkable classic — published after his death — offers a revolutionary perspective on how Europe evolved as the Roman Empire centered in Constantinople evolved into the Europe of Charlemagne and the Middle Ages. I agree with most of what’s in it, but I do not view it as the end all, be all.

Departing from the standard view that Germanic invasions obliterated the Roman Empire, Pirenne advances the radical new thesis that “the cause of the break with the tradition of antiquity was the rapid and unexpected advance of Islam,” and event of historical proportions that prevented the western Mediterranean from being what it had always been: a thoroughfare of commerce and thought. It became instead what Pirenne refers to as “a Musulman lake,” thereby causing “the axis of life [to shift] northwards from the Mediterranean” for the first time in history.

The other standard view, as advocated by Gibbon, was that civilization collapsed because of Christianism.

My own version is more subtle: Christianism and the invasions were a consequence of the Roman Republic collapse and the subsequent political and intellectual fascism that resulted.

Islam itself an aftershock of all this (both the Persians and the Romans quasi-ruled Arabia; Rome traded with India for centuries through its control of the Red Sea).

Islamophilia, in the sense of the love of Salafism, is fundamentally lethal for, not just civilization, but human ethology, even intelligence.

Vigilance and subtlety should be our mantra. Today it was announced that MI5 (British “Intelligence”) tried to assassinate the Irish Prime Minister.

MI5 asked a loyalist paramilitary group to assassinate the Irish prime minister during the height of the conflict in Northern Ireland, according to claims in newly released government documents. The records show that in 1987, Prime Minister Charles Haughey was informed by a letter sent from the Protestant Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) that British Intelligence wanted him dead.

In it, they claimed to Haughey that “in 1985 we were approached by a MI5 officer attached to the NIO [Northern Ireland Office] and based in Lisburn, Alex Jones was his supposed name,” the UVF said. “He asked us to execute you.” The letter was among the Irish government archives released today. Unsatisfied with the refusal, MI5 then asked the UVF if they would accept the blame. UVF said they turned down the request, telling the Taoiseach: “We refused to do it. We were asked would we accept responsibility if you were killed. We refused.” 

Real history is more complicated in crucial ways than simpletons have it. One shouldn’t confuse the history of myths, with the history of facts. Look at Islam like you should look at MI5.

Patrice Ayme’

Arm Ukraine, Disarm Bankers

February 2, 2015

Before scoffing that both subjects have nothing to do with each other, please be informed that they do. And the name is Putin. The kleptocratic regime in Moscow has been using elements of Western high finance and banks to launder the money it steals.

And not just through Cyprus’ banks. This, in turn, means that much of Western high finance is penetrated not just by Mr. Putin’s goons, but also by Putin’s spirit of ultimate greed and ever more gigantic empire, in total disregard of anything else, just to fill up empty hearts. If Putin can get away with exerting so much force, why cannot we do the same? Say the bankers. And they preen. Reciprocally, as Putin enjoys collaboration from Western plutocrats, Putin feels that plutocracy and civilization are the same.

It’s a vicious spiral of mutual encouragement.

I was astounded this week when I saw Putin declare, apparently seriously, that NATO has a “foreign legion” in Ukraine.

Mr. Putin, surrounded by enthusiastically approving and nodding generals, declared to students in St Petersburg that Ukraine had a few divisions fighting in Eastern Ukraine, but that “trying to contain Russia was against Ukraine national interest“. Then Putin added:

“In effect, it is no longer an army but a foreign legion, in this case NATO’s foreign legion, which does not of course pursue the aims of Ukraine’s national interests”.

Putin's Volunteers Are Streaming West

Putin’s Volunteers Are Streaming West

The way it was said, in conjunction with Putin’s recent admission that Russian “volunteers” were fighting in Ukraine, is basically a declaration of war. On top of this, the head of the Eastern Ukraine rebels declared that he was raising a 100,000 men army. This means he expect tens of thousands of Russian troops (Putin’s “volunteers”) to cross the border.

This is not contained. Putin is billowing out of control, all by himself. One has to see what the combination of Putin’s dictatorial powers, media control, psychology and sinking economy leads to. Let me spell it out.

Once Putin has conquered Ukraine, he will push for more: he is already partly occupying Moldavia, WEST of Ukraine. Putin is also messing up with Hungary: there were street protests about this, just yesterday, in Budapest. Putin uses the fact that Hungary is extremely dependent upon Russia’s fossil fuels. Merkel, who desperately wants to avoid war with Putin, flew to Budapest in emergency, to sort the situation out.

Says the New York Times in “Putin Resumes His War”:

“American officials acknowledge that Russia has repeatedly violated an agreement, reached in Minsk in September. The agreement called for an immediate cease-fire in Ukraine, the removal of foreign forces and the establishment of monitoring arrangements to ensure that the border between Ukraine and Russia would be respected.

In recent weeks, Russia has shipped a large number of heavy weapons to support the separatists’ offensive in eastern Ukraine, including T-80 and T-72 tanks, multiple-launch rocket systems, artillery and armored personnel carriers, Western officials say.

Some of the weapons are too sophisticated to be used by hastily trained separatists, a Western official said. NATO officials estimate that about 1,000 Russian military and intelligence personnel are supporting the separatist offensive while Ukrainian officials insist that the number is much higher.

Supported by the Russians, the separatists have captured the airport at Donetsk and are pressing to take Debaltseve, a town that sits aside a critical rail junction.”

An argument, a self-contradictory argument, deployed by the cowardly, is that Putin may raise the stakes, if he sees Western modern weapons coming to the help of Ukrainians. In other words, appeasers are saying: Putin is Hitler, so let’s not irritate him, let’s make friends instead. The argument is self-defeating: if Putin is Hitler, as they insinuate, why to appease him? Did we not try that before? With Hitler, of course, but also with Kaiser Wilhelm II, who launched World War One: the Americans traded with the Kaiser, for years, through the Netherlands, enabling the crazed dictator to pursue his war (and then the Netherlands got savagely attacked by the Nazis in 1940!)

(Notice that I did not mention Stalin: although Stalin was a monster, he mostly respected international agreements. It’s not Stalin’s fault that Roosevelt gave him half of Europe at Yalta. Not only did Stalin respect Ukraine’s historical borders, but the Soviet dictator gave Ukraine a seat at the UN… Although many Ukrainian had risen against him during WWII.)

I, personally, saw enough: Putin is Hitler. New and improved. A craftier version of Hitler, with nukes.

Putin was very clear that he wanted to invade Eastern and Southern Ukraine. The “New Russia” invaded by Catherine of Russia… Truly old Ukrainian territory… for a millennium.

If we let Putin invade half of Ukraine, as he wants to do right away, he would be propelled, by the logic of war, aggression and the concomitant collapsing economy, by the same exact forces which pushed Hitler to want always more, always faster.

The robbing of the Jews Hitler indulged in, was directly related to the sinking of the German economy under the weight of intense militarization. To make his followers richer, Hitler redistributed the Jews property. (“Kristallnacht, and the like, 1938.)

From total media control, Hitler saw his popularity soar. Hitler, initially a divisive figure favored by only one German voter out of three, reached 85% approval rating. Exactly like Putin now.

The worse things got, the more popular Hitler got. As the Reich was collapsing, crushed by carpet bombing, with more than ten million soldiers invading it from the west and the east, Hitler was at its most popular. (If you disagreed, some SS were ready to kill you on the spot, that helped the monster’s approval rating.)

Putin’s economy is imploding. Just as Hitler’s was.

So it is tempting for the dictator to reproduce the exact same program. After Munich, in 1938, Hitler was given the part of Czechoslovakia where he claimed Germans were living. In short order, he had occupied the whole country, and enslaved its weapon industry.

Then Spain finished falling to the fascist, and Hitler attacked Poland. At this point Britain decided to support France, and World War Two was on.

It is absolutely certain that a similar situation will develop. Putin admitted that the real problem is not that he annexed Crimea (and now wants a land bridge to it), but that “I can be in Kiev in two weeks”.

Arming Ukraine enough to enable it to resist now will break Putin’s plan, and not let him turn into the irresistible victor he would otherwise pass for.

If we lose Ukraine, we will lose peace. A new world war will start. This time, with nukes.

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/02/01/survival-trumps-tolerance/

Putin is a dictator passed the tipping point into ever more violence. Should he conquer all of Ukraine (which he himself defined as “his real problem”), he would militarize Russia even more than it already is, and make the economic situation even worse. So only more aggression would then stabilize his regime.

This pattern has been seen throughout history: militarization and invasion stabilize the augmentation of dictatorship.

Thus, piece by piece, Putin is exactly following Hitler’s playbook. He is just more careful, because he knows Hitler went too fast. We have to give him an unambiguous warning that he will be stopped. The earlier, the less costly.

One of the factors encouraging Putin is that the West is poorly defended.

In particular, the USA has no appropriate air superiority fighter: from corruption, 55 billion dollars has been spent on the F35, a plane that does not work, cannot work, and, moreover, is already at least eight years late.

Austerity is not just a way to make the small suffer, but a way to insure we are defenseless.

AUSTERITY FOR THE SMALL, WEALTH FOR THE BIG:

Krugman wrote an editorial about the fact that long term worries about potential deficits in the distant future, are killing today’s economy in The Long-Run Cop-Out”.

On Monday, President Obama will call for a significant increase in spending, reversing the harsh cuts of the past few years. He won’t get all he’s asking for, but it’s a move in the right direction.”

Notice that Krugman is now admitting that Obama was an austerian, a Tea Partier, a whatever was not too good for the USA economy (and it’s true!)

Well austerians are also killing equality, education, and defense… While allowing crooks such as Putin to launder all the money he wants in the West (and thus capture Western media).

Private banks are money creating machines. They create money through the credit they extent, to those they like. Banks (and so-called shadow banks) caused the crash of 2008. However, the deregulation of finance that allowed them to transfer huge amount of wealth to the wealthiest, before, during, or after the crash, was not corrected.

Instead, misleading discourses were deployed to accuse other actors in the economy of this astronomically large swindle: little guys borrowed too much, they had been living too large, etc.

Thus the banking system as a machine to make the wealthiest even wealthier, was left as it was before 2008: financial derivatives monopolize even more wealth than they did before 2008. Namely 12 times world GDP.

Banks are machines to create injustice and inequality have suffered no significant disruption, and their profit margins at this point are the highest with those of Big Pharmaceuticals. The graph is in:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/01/31/no-taxation-without-decision/

Banks are free to give to their friends and their class. More than ever.

The entire “austerity” drive is thus not to reduce how much money, hence power, the wealthiest possesses. It is about reducing how much money and power the non-wealthy possess. Thus “austerity” is a trick to augment the relative wealth and power of the wealthiest.

The problem, for the wealthiest and most powerful, is to disguise that true reason for austerity, which is greed. So they made up stories, and they could be anything, as long as they are misleading, to fascinate We The People with. Long term doom and gloom is best, as it looks very serious.

The more serious the economic inequality becomes, the easier it should be to make the case that inequality is the principal economic problem. However, the “austerity” drive has to be shown first to be the problem, instead of a solution.

Todays’ situation is developing increasingly parallels with the 1930s. A first crucial mistake in 1936, was not to react to fascist aggression against the democratically elected Spanish Republic. Mussolini and Hitler were left free to send their armies into Spain.

Time to not repeat history.

The democratic Ukrainian republic needs help from the fascists. Give it. And give it first efficiently, and under cover, to make it more difficult for Putin to escalate quickly. For once the CIA and its ilk could become useful. (The predecessor of the CIA, the OSS, was extremely efficient in WWII.)

Putin plays dirty, democracy cannot play clean and nice.

This is an occasion for the timorous Obama administration to show that it has some courage. It is an occasion for Obama to show he was not just into assassinating innocent civilians with drones, thus making a bad situation way worse. Can Obama stand up to the man?

Patrice Ayme

CIVILIZATION WARNED Hitler & Putin

May 1, 2014

Abstract: Putin is going to war for exactly the exact same socio-economic reason as Adolf Hitler: total failure. So he will not stop, until all is consummated.

Putin’s plutocratic society has turned into a dictatorship. His economy, weakened by militarization and corruption, is failing. That decay is on a collision course with his self-admitted personal addiction to power. A difference with Hitler: oil and gas (Russia is the first producer, with the USA; Hitler had none and depended upon American and Russian oil until 1941). Faced with fascism again, having learned a bit from history, with higher stakes, this time the so called “democracies” are rallying in a more timely manner.

In September 1939, France attacked Hitler to help Poland. Alone, France was, and condemned by the presidency and Congress of the USA. This time, it’s completely different. The USA is on the frontlines, joining an increasingly serious NATO. France is sending to Poland and the Baltic republics one hundred of her lethal, nuclear capable Rafales active stealth jets:

Serious Business: Rafale Carrying Six Beyond Visual Range Infra Red Missiles &, On Its Belly A 300 Kiloton H Bomb Capable Of Making 600 Kilometers In 8 Minutes. Sent To Poland.

Serious Business: Rafale Carrying Six Beyond Visual Range Infra Red Missiles &, On Its Belly A 300 Kiloton H Bomb Capable Of Making 600 Kilometers In 8 Minutes. Sent To Poland.

Both with the European Union, and NATO, attack against one is attack against all. Taken literally Putin has said he wanted to reconstitute the Czars’ evil empire. Submitting to Putin, means, for starters, sending people to be abused in concentration camps for homosexuality, opinions, and insulting the Church. Pluto’s reign: even Putin’s generals are billionaires.

[I would suggest that the USA sent anti-ballistic missile ships, in the Baltic, as the Kremlin has made nuclear threats from its occupied territory around the ancient German city of Konigsberg.]

***

SOCIALIST WARNING TO PLUTO PUTIN:

The French Republic is controlled by the Socialist Party, and, officially, 57% of its GDP is state (although an economist on this site, D. Deux said the real number is lower). France can hardly be called a Wall Street, or NATO puppet.

100 French supersonic active stealth fighter-bombers Rafales are deploying in Poland and the Baltics, some a few dozen miles from Russia’s Kaliningrad enclave. What’s Kaliningrad? The ancient East Prussia. Another territory invaded by the Kremlin, and declared to be Russian. Some of the Baltics have been tortured and nearly exterminated by Russia for the last 250 years. Then, after ethnic cleansing, the Czars moved in Russians (many as recently as after WWII, under Czar Stalin). Those very same Russians whose descendants now Putin wants to save so much.

The Rafales carry the active stealth system “Spectre”. Basically Spectre makes anti-noise, with a precision of less than one degree on the source. That allows to jam Very High Frequency radar that renders even stealth planes like the future USA Strike Fighter, the F35, “Lightning II, plainly visible.

Active stealth Rafales can carry a standoff missile carrying  a 300 kilotonnes (of TNT) thermonuclear warhead. That’s twenty times Hiroshima. The missile is propelled by a French invention patented in 1908 (Lorin), that nearly flew as a fighter in 1940, before flying in 1947, the RAMjet. The RAMjet gives the missile a 600 kilometers range above Mach 3 (because it carries only fuel: the RAM breathes air).

(By comparison the bomber part of the arsenal of the USA consists of subsonic planes carrying obsolete subsonic cruise missiles of H bomb power at most 150 kt.)

Britain also regrets to have only strategic nuclear submarines as a deterrent (which the Scottish Independence Party wants to eliminate, presumably to switch allegiance to Putin). As Russia has threatened to use H bombs on the battlefield, and based some in occupied “Kaliningrad”, between Lithuania and Poland, it’s good to be able to reply tit for tat. Besides, Rafales could certainly land on Red Square…

Even Socialist France is warning Putin.

***

WAR PHILOSOPHY:

As I have argued, history is basically a compendium of ineluctable complexities, avoidable conspiracies, and ultimate wars. In particular, history is not made by pacifists inasmuch as by war. See: “War Makes History”.

There are basically two types of war: bad guys against bad guys, and bad guys, against good guys. Wars of good guys against good guys are very rare (see Note1).

A sure way to have a country led by bad guys is to make it a plutocracy. In Putin’s realm, even the top generals are wealthy plutocrats. Actually every whom Putin calls a “friend” is a multimillionaire, or multibillionaire, in the West alone. Putin has invaded now three countries, and made clear he was not going to stop there.

The enormity of what happened has not been grasped yet, just because it’s too enormous, emotionally speaking. Such a thing, a major power using military force to annex territory, did not occur since 1938-1940 (when Hitler annexed several countries and pieces thereof). Even under Stalin, countries were invaded, and controlled, but Stalin did not formally annex them.  Far from annexing Ukraine, actually, Stalin gave Ukraine a seat at the United Nations, and other powers (which now Putin is busy stealing, making him, in that precise sense, worse than Stalin himself! Quite a feat).

***

PUTIN’S INVASION EXCUSE:

I argue that, although Putin really wants to terrorize the world with his military, and enjoys the power, his true motivation is to use his aggressive drive to hide a much less savory reality of his gigantic kingdom. But, before this, what is Putin’s official reasoning, officially a regression from concessions made by Stalin himself?

The unfolding invasion doctrine exposed by Putin, is a faithful duplicate of that of Hitler in the 1930s Hitler said: ‘invade wherever there are “threatened” “Germans”, and evoke the splendor of reconstituting the “Grosse Reich”, to protect “German” minorities. Putin says exactly the same except replacing “German” by “Russian”, and “Grosse Reich” by “the Big Country”.

As the New York Times put it, April 18, 2014 (with a few additions of mine between brackets []):

“[NEW RUSSIA] was conquered in the late 18th century by Catherine the Great, who installed [one of her many lovers, co-conspirators, and co-murderers in the assassination of Catherine’s husband, the Czar] Prince Grigory Potemkin to lead the colonization of the lands.

The prince earned fame as the architect of the Potemkin village, a town of brightly painted facades and happy people erected to deceive visiting officials and dignitaries. Critics have accused Mr. Putin of employing a similar sleight of hand in the invasion of Crimea and the supposedly spontaneous pro-Russian uprising in eastern Ukraine.

On Thursday, Mr. Putin repeated his assertion that he felt an obligation to protect ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, where they are a large minority of the population. “We must do everything to help these people to protect their rights and independently determine their own destiny,” he said.

“The question is to ensure the rights and interests of the Russian southeast,” he added. “It’s New Russia. Kharkiv, Luhansk, Donetsk, Odessa were not part of Ukraine in czarist times; they were transferred in 1920. Why? God knows. Then, for various reasons, these areas were gone, and the people stayed there. We need to encourage them to find a solution.”

What Putin is saying is that the empire of the Czars ought to be reconstituted, as it existed in the Nineteenth Century. That means that, among other places, Poland ought to be annexed (Poland was part of the empire of the Czars in the 19C).

IF ANYTHING, WHAT PUTIN SAYS OUGHT TO BE TAKEN MORE SERIOUSLY THAN HITLER:

Yes, it’s enormous. Yes, Putin went off the deep end. Yet, remember this: it’s because people did not read Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini or Hitler literally, that they got surprised by the resulting holocausts, later.

Once again, several of mechanisms launched by Putin are exactly the same as with the ones the Nazi dictator used. Hitler was surrounded by a cloud of plutocrats (many from the USA and Great Britain). Plutocrats made Hitler feel all powerful, and made him believe that so great was plutocratic power (kratos), that they would keep the Western democracies impotent, and that, never, ever, Britain and the USA would align themselves behind the French Republic in her determined opposition to Nazism.

WHY HITLER COMMITTED TO A WAR HE WAS (NEARLY) SURE TO LOSE:

[The relevance to Putin, is that, at first sight, Putin is sure to lose, especially if he conquers all of Ukraine. Putin is acting from the same political delusion, and economic necessity as Hitler.]

So Hitler was sure that the “democracies” would once again surrender, and do whatever he wanted. However, he got extremely surprised by the signing of a defense treaty between Poland and Britain (France had signed a similar one 6 months earlier… with Britain in the appendix). Hitler tried a few last tricks, and differed the invasion of Poland by a few days.

However as Paul Schmidt, a translator of the Reich’s foreign ministry relates (See Note 3 for an error in the link!):   On Sunday September 3, 1939, at 9am, Berlin time:

“I then took the [British] ultimatum to the Chancellery, where everyone was anxiously awaiting me. Most of the members of the Cabinet and the leading men of the Party were collected in the room next to Hitler’s office. There was something of a crush and I had difficulty in getting through to Hitler.

When I entered the next room Hitler was sitting at his desk and Ribbentrop stood by the window. Both looked up expectantly as I came in. I stopped at some distance from Hitler’s desk, and then slowly translated the British Government’s ultimatum.

[This is the text of the British Ultimatum: ‘More than twenty-four hours have elapsed since an immediate reply was requested to the warning of September 1st, and since then the attacks on Poland have been intensified. If His Majesty’s Government has not received satisfactory assurances of the cessation of all aggressive action against Poland, and the withdrawal of German troops from that country, by 11 o’clock British Summer Time, from that time a state of war will exist between Great Britain and Germany.’]

Paul Schmidt pursues:

“When I finished, there was complete silence.

Hitler sat immobile, gazing before him. He was not at a loss, as was afterwards stated, nor did he rage as others allege. He sat completely silent and unmoving. 

After an interval which seemed an age, he turned to Ribbentrop, who had remained standing by the window. ‘What now?’ asked Hitler with a savage look, as though implying that his Foreign Minister had misled him about England’s probable reaction. Ribbentrop answered quietly: ‘I assume that the French will hand in a similar ultimatum within the hour.’

[Patrice’s remark: Hitler’s foreign minister and former Ambassador and conspirator to London, Joachim von Ribbentrop, had assured him repeatedly that neither Britain nor France would honor their commitments to Poland.]

Paul Schmidt pursues:

“As my duty was now performed, I withdrew. To those in the anteroom pressing round me I said: ‘The English have just handed us an ultimatum. In two hours a state of war will exist between England and Germany.’ In the anteroom, too, this news was followed by complete silence.  

Goering turned to me and said: ‘If we lose this war, then God have mercy on us!’ Goebbels stood in a corner, downcast and self-absorbed. Everywhere in the room I saw looks of grave concern, even amongst the lesser Party people.”

Hitler was allied with the Kremlin, which promptly invaded Poland, even though 45 French divisions attacked Hitler’s “Westwall” in the West: “Poland never will rise again in the form of the Versailles treaty. That is guaranteed not only by Germany, but also … Russia.” (Hitler , public speech in Dantzig, now Gdansk, end September 1939.)

***

WHY PUTIN IS INVADING:

What is going on with Putin? Why is he so crazy? Why does he risk a widening war?

Well, the answer is simple: because he has long been at war, and has long been losing it so well that even him, in spite of his stupidity, has noticed it. Like a gambler on a losing streak, he puts more on the table. Wait, some will say: ”Is Putin not acquiring territory? How can you say he is losing”.

Once again, Adolf Hitler’s case comes to our rescue to understand the generality of the situation.

In 1939, President Franklin Roosevelt, alarmed by Hitler’s annexations sent a telegram to the German “Chancellor-President” inquiring: “Are you willing to give assurance that your armed forces will not attack or invade the territory of the following independent nations?” Roosevelt listed 31 nations including Poland, the Baltic States, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, and Britain.

Hitler gave his answer to the Reichstag, assuring ‘Herr Roosevelt’ that Germany only had peaceful intentions toward its neighbors. Germany, Hitler declared, “had not thought of proceeding in any way against Poland.”

Putin, Lavrov, and company have been duplicating those comments. And duplicating the brazen lying pattern of Hitler: after claiming there was an insurrection in Crimea, Putin coolly, and publicly, admitted that his forces did it all, “acting very professionally”. In other words, Putin lies so much, he believes that everybody has got to tolerate his constant lying, and he does not mind broadcasting it. That, too is reminiscent of Hitler, who did not hesitate to say, and write, publicly, that the bigger the lie, the better.  See “Mediating Pluto”.

As with Hitler, but hopefully faster this time, the “democracies” are going to get tired of the lies.

PUTIN & HITLER: WORLD WAR WANTED TO HIDE ECONOMIC FAILURE:

The truth was just the opposite. Starting in May 1939, the president of Germany gave a whole series of conferences to his top generals stating that war was unavoidable, because the German economy, far from flourishing, was breaking down.

What was going on? Germany had become a full blown plutocracy, corrupt through and through, insuring immense economic inefficiency.

Same for Putin’s Russia. Remember the Olympic games in Sochi, by far the most expensive, ever, in history, 50 billion dollars, most of the money going top plutocrats around Putin (some now struck by sanctions)?

Germany also was making a huge effort of militarization. That, too, unbalanced the economy completely. Putin is duplicating that. While NATO is disarming, Putin announced a complete rearmament with completely new weapons, including new mobile nuclear missiles.

So, of course, Putin’s economy is breaking down. The nominal GDP of Russia is significantly smaller than Italy, and is around 1.5 trillion dollars (less, smaller than California’s).

Hitler again, in his third and final conference to his top generals in August 1939:

Our economic situation is such that we cannot hold out more than a few years. Göring can confirm this. We have no other choice. We must act,” Hitler said. Thus far, all of Germany’s territorial gains had come as a result of “political bluff” but it was now necessary to utilize Germany’s “military machine.”

“I shall give a propagandist reason for starting the war. Never mind whether it is plausible or not. The victor will not be asked afterward whether he told the truth or not. In starting and waging a war it is not right that matters but victory.”

In the latest developments, May 1, the Russian Foreign ministry condemned the Ukrainian national elections and referendum scheduled for May 25. Chancellor Merkel called Putin to ask him to say something about freeing observers of the 57 nation strong Organization or Security and Cooperation in Europe held by terrorists in South East Ukraine. Putin retorted by requesting the withdrawal of Ukrainian army from South east Ukraine (as if that was within the powers of Merkel to order around the Ukrainian army!)

Heil Putin!

BABY VLADIMIR WALKS THE VALLEY OF DEATH:

I am of courseunfair when I compare Putin to Hitler.  Putin himself would to point out that he, and Hitler, used the methods Catherine The Great used to extend her borders all the way to the west. That, is west of Warsaw. Catherine would send spies and agents provocateurs, hard picked Russophiles, who would cause problems, and then what we call now Special Forces. At this point she would scream Russians are being threatened, and send her army, using the Targowican confederation.  She used that method also throughout the “New Russia” which Putin mentioned repeatedly.

The entire idea of the European Union is unanimity in all important decisions, respect of the dozens, if not hundreds, of cultures and civilizations of the Old Continent. It’s the exact opposite of the spirit that has been festering in the Kremlin, ever since it exists. It’s a shock of civilizations against a predation that predates civilization.

“They say the greatest addiction is to power,” Vladimir Putin. Well, there is more than that, baby Vladimir, with your nuclear toys. As Salvador Dali pointed out, Hitler started World War Two, just because he wanted to lose it… Unbeknownst to himself!

Why? There is a streak of self-destruction in the genus Homo.  By destroying the latter, just so, evolution made it possible for the environment to live another day.  Putin may feel he is channeling Ivan the Terrible, and he will create his “Big Country” (not realizing that his country is 42 times California in area already, although Russia has a smaller GDP than this state of the USA).

But all what Putin is doing is walking up the valley of death, searching for the oldest instinct, destruction of the fiercest predator, himself. Evolution at its best, culling the obsolete. Too bad millions of lives are at stake.

Meanwhile all will turn out good, as long as the Occident remembers that history it its master, and collapse, its friend.

Patrice Aymé

***

Note 0: Why did Hitler refer his generals to Goering’s assessment of the Nazi economy? Hermann Goering was an authentic hero of the World War One, whereas Hitler had been only a courageous, but lowly caporal in WWI.

Generals took a flying ace such as Goering seriously. Goering replaced Von Richtoffen at the head of his top squadron, after the latter’s demise.  Moreover, the father of Goering had made Namibia safe for Germans, by exterminating the locals in a deliberate holocaust-man hunt.

So the Nazi German military officers (such as Rommel) could only venerate Goering. The most serious generals wanted Hitler dead. But that was easier said than done. When the generals turned to Anglo-American help to do so, they were betrayed.

Note1: the Swiss Civil War of 1847 is a rare example of good guys against good guys; yet, even in this case, the ones who won were the progressives federalists, and could be viewed as good guys against the staunch Catholic conservatives! Moreover, less than 150 soldiers got killed.  A better example of good guys on good guys would be the much more bloody French Commune of 1871, when both French sides had good points, and no choice, as the Prussian imperial army was pulling the strings, material or emotional, on both sides.

Note 2: On the obsolescence of USA bombers: manufactured between 1979 and 1990, the SUBSONIC cruise missile’s W-80 warhead is deployed aboard 85 non-stealthy Air Force B-52 bombers to give the 1960s-era planes an ability to launch nuclear weapons without having to enter heavily defended airspace.  The warhead has a variable explosive power of 5 to 150 kilotons, or roughly one-third to 10 times the yield of the nuclear weapon dropped on Hiroshima. It’s carried by 1980s-vintage Air Launched Cruise Missile.

Note 3: I gave the link on Paul Schmidt because it was in English. However it contains a grievous mistake: it claims France joined Britain in supporting Poland. However, in truth, it was the other way around: Britain was added in the fine print of the addendum of the Franco-Polish Treaty. And the truth is, that Britain was highly supportive of Hitler until 1936. In 1940, the ex British king, who was a Nazi, transmitted the French plans to his friend Adolf Hitler. Although he had been fired for being pro-Nazi, and wanting to marry a notorious Nazi spy, Edward VII had been made Inspector General of the British Forces, and spent a month studying the French defenses.

 

Letter From Moscow

April 10, 2014

I got a letter from Moscow accusing me of “deep seated hatred for the Russian soul” (it’s found in the comments of “1938?”).

Let me first make the following clear: I am not anti-Russian, quite the opposite. The same holds for Germany: I am pro-German, and that is why I have attacked German racist fascism, murderously anti-Semitic for at least 5 centuries (and maybe before Alexander Nevski).

Ideally, I would have Europe extending from the Azores to Alaska. I would be happy with Russia as a member of the European Union.

Uniquely Beautiful Russian Soul Much Loved

Uniquely Beautiful Russian Soul Much Loved

Nearly all Russians that I have met struck me as advanced cultural types (partly a selection effect from immigration, as the best and brightest tend to flee). I used even to read Soviet books (in translation), from Lenin to astrophysics (where Russians invented many things Americans claimed later, such as cosmic inflation; the successful thermonuclear device, the tokomak, is named from a Russian abbreviation and was invented by Sakharov (Stalin’s own H bomb genius; later a famous dissident).

But my extreme, and growing, dislike for Putin has appeared several years ago. He is making things worse with his new doctrine of the Eurasian Union, founded on values not embraced by Europe. See my:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2008/08/27/from-russia-with-hate/

which made already pretty explicit that Putin was on a collision course with civilization. I was not, BTW, always anti-Putin. I thought he would crack down on the plutocrats initially. Instead, he herded them. And bred his own.

In “1938?”, or “Hitler’s Book”, I related the analogy of facts between Hitler’s and Putin’s action. Not my fault that both invaded, and then held referenda with 97% approval. And other identities of facts. I don’t see why the fraud of 97% of Hitler (demonstrated 16 years later, no less!) is not a model for the fraud of 97% of Putin.

Everybody could see transparent urns were used in Crimea, at least in some cases, and the yes or no were plainly visible. Is that civilization, or is that making fun of civilization?

OK, let’s talk about what we know. What happened with Herr Hitler? A process was engaged. Both an inner psychological process, and an outer psychological process. Inwardly, Hitler got away with great horrors and obvious outrages… that brought him great success. He came to believe that, the more horrors and outrages, the more success would come.

And so they did.

In 1939, though, a weak Britain, having belatedly abjured Hitler, accepted to join France in providing Poland with support against Hitler and Stalin. The rest is history. The USSR harvested what it had sown: a quarter of a century of complicity with German fascism (started by Lenin himself before 1917).

Similarly, now, Putin could tip into the Darkest Side.

For example, if Putin uses transparent voting boxes and then all the Russians salute that democratic gesture, while the West scoff in impotent rage, Putin will be enticed to do more of the same, all over, from Georgia to Moldova.

Some will say: Russia is only 17 million square kilometers, 70% larger than Canada, the USA and China (the three largest countries after Russia). Why can’t Russia become the “big country” as Putin himself called it, again? Why can’t Russia become again Czarist Russia, with its 22 million square kilometers? What’s wrong with that?

What’s wrong is that it crushed many civilizations. Armenian civilization, in Christian form, is the oldest Christian civilization, older than Christian Rome, more than 17 centuries old, for example.

That brings us to the question of the “Russian soul”. What is the “Russian Soul”? How old is it? Where does it come from? Well, history is very clear. The youngest son of Alexander Nevski founded Moscow, but then came the Mongols. Out of centuries of war, oppression and occupation, came the Moscow soul, in the style of Ivan III, and Ivan IV, The Terrible.

Now that Moscow soul is called the Russian soul. Its pluses? First of all, the capacity to install the largest land empire the world has known (except for the Mongols, for a generation or so). True, that empire spread among semi-Neolithic people, and was rendered possible by the potato (a South American invention, not Russian!). Potatoes grow in very poor soils, with very cold winter, and give nearly all that a human being needs, including proteins.

You say, dear Moscow reader: …” you don’t grasp some very important aspects of the proverbial Russian “soul” — why they fight so hard when humiliated and so on. Or perhaps you think they are so stupid to be totally indoctrinated without “free press”? In our Internet age… How arrogant and stupid of you! I think it is deeply seated hatred that devaluates all the good reasoning you have.”

Well, Putin has apparently blocked some Internet site (not mine, it seems). Also clearly he has control of the Russian Main Stream Media. I don’t know if Russian fight so hard. They lost the Crimean war of 1853. They lost World War One. In WWII, Stalin’s terror proved to be much superior to the terror Nazi inspired. One could say that the Nazis got out-Nazified.

Also the Allies provided Stalin with many things, from trucks to first class intelligence (intelligence from the British, itself building on French and especially Polish work). The battle of Kursk, the largest tank battle of WWII, by far, in summer 1943, was won because the Soviets knew everything about the Nazi formations, thanks to the Brits. That’s when the Wehrmacht got broken (it was defeated, but not broken, at Moscow in 1941, and lost stupidly the Sixth Army’s 300,000 men at Stalingrad around Christmas 1942. But at Kursk, it lost its last chance to defeat the USSR).

I don’t see why I should have “deep seated hatred against the Russian soul”. And the fact is, I do not. Although I do deeply despise Orthodox Christian fanatics…

The danger now is that Russians are embarked on a phenomenon of satanization (we need a word beyond diabolization!) similar to that experienced by the Germans in the 1930s and 1940s. That’s all. That’s plenty enough to raise some alarms.

By grossly violating International Law in exactly the same way as Hitler did with Austria and Czechoslovakia in 1938. (Hitler did a better job, getting everything without firing a shot.) Putin has opened the gates of violence. Not only has Putin’s psychology tipped irreversibly in the Dark Side, but he has set in motion forces that push him ever further that way.

The weakness of the West only encourages him. Hitler was stunned when France and Britain sent him an ultimatum, on September 1, 1939. In retrospect, it should have been done earlier. Fortunately this time, the West is not divided. And an economic ultimatum can be sent to Putin.

At this point, all signs are that Putin prepares an invasion. If Mr. Putin does not get the Ukrainian constitution changed within a few weeks, according to its diktat, he will probably attack before the Ukrainian presidential elections of May 25. And then what’s next?

The problem with the wished-for 22 million square kilometers empire of the Czar Putin is that it imposed the paranoid, metastatic, militaristic, satanic Kremlin soul on many civilizations, most of them wiser and older, with less space for the Dark Side.

Nowadays, the Dark Side has to be fought, lest nuclear weapons, and many other terrible ways and means, be used. Interestingly, Putin and his henchmen have declared they will use nuclear weapons on the battlefield, a clear escalation, of the nuclear type (whereas the Obama administration has wowed never to use tactical nukes).

Weirdly, yet in the traditional Hitlerian way, Putin is proving more deliberately dangerous to the West than any Soviet leader ever was (except for when Stalin allied with Hitler against France).

Patrice Aymé

Putin’s Lies & Hallucinations

March 20, 2014

Putin’s premeditated assault against civilization is the gravest crisis since 1938, the year when Hitler tipped so deep into the Darkest Side, that he could not come back. Aside from this, Putin’s psycho crisis is fascinating as it demonstrates how entire populations become seized with madness (and how belief systems work in general).

So I hope my readers forgive me to insist a bit on what looks increasingly as the beginning of WWIII. Today Russian forces, using grenades, captured an Ukrainian frigate. The Ukrainians are stalling for time, aware as they are, that Putin does not want to allow them to prepare for the all-out war he obviously long planned, and for whom no one, but for him and his thugs, is ready.  Get Your “What Would Hitler Do?” Bracelet

WAR! Putin Speaks Like Hitler

WAR! Putin Speaks Like Hitler

[Translated from Polish.]

In war, it’s most important to choose the place and time of one’s battle. Putin quadrupled Russia’s military budget, for years, and then struck, as he could not resist anymore the temptation of showing his muscles. I will deconstruct here more of Putin’s lies and hallucinations, from the major discourse he gave March 17, 2014, in which he does not hide his ambition to recover what he calls the “big country”. Starting with the invasion of Ukraine (which he claims he got the authorization to proceed with, see below in his own words).

The big problem for the rest of the world is that the “big country”, the USSR, not satisfied with terrorizing 145 million Russians, also directly terrorized more than 155 million NON Russian people (the USSR was 300 million, Russia is not even half of that, only 145 million), and the USSR also subjugated another 100 million in Eastern Europe. Relative to that, Hitler’s dream of rebuilding a “Great Kingdom” (“Grosse Reich”) was puny.

Let me say in passing that my critique of the Soviet Union was always from the left, and the more progressive point of view. From that admittedly advanced perspective, Stalin was the Twentieth Century’s greatest capitalist (he commanded the greatest capital, including millions of slaves). Stalin was also addicted to the sort of behaviors that used to be associated, for millennia, to the Devil (making him a first class plutocrat).

In the preceding essay, Kill Tatars, Own Crimea, we have seen Crimea has been made into Mother Russia through a recent holocaust. Let’s go back to Putin’s discourse this week and what he calls with spite the “sovereignty parade”. (I use the official translation of the Kremlin.)

Sovereignty Parade? This means that the independence of nations, an idea Gorbatchev respected, is for Putin a flaw. Moreover, these nations are not just nations. They often have their own languages, have their own civilizations, and are sometimes 3,000 years old (example: Armenia).

Ukraine, in particular, is more than twice older than Russia. Duration over greater eons entails greater wisdom. Russian tyrannical military expansionism is reminiscent of ancient Assyria. (That did not end very well for Assyria, as world coalition annihilated it.)

Putin: “I would like to share with you some details of the negotiations that took place in the early 2000s…Russia SEEMED to have recognised Crimea as part of Ukraine… by agreeing to delimit the border we admitted de facto and de jure that Crimea was Ukrainian territory

[Tyranosopher: But the Russian leadership is a bunch of lying snakes, so that it “SEEMED to have recognized de facto and de jure” is nothing, but lies. Putin goes on, justifying his lying ways by inventing a cruel victimization Russians, those great invaders, are subjected to, in a way identical to the victimization of Germans Hitler had invented to justify his annexations and invasions:]

Putin: However, this is not how the situation developed. Time and time again attempts were made to deprive Russians of their historical memory, even of their language and to subject them to forced assimilation. Moreover, Russians, just as other citizens of Ukraine are suffering from the constant political and state crisis that has been rocking the country for over 20 years. 

I understand why Ukrainian people wanted change. They have had enough of the authorities in power during the years of Ukraine’s independence. Presidents, prime ministers and parliamentarians changed, but their attitude to the country and its people remained the same. They milked the country, fought among themselves for power, assets and cash flows and did not care much about the ordinary people…

[Tyranosopher: One can observe the exact same “milking of the country” in Russia, except that it’s much more orderly, as Russia is a dictatorship, not just a plutocracy. Moscow is the city in the world with the most billionaires. “Forced Assimilation” happened nowhere: Russian colonizers were allowed to stay wherever they had colonized, such as the Baltic nations.]

Putin: However, those who stood behind the latest events in Ukraine had a different agenda: they were preparing yet another government takeover; they wanted to seize power and would stop short of nothing. They resorted to terror, murder and riots. Nationalists, neo-Nazis, Russophobes and anti-Semites executed this coup

[Tyranosopher: Here Putin is lying big time: there was NO coup in Ukraine whatsoever; let alone by “neo-Nazis”; the deposition of the president was fully constitutional, and Putin knows this. That means the sort of regime he heads can afford giant lies. That means his opposition has been completely muzzled, and also that the propaganda is so thick in Russia that the so called president can murder the truth in peace. Notice also that he implicitly identifies “nationalism” and “neo-Nazism” by putting them in the same litany of horror.]

Putin: “They continue to set the tone in Ukraine to this day.

It is also obvious that there is no legitimate executive authority in Ukraine now, nobody to talk to. Many government agencies have been taken over by the impostors, but they do not have any control in the country, while they themselves – and I would like to stress this – are often controlled by radicals…

[Tyranosopher: The same lie again. Actually the executive authorities in Ukraine are fully legitimate. Putin claiming he had “nobody to talk to” is beyond grotesque.] 

Putin: “Those who opposed the coup were immediately threatened with repression. Naturally, the first in line here was Crimea, the Russian-speaking Crimea. In view of this, the residents of Crimea and Sevastopol turned to Russia for help in defending their rights and lives, in preventing the events that were unfolding and are still underway in Kiev, Donetsk, Kharkov and other Ukrainian cities.”

[Tyranosopher: “Preventing the events”? So they had not happened yet, according to Putin? Putin admits, in his stupidity, to a pre-emptive strike.] 

Putin: “Naturally, we could not leave this plea unheeded; we could not abandon Crimea and its residents in distress. This would have been betrayal on our part. 

First, we had to help create conditions so that the residents of Crimea for the first time in history were able to peacefully express their free will regarding their own future. However, what do we hear from our colleagues in Western Europe and North America? They say we are violating norms of international law.  Firstly, it’s a good thing that they at least remember that there exists such a thing as international law – better late than never.

[Tyranosopher: Ukraine had a seat at the United Nations for 65 years, and has been fully independent since 1991, and has existed as a nation for well above 11 centuries, about twice longer than Russia. Putin just invaded it, in complete violation of International Law, and is flippant about it.

By the way, using soldiers without national identification and identifying marks, the way Putin does, is against International Law.]

Putin: “They did not wonder why it was that millions of Ukrainian citizens saw no prospects at home and went to other countries to work as day labourers. I would like to stress this: it was not some Silicon Valley they fled to, but to become day labourers…

Secondly, and most importantly – what exactly are we violating? True, the President of the Russian Federation received permission from the Upper House of Parliament to use the Armed Forces in Ukraine.  However, strictly speaking, nobody has acted on this permission yet.  Russia’s Armed Forces NEVER entered Crimea…”

[Tyranosopher: Another huge lie. That’s why Putin’s soldiers are invading without marking. Notice that Putin considers he has permission to use Armed Forces in Ukraine. One could not be clearer: Putin intends to attack Ukraine.]

Crimean authorities referred to the well-known Kosovo precedent – a precedent our western colleagues created with their own hands in a very similar situation, when they agreed that the unilateral separation of Kosovo from Serbia, exactly what Crimea is doing now, was legitimate and did not require any permission from the country’s central authorities. Pursuant to Article 2, Chapter 1 of the United Nations Charter, the UN International Court agreed with this approach and made the following comment in its ruling of July 22, 2010, and I quote: “No general prohibition may be inferred from the practice of the Security Council with regard to declarations of independence,” and “General international law contains no prohibition on declarations of independence.” Crystal clear, as they say…. 

[Tyranosopher: What’s crystal clear is that Crimea was ANNEXED by Moscow. The situation of Kosovo is completely different. First of all, Kosovo is independent.]

Ironically “If authorities in Moscow demand that Crimea join Russia, Tirana [Albania’s capital] and Pristina [Kosovo’s capital] should demand the same for Presevo valley,” Jonuz Musliu, head of Bujanovac Municipality, was quoted as saying by Serbian radio B92 and CROSS news agency. Presevo valley, as well as all South Serbian municipalities, Bujanovac, Presevo and Medvedja, are populated mainly by ethnic Albanians, who form a 90% majority. Crimea is only 60% made of ethnic Russians, and they came in after holocausts and ethnic cleansing directed from the Kremlin. Notice that Putin considers Western Europe his business.]

Putin: “if the Crimean local self-defence units had not taken the situation under control, there could have been casualties as well. Fortunately this did not happen. There was not a single armed confrontation in Crimea and no casualties…

[Tyranosopher: By self defense units, Putin means his thugs.] 

Putin: “They keep talking of some Russian intervention in Crimea, some sort of aggression. This is strange to hear. I cannot recall a single case in history of an intervention without a single shot being fired and with no human casualties.

[Tyranosopher: Hitler said the same in 1938. And it was true. However this time, the invading dictator, Putin, is lying: there are several dead so far, including an Ukrainian officer…] 

Putin: “Colleagues,

Like a mirror, the situation in Ukraine reflects what is going on and what has been happening in the world over the past several decades. After the dissolution of bipolarity on the planet, we no longer have stability. Key international institutions are not getting any stronger; on the contrary, in many cases, they are sadly degrading. Our western partners, led by the United States of America, prefer not to be guided by international law in their practical policies, but by the rule of the gun. They have come to believe in their exclusivity and exceptionalism, that they can decide the destinies of the world, that only they can ever be right. They act as they please: here and there, they use force against sovereign states, building coalitions based on the principle “If you are not with us, you are against us.” To make this aggression look legitimate, they force the necessary resolutions from international organisations, and if for some reason this does not work, they simply ignore the UN Security Council and the UN overall. 

This happened in Yugoslavia; we remember 1999 very well. It was hard to believe, even seeing it with my own eyes, that at the end of the 20th century, one of Europe’s capitals, Belgrade, was under missile attack for several weeks, and then came the real intervention. Was there a UN Security Council resolution on this matter, allowing for these actions? Nothing of the sort. And then, they hit Afghanistan, Iraq, and frankly violated the UN Security Council resolution on Libya, when instead of imposing the so-called no-fly zone over it they started bombing it too…” 

Tyranosopher: More of Putin’s lies. In Libya, the UNSC authorization was for force as needed to protect the civilian population. The French had made no mystery that they intended to do so. After the French had fought on and off Qaddafi for decades all over Africa, using the heaviest weaponry, and nearly having killed the Libyan mass murderer one in an air strike in Chad (which Qaddafi had invaded), it was clear that they were going to use the UNSC’s check to strike. They did so, without asking the USA for authorization.

Serbia, at the time of Putin’s indignation was under Milankovitch’s dictatorship. The Serbian dictator was later arrested, by the Serbs, for war crimes, and crimes against humanity, and sent to the International Criminal Court in La Hague, where he died.

And that’s where Putin is going too. Lest he dies first.

Patrice Aymé

WAR MAKES HISTORY

March 4, 2014

HERE WE GO AGAIN

The earlier unjustifiable, unprovoked fascism, greedy plutocracy, imperial overstretch, murderous paranoia and other aspects of the Dark Side get smashed, the better.

Such is the most basic lesson of the 1930s.

By 1936, fascist regimes in Italy, Japan and Germany had taken offensive actions against other countries, by invading them. What did Western “democracies” do? Nothing (for various reasons; the case of deeply anti-Nazi France, led by a Jew, Leon Blum, in 1936, was the opposite of that of the, de facto, Nazi collaborating UK and USA).

A doctrine of Russian foreign policy is that “Russian ethnicity and citizenship trump national sovereignty” That mean that, wherever there are Russians, Putin ought to invade. That was exactly the Nazi doctrine: wherever there were Germans, Nazis ought to rescue them, and invade. Conveniently, there were Germans all over Eastern Europe, all the way to the Volga.

Russian Plutocracy In Full, Version 1900 CE.

Russian Plutocracy In Full, Version 1900 CE.

I’m sure that, deep down inside, following the Czarist doctrine, Putin views the Poles as Russian.

Indeed, notice in the map above, that most of Poland is owned by Russia. The Russian empire also owned all of present day Ukraine, except for the extreme western piece that is part of Austro-Hungary, presently with one of the largest city in Ukraine, L’viv… Known as Leopolis in Latin, capital of ancient Galicia. A city with an outstanding intellectual tradition up to 1939, with its great mathematical school; some of those mathematicians, hunted by the Nazis and their Soviet allies (!) having fled to the USA, elaborated the (Teller-Ulam) H bomb design.

So here we exact identification: Putin can be identified as a classic dictator, the 1930s class. He invades countries, based on abominable theories of historical ownership. Not surprising for something molded as a KGB officer.

Starting around 1930, Stalin forcefully exerted genocide on Crimea’s inhabitants, the Tartars. Stalin even drove their language and their alphabet out. Finally he deported them all, out of their homeland.

Putin is reinforcing that genocide, with the lie that it never happened, or that, if it did, it was of no consequence, and certainly no consequence that can be reversed. (Yet Spain just repaired its unjust, total expulsion of Sephardic Jews in 1492 CE. More than 5 centuries ago. Jews were in Hispania before Christianism was invented.)

In the 1930s, the less they were resisted to, the more encouraged the fascists felt. They invaded more and more countries, in most of a decade, until France and Britain declared war.

Even then, the only way Hitler’s abominable regime kept on going is that many, in that regime, believed a critical mass of the leadership of the USA was on their side. (Hitler’s and Mussolini’s successes, in turn, encouraged the top Japanese military to engage in the worst exactions… even inside Japan. And soon, genocide. Japanese genocidal activities then fed-back to Hitler and Mussolini; it’s why it’s encouraging that China was not supportive of Putin March 3, 2014, at the UN: the PCR made a not so veiled critique of the Russian dictator’s invasion.)

Fortunately, this time, in 2014, France, Germany, Great Britain and, most importantly the USA, are on the same democratic frequency. Samantha Powers, the USA’s UN ambassador, gave a perfect discourse at the United Nations.

But for one point. The most important point.

The announcement of crippling sanctions. That’s not helped with Obama declaring that he does not want a “cold war”.  The “cold” war is past. We have a hot war. Overnight.

The expression “Cold War,” was derived from a phrase used in Europe during the late 1930s to characterize the war of nerves between Hitler and the French Republic, which was described as “la guerre blanche or la guerre froide.” Confronting Hitler was delayed all too long, because France could not attack as long as the Anglo-Saxons were, de facto, allied to Hitler.

Hard core pacifists, Nazis, pro-Nazis and Pat Buchanan said: “Oh, that was a mistake, we should have made peace with Hitler, it was all the fault of the French.” Auschwitz ‘s ashes are on their shoes, for all to see.

Hard core pacifism is a form of cretinism, in the world we presently have. It overlooks the fact that, thanks to the enormous power of technology, the evil of one man can be multiplied nearly infinitely.  That’s how Stalin, Hitler and the emperor of Japan, could kill so many. Although they were just three guys.

The social structures of this world are still tribal: France and the USA have great chiefs whom I had the extraordinary opportunity to approach. The level of security is properly astounding. Layers upon layers, many in plain clothes. Officers with nuclear weapons’ codes is in plain view. However the question comes to the fore: with so much power in just one man, what if he goes nuts?

Putin is nuts. And he commands the world’s largest thermonuclear bomb stockpile.

Angela Merkel speaks perfect Russian, and had, over the years, deeply disturbing encounters with Putin, that revealed him to be “in another world”, as she reported. Even more disturbing, what Angela reported was never denied by the Kremlin. Putin’s insanity is the new normal there.

Putin is nuts.

People will say: ”So what? Just one man, don’t listen to him. Just wait for the next guy.”

However people saying this would not understand how leadership, in other words, autocracy, works. I agree that the Leadership Principle ought to be discontinued in politics. However, right now it reigns. So Putin is Russia.

And Putin is nuts.

When one guy like that leads a country, and he is nuts, he makes the country he leads nuts, too.

This is what happened with the fascist regimes of the 1930s. Nuttier and nuttier every year. After ten years, the insanity had become mass murdering, and the leaders of Germany and Japan deliberately killed dozens of millions. Each. (Italy’s Mussolini lost the war too fast to kill many millions.)

Here is Putin, sitting in the Kremlin, having rigged all sorts of things, from elections to exploding apartment buildings (OK, there are no proofs, but that’s precisely the proof). He is leading the world’s largest country into the ground, thanks to the plutocracy he leads. Russia is indeed 70% larger than the already gigantic USA. 17 million square kilometers (Canada, the USA and China follow with around 10 million sq km). Russia has enormous resources. So why is Putin obsessed by recovering territories the Tsars used to rule?

The Tsars ruled much of Poland, and all the way to Alaska and beyond, establishing forts all the way to Northern California. They ruled not just Ukraine, but Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Mongolia, parts of China.

Putin has, clearly the agenda of recovering all that empire (but for Alaska, “Seward’s folly”, legally sold to the USA). It’s a secret agenda inside his head, a temptation, a way to make his rule indefinite. Should the West not threaten the use of overwhelming force, he will be encouraged, and will proceed further.

What Was Given To Stalin At Yalta, Putin Wants Back

What Was Given To Stalin At Yalta, Putin Wants Back

“Overwhelming force”? What’s that? First shut down all the relations with Russia that can be closed right away. If that’s not enough, keep on closing what’s next. Close the whole thing, even the Space Station. When the enemy invades, it’s too late to prepare peace.

On his website, Putin just declared his intent to invade Eastern Ukraine, not just Crimea. Talk about talking too much. We cannot say we have not been forewarned. (Let’s hope the NSA, CIA and other dark horses of the apocalypse, are finally put to good use…)

Die for Ukraine? Not exactly. But Putin will not stop. Not on his own. He has crossed a psychological Rubicon. He will not stop at Ukraine. Putin has to be shown clearly, now, that, should he proceed in his pattern of invading other countries, his regime will not survive.

A new cold war? Well, Putin rigged the last elections. In a way that makes him less legitimate than the USSR.

Indeed, Stalin’s successors had the excuse that they found a very bad system that they tried to improve: they made things better. This time is different: Putin has been making things worse. And now he wants to make them way worse, because he is a weak and desperate leader. For all his badness, even Stalin was more cautious.

Do not underestimate weakness and desperation as strong motivators: Hitler’s acts, after 1937, were all about jumping from weakness to desperation (that’s why he attacked the Jews, Czechs, Austrians, Poles, Norway, France, and finally, his ally Stalin. That’s not my own fancy psychobabble theory, we have explicit statements and discourses from the Nazi dictator to that bear witness).

By the way, “violation of international law” (Obama) by war of aggression (an invasion qualifies) is a war crime. Putin does not have a semblance of a UN mandate to invade Ukraine (as Bush had in Iraq, sort of). Vladimir Putin and his cronies should be formally informed, right away, that they expose themselves to prosecution for war crimes.

Total economic war now is better than war later. (After all, Switzerland got struck by sanctions from the EU the day after the Swiss people voted against free circulation of people in Europe, two weeks ago.)

A UN Security Council proposition ought to be presented right away  to send UN observers in Ukraine. Russia would veto it, but get even more isolated than he is now. (The OSCE, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, presided by the Swiss president at this point, is sending observers to Ukraine, March 4, 2014, but that’s not enough.)

Putin has seen all nice signs and kind discretion from the West to him as weakness. Say when Obama agreed not to install an anti-ballistic missile system in Europe: weakness. Similarly for the lack of reaction to the invasion (and persistent occupation) of part of Georgia by Putin, under Bush: weakness.

The final encouragement to Putin was Obama’s reculade in Syria. French pilots were actually inside their fully armed jets when Obama announced he has had a cold sweat, and would not send his missiles against the satanic Assad with the only language mass murdering dictators understand, high explosives. At that point, Putin understood in turn what Hitler understood early on: as long as he used force, forcefully, nobody would stop him.

This is 1936, all over again. History is repeating itself. But, for one drastic difference.

In 1936 the West was just 3 countries: France, the UK, the USA. Only France wanted to destroy Hitler, the other two wanted to collaborate with him some more.

In September 1939, France and Poland found themselves fighting Hitler  alone, plus Stalin, and most plutocrats of the USA and their tentacular corporations. The war did not go well until the USA got involved, 40 months later.

This time, the West is most of the planet, and, in particular, the USA and the EU, are fully united (and Japan is an ally). Hence Putin can, and should be, struck as vigorously as possible, in all ways. Spare him not.  Now that Putin has engaged in an act of war, albeit a small one (as of March 3, 2014; March 4th could be very different). Thus, the more force is used now, the more powerfully, the less will have to be used in this war, overall. Because it’s war. Please wake up.

We did not chose to have war in Ukraine. Putin, an apex plutocrat, did.

We did not choose to have war in Ukraine. But we can choose to lose it. If we do, we are choosing to fight the continuation of the war on less strategically favorable terms.

When tiny Athens (with only around 80,000 citizens) confronted the remarkable Achaemenid empire (“Persia”), it confronted an ultra-modern state with no less than 45% of the world’s population. Resisting Persia was sheer insanity. All proportion kept, it was if Luxembourg declared war to China.

Persia got obsessive about Athens, because Athens, tiny Athens, launched a mood that could not be forgiven, once the Spartans threw down a well the Persian emissaries (after being insulted in Athens, they made the mistake of asking Sparta for earth and water, to symbolize Sparta’s subjugation).

The Athenian army confronted the Persians at Marathon. The reason? Athens enjoyed direct democracy, whereas the empire founded by Cyrus the Great was an extremely wealthy fascist plutocracy. Athens won, and here we are, heir of the same principles. Those principles made the genius of our genus.

We are a deeply equalitarian species. Out of equality rises our superior cultural performance. Plutocracy, the rule of the Dark Side, denies giving, love, and the equality which make us possible. Thus plutocracy is a denial of our species. Only an anger great enough to destroy it, will save us, and the biosphere. And there is hope: greed is neither as natural, nor as strong as anger.

It’s time to get angry against dictator Putin. Angry now is better than very sorry tomorrow.

War makes history. Of this we must think, if we want to make history better.

Patrice Aymé

Notes: I already called on expulsing Russia from the G8 (that means no meeting in Sochi). Replace him by Brazil, India, whatever. Prepare to cut off the flow of Russian gas (Oh, the pseudo-ecologists don’t like it, and Germany whines, because it’s cold out there? So why did not they push for safe nuclear power then? Meanwhile, I’m sure Obama will be happy to sell Germany coal). The G8 meeting (sans Putin) should he held in Warsaw.

Putin being crazy, that would be a bit dangerous; but the time to take risks has come. A solution is to hold the G8 in Gdansk (Danzig). When Gdansk got attacked on September 1, 1939, France and Britain sent Hitler an ultimatum. But the USA kept collaborating with Hitler. Not so this time. An unmistakable message.

US Navy cruisers off shore, equipped with anti-ballistic missiles, could provide protection.

Oh, another thing: the plutocrats around Putin have huge assets in the West. Freeze them. Including private estates on the French Cote d’Azur, and London. There are hundreds of billions of dollars of them in the EU alone. The freezing of the vast assets of Putin’s plutocrats will be humiliating, and revealing, for the whole world to see.

Meanwhile expedite a war crime inquiry in the International Court in La Hague, for “wars of aggression, and mass murder” in Chechnya, Georgia, Syria, Ukraine.

French War In Mali

January 11, 2013

Finally! Friday January 11, 2013, Paris, Élysée: “Mali is confronting an aggression of terrorist elements coming from the North, with a brutality and fanaticism that the entire world knows” said the French president “I have therefore, in the name of France answered the demand of help from the Mali president, which is supported by the Western African countries. In consequence, the French armed forces have brought this afternoon their support to Malian units to fight against those terrorist elements.”

And, presto, France is at war again. This is the second military intervention of France in Africa, in one week. (The preceding one stopped an insurrection in the Central African Republic.)
And at least the FOURTH major French combat intervention in two years (Ivory Coast, Libya).

French Strike Mali [From Terrorist Video]

French Strike Mali [From Terrorist Video]

For those who are naive in these matters, historically, in the fullness of time, France is the primary military interventionist in the world. Ever. This started when the Roman empire put the Franks in charge of defending Germania and Gallia in 400 CE. After some initial difficulties that caused the fall of the Occidental part of the empire, the Franks annhilated the Huns, the Goths, the Lombards and various other critters. (The Franks also intervened in Britannia for centuries afterwards, before conquering the whole thing in 1066 CE).

The nations French military intervention created constitute the essential of the West: Germany (starting in 500 CE), much of Europe (by 800 CE), all the way to Eastern Europe, and including Catalonia and the reconquista of Spain (Charlemagne), England (1066), the reconquest of much of the Mediterranean from the Muslim invaders (South Italy, Sicily, etc.)… even the Netherlands is, to a great extent, a French creation (a 75 year war part of a 120 year French war against Spain)… And finally, of course, the USA.

Without gigantic French help, and even… incitation, the American rebels would have all been hanged by the authorities, end of the story. Nearly all their cartridges were even made in France. Even while being created, the USA defaulted, and refused to pay back even a cent to the French Treasury for the enormously expensive war that had given birth to it. Thus default presided at the birth of the USA. (Louis XVI was advised to follow suit, and default too; but he refused, as he was hell bent on making nobles pay taxes, something that the National Assembly of 1789 finally imposed!)

That’s one problem with war. When made out of principle, it can only pay back with principle. But that does not mean it should not be made.

It’s not just that the Franks (or the Gauls before them) are slightly demented supermen in search of somebody to fight. The very position of France at the crossroads of the three main trade routes of Western Europe, since the Neolithic, condemned any people thriving there to be pretty aggressive and open minded. That is why the occupants of France may have changed quite a bit, but the mentality persists.

Frankish intervention led to the unification of Western Europe under the body of Roman law and the Roman language, and a version of civilization (and weaponization!) that they called Christianity. Achieving what they called in 800 CE “the Renovation of the Roman Empire”. The Franks, were Germans who civilized Rome, while learning the proper way of making war, a state, and a melting pot, from the Romans.

War is inseparable from democracy, be it just because plutocracy hates democracy. Plutocracy tends to blossom all over, all the time, and one of its main variant is “theocracy”, where (mass) criminal acts are ordered by god(s).

The French government declared that the invaders of Mali are “terrorist” and “criminal”. Differently from December 31, 406 CE, when the Vandals, Alans and various others crossed the frozen Rhine by surprise, France was not surprised that the terrorists decided to invade the rest of Mali, in the hope that the international community would take months to get organized after Susan Rice lifted her veto against France at the UN, and the Security Council voted to allow armed intervention as needed.

The French Air Force has already conducted bombing missions. This is excellent. In the West Africa of my childhood, one had to fear only spiders, horribly poisonous snakes, crocodiles and furry predators. The danger presented by man was inexistent.

Western Africa was way safer than Europe. Shockingly, once, a taxicab driver got killed for his money. That had never happened before. It turned out, and it was pretty telling that, a young French tourist had done it.

Black Muslim faith was not distinguishable from Western secularism in most ways, and was distinctly more progressive in some important ways (having to do with socialism, nudity, and… even the position of women in society).

The “Muslim” faith of the fanatics in the middle of the Middle Earth is a “different religion from mine” declared Abou Diouf, a Wolof Muslim, ex-president of Senegal (and General Secretary of the 70 nations strong francophonie).

Of course such a version of Islam, islam with a progressive, human, civilized face, is intolerable to a lot of bad actors.

Wahhabism, the faith of Saudi Arabia, is perfectly compatible with terrorism, gangsterism, drug trafficking, and, first of all, extreme concentration of wealth (in other words, the exact opposite of Senegalese style Islam). Thus extremely well financed bad actors, armed by the feudal oil powers, tightly connected to Wall Street, of Arabia, keep on financing it. This constant war agaisnt a self made enemy, serves as a justification for the feudal, fascist regimes in the Middle East. That’s why they keep on secreting what we are supposed to fight.

The usual professional pseudo-leftist whiners are sure to surface and accuse France of having interests in Africa. Well, there is something to the notion of empire. Originally, it simply meant command, order.

Under the British Raj, there was no danger that the Muslim dominated regions would engage into a thermonuclear war with the rest of the subcontinent. Had the British Raj evolved as Canada, that would still be an impossibility.

Whereas, as it is, after Gandhi’s pathetic circus, the existence of that Pakistani theocracy (see the connection with plutocracy, above) which he contributed so much to create, does not just threaten India with a few hundreds of millions of dead, but also could ignite a world war.

The old argument of the French in Algeria was that they were back, as the successor state of Rome, after a hiatus imposed by Arab Muslim invaders. This was also the basic argument of Napoleon in Egypt. And there is something to it.

After all, Rome had African, and even Arab, emperors.

So how does this compare with Libya, Syria and Afghanistan?

Well Qaddafi was a horrible dictator, who even raped young girls industrially. he had a deal with those plutocrats, Blair and G.W. Bush. As long as he was in place, an atrocious plutocratic symbol was in place. The difference with North Korea is that, as Qaddafi found out, Libya was only an hour flight out of European bases. Similar reasons brought JFK to a tough line about nuclear capable missiles in Cuba.

Syria is a mess. The only correct line of the West is to draw lines for Assad not to cross, and support the secularist opposition (even with weapons)… while trying not to help the genuine Islamists supported by the feudal regimes.

I have been opposed to the war in Afghanistan for, among other things, strategic reasons. The first one is that, when democracy fights, democracy ought to be pure. In Afghanistan the USA has been as impure as possible, and that had direct strategic consequences leading to the unavoidable defeat we are now experiencing.

During its great war with Sparta, Athens was not ethically pure, far from it, and that is why she was ultimately defeated by a coalition of enraged city states (led by Sparta, financed by Persia). Athens was impure because Athens used the defense funds of the Delian League to build itself pretty buildings still observable today, because Athens destroyed an entire island, Milo, just to show it was a superpower, and because Athens attacked Syracuse, there again, just because she could, as an undefeatable superpower. Athens aggravated her case by boasting of her great democracy and Open Society, while practicing the opposite for all to see.

(Analogies with the present USA, while regrettable, are not a coincidence, and fully intended.)

When the French Republic gave an ultimatum to Hitler, on September 1, 1939, the Republic had been ethically pure (Britain, that France dragged behind, had been much less pure, and its compromising with Hitler had a direct effect on its military preparedness, which was so insufficient, as to leave mostly France fighting, by a ratio of 1 to 20 in soldiers deployed!)

The first big mistake in Afghanistan is actually that the USA attacked the REPUBLIC of Afghanistan in the 1970s. It would seem that the USA (or some influential people in the USA) were after the mineral wealth that the republic of Afghanistan intended to develop with French (and probably Soviet) help.

A dirty war resulted, with the likes of the CIA instrumentalizing the likes of Bin Laden. Then there was 9/11. The West invaded Afghanistan, as was its right.

But then a tragic, and strategic mistake was done: that one of NOT enforcing a SECULARIST state in Afghanistan. Instead the west did what it should never do, put a theocratic republic, Iranian style, in power. Hence NATO fought for Wahhabism light. Thus the Afghans, including those in the army and police, got completely confused, and felt NATO ought to be supporting Fundamentalist Islam, and became crazy, observing otherwise.

Hence the famous “green on blue” and “green on green” attacks. It’s a hopeless situation, and too late to fix it. Better next time we invade Afghanistan from scratch.

Mali is completely different. Mali is a secularist republic. A natural ally of Western civilization, an emanation of it. Not supporting Mali would have extremely adverse consequences, because not just of its location, but because it would be not supporting civilization.

Fortunately precision bombing on armed columns have happened on Friday January 11. There is no doubt the terrorists were taken by surprise. Moderation in the support of civilization is no solution.
Patrice Ayme

The Fiscal-Military Anglo-Saxon Model

November 11, 2011

SO CALLED LIBERALISM IS AS LIBERAL AS AN OCCUPATION ARMY

***

Abstract: The meat of the so called Anglo-Saxon liberalism was actually a leveraged war machine that entangled finance and military. Forget misleading plutocratic propaganda. The invisible hand was more about war than it was about commerce. When Napoleon assimilated Britain  to a nation of shopkeepers, he did not know what he was talking about, as he found out soon enough.

The Anglo-Saxon “liberal” model, is, first of all, a war machine of the few against the many. It worked, against France, from the eighteenth century, until the twentieth century, as I show, by evoking major historical facts which are generally superbly ignored.

Happenstance does not a logic make. Especially when the happenstance is military (England was lucky to defeat France), and the logic economical (there were other European economic models; that plutocratic leveraging defeated France at that particular moment of military history proves nothing in matters economic: if Louis XIV’s mighty army had invaded England, as Louis was begged to do, by the king of England, himself, none of this would have happened!)

The plutocrats’ greatest enemy is the socializing European Union. The EU is also turning into the plutocrats’ greatest source of profit, as they dismantle it. It is time for the Europeans to understand that they were naïve and self contradictory to build peaceful altruistic Europe as a servant of an economic model which rested on war and exploitation.

***

CELEBRATING THE ANGLO-SAXON LEVERAGE DEBT PLUTOCRACY IS CELEBRATING MILITARY VICTORIES:

What has the Anglo-Saxon economic model been successful at? How did it arise?

It’s a long story. It goes all the way back to when Julius Caesar and his generals were astounded by the immense Celtic, ocean going fleets which opposed them as they conquered “Long Haired Gaul” (“Gallia Comida”). These were the three quarters of present day France which were not part (yet!) of the Roman republic. The Romans invented technology to topple the tall Celtic ships, and won that war. Nevertheless, Ireland and Scotland escaped the Roman grasp… in a very long war.

Having the ability to navigate throughout and off the British archipelago stayed a must, though. Who dominated the seas, dominated the isles. The sea was how to invade, and how one got invaded. The Vikings demonstrated this, by eradicating many places, including much of Ireland.

It was nicer to make war on the continent than in the isles, if one were an islander. Thus, the nearly five centuries long “100 year war” was fought on said continent. By 1600, Elizabeth I had been seduced by the West Country Men, immensely nasty plutocrats who, after conquering Ireland, turned to North America.

Full leveraged, all-market, all plutocratic “Anglo-Saxon” finance is four centuries old (for the Plutocratic aspect) and three centuries old (for the leveraging aspect). It was devised not as a “free market“, because no market was ever free from the state. West Country Men used to line up their lawns with skulls, this is what they meant by “market“: abject terror. Neither was it “liberal”, because there is nothing very “liberal” at conquering half of the planet in 100 years.

In truth the Anglo-Saxon economic model’s military aspect was no accident. It was designed as a fiscal-military system. As I will explain, Europe, which has neither fiscal, nor military aspects, copied that system, apparently not knowing what it was for.

Elizabeth’s successor, King James I, closely tied to his co-investors, the West Country Men,  hated the “vile custome of tobacco, personally, and wrote scathingly about it. Although, all well considered, he lowered the tax rate on it, so as to maximize the tax revenue that tobacco brought. Tobacco made the American colony profitable. We all have to negotiate with evil, it seems, when profits loom.

***

NO WEST COUNTRY PLUTOCRATS IN JAPAN, ALTHOUGH THEY TRIED:

Ireland, North America, made the difference of Britain with, say, Japan. Japan tried the West Country Men trick, and shogun Hideyoshi invaded Korea with enormous armies comprising 200,000 Samurais. However, Korea, especially backed up by Ming China, was no push over. The Korean Navy was able to isolate and starve the Japanese into ignominious retreat, although the Korean population suffered enormous losses.

There was 8,000 years of civilizational progress between American Indians and East Asians. So the two tremendously expensive Japanese invasions failed. Japan stayed bottled up in Japan.

The “virtuous” inferno of building a blue sea Navy to serve transoceanic plutocracy never developed in Asia, because Asia was all too developed everywhere and invading neighbors was unprofitable.

It would take three more centuries of breakneck techno-military “progress” for Europe to be able to dominate Asia by sheer force, easily and profitably (and that lasted only a few days with Japan in the 19C, when the American “Black Ships” showed up in Tokyo’s harbor).

Japan tried the West Country trick again in the late 19C, with Korea again, and Formosa. First it worked grandiosely. By the 20C Japan extended the method to Russia, then China, and French Indochina. It all ended in the terrible defeat of 1945, when the very spirit of Japan got so crushed that its population is now collapsing (like that of fellow fascist countries, Germany and Italy, but worse, as Japanese racism and isolationism are greater, thus offering no compensation through immigration; funny how the worms of defeated psychology multiply in time).

To serve the plutocrats, a strong Navy was a must, and the Bank of England was created to serve it: its profits were used to finance the Royal Navy. Thus a tight seal was created between the military and finance. That, in turn, allowed to use tremendous leverage in finance. Because there is nothing like an invasion to demolish markets.

The markets were secure, because of the Navy was there to repeal invasions, and the state of emergencies that the threat of such would bring, say in France (the plutocrats had conspired to double the Dutch invasion of England of 1688, with a coup, so that is the exception that reinforces the rule). Also, because the Bank of England, the lender of last resort, was, actually, the Navy, in a sense, top plutocrats had nothing much to fear. And it was clear who was giving the orders; admirals could be hanged, pour encourager les autres, as Voltaire noticed.

***

INVADING WITH LEVERAGE, SUCCEEDING WITH GUSTO:

When leverage succeeds, it succeeds like nothing else. After being injected the Dutch mania for leverage, the Anglo-Saxon liberal system became operative in Great Britain in the Eighteenth century. Plutocratic propagandists have hypnotized much into believing that it is economically superior. Militarily, certainly superior. As it turned out.

Military superiority makes an empire economically superior, if the military superiority is translated into ownership. The Anglo-Saxons, circa 1900 CE, and its extension, the American empire, circa 1950, owned, or controlled, more than half the planet, insuring wealth, in a way which has nothing to do with intrinsic economic superiority.

Within 150 years, a giant Anglo-American empire came to cover the planet. North America, Australia, among others, became Neo-Europes of the Anglo persuasion. At some point South Asia and other parts belonged to the British empire. The USA defeated Spain in the Philippines, and replaced it, to a great extent in Latin America, And so on.

Those empires were actually military empires, carefully financed. Careful financing is how Britain had, generally, a better, bigger Navy than bigger, better France. So the Anglo-Saxon financial system was actually a fiscal-military system. (Fiscal comes from Franco-Latin for “treasury”.)

That British system blossomed as a weapon against France, and then the world, both of them, much bigger, to start with. Hence the necessity of using leverage.

Ironically enough, it was rather curious that French socialists would adopt the Dutch-British financial-military system to found Europe in peace, union and prosperity. Even more curious, maybe out of abysmal ignorance, the makers of Europe adopted only part of the Anglo-saxon model. They forgot both one of its head, the fiscal part (the present European Union and Eurozone do not have a treasury, just a central bank). They also forgot its other head, the military one. What was left, it seems increasingly, was a spastic, decerebrated corpse.

So let’s recap a bit.

In the mid Eighteenth Century, Europe’s greatest power was France. France had more people than Russia, and three times the population of Britain. It was the most solid economic block in Europe, and the most developed in the world, with roads and canals all over.

(Unfortunately for French demographics, in a village called Condom, an artisan discovered a better realization of a new device; Condom denies it, although it is located on the river “Baise” (“kiss”, as an euphemism); what is sure is that the French population stopped towering because of contraception, and Napoleon’s devastation; all the growth came from immigration.)

Mighty Spain had been defeated by France, after 150 years of war. That 150 year war gave birth to the Netherlands, during the Eighty Years War of Independence of the Netherlands. Each time Spain had to repress its unruly province, it found itself at war with next door France. The Netherlands, ancestral homeland  of the Franks, was too big to fail, as far as France was concerned.

And, of course, the Dutch came to understand that they were too big to fail, as far as France was concerned, and developed great taste for speculation and leverage. Thus the Low Countries, and independent part of France (the ex “Germania Inferior” of the Romans) learned to take great risks.

This may have created a moral hazard; the Dutch may have believed they could get away with anything, as long as they used massive leverage. Since big daddy France was always coming to their rescue, and they attributed that to their genius.

Finally France crushed the Spanish Squares, the elite Iberian army formations, starting with the battle of Rocroi.

Then the Dutch William Of Orange, unable to become king in his republican homeland, made an arrangement with bankers to put together a 20 miles long fleet and a highly professional army, and, after two Dutch-English sea wars, invaded England (November 1688 CE).

The main reason of state for the invasion was to prevent further alliance between England and France. After grabbing power, the Dutch proceeded to make a coalition, including England, to attack France. The Dutch bankers who had financed the army came with it. By 1700, the top two powers in the world were the Netherlands and France. That’s how the present British monarchy arose: Francophobic Dutch poodles. (Dutch politics had long been divided between a very Francophile faction, as, fundamentally, the Netherlands were a piece of Francia, and, of course, a faction opposed to that; the Anglo-French “100 year war” started there.)

The general coalition led to a succession of wars to prevent French hegemony. However, by 1714, the war of the Spanish succession, although it expelled France from the Netherlands, Bavaria, and Italy, ended curiously. As the late Spanish monarch had wished it, Spain, and her gigantic world empire, was ruled by a Bourbon. France was ruled by Bourbon too: Louis XIV. Philippe de France, grandson of Louis XIV, and second in succession for the French throne, became Felipe V, king of Spain.

In North America, French territory, from Louisiana, through Colorado, Canada to Quebec, a Franco-Indian alliance, completely surrounded the 13 white English colonies, and blocked their invasion of Indian lands.

The Anglo-Saxon, Bible inspired model of negotiations with the Indians was for government to offer money for their scalps.

In the second half of the eighteenth century something strange happened. Britain defeated France and Spain. It was a bit as if nowadays France defeated the USA and China, in a few decades. How were France and Spain thoroughly defeated by smallish England, within a few years? (Trafalgar in 1805, where the combined French and Spanish were sunk and Waterloo in 1815, were the final nails in the coffin of Franco-Spanish supremacy).

Great Britain was able to defeat France through financial engineering, extensive leveraging, a private-public devotion of the state to war.

The Seven Year War, a world war, was fought from India to the Canada. It is known in the USA as the French and Indian Wars (1754-1763). It was started by an officer in the British army, who doubled as a land speculator, George Washington.

Britain spent (the equivalent of) trillions to pay for her superlative Royal Navy, and for paying countries such as Prussia to attack France from behind. This was all financed by leveraged bankers who thought they would inherit the world, if they financed massively the upstart British. And they did.

By the time of the so called Napoleonic wars, the house of Rothschild financed both sides, a familial system that was duplicated by many other plutocratic families, many of them Jewish (gentiles did not care where the money came from, and the position of wealthy Jews, both in and out of the system, made them natural conspirators; from these incontrovertible facts the extravagant racist ranting of Adolf Hitler, his predecessors, and friendly non Jewish plutocrats originated, according to the false and misleading equation: Plutocracy = Judaism)… the same familial system of covering both sides was followed by Nazi supporters (example: the Thyssen family).

As Frederick the Great, king of Prussia, pointed out: “A financial system… constantly improved can change a government’s position. From being originally poor it can make a government so rich that it can throw its grain into the scales of the balance between the great European powers.”

He should have known: he was financed by Britain, and by various exactions against Poles and Jews. Following Frederick upside down, one may deduce that a financial system, constantly worsening, can change a government’s position, from being originally rich to so poor that it become a grain of sand in history. This is where we are at.

In the Seven Year war, France lost Canada, part of West Indies, (rich sugar exporters), India…

The vengeful French counter-strike against Britain was thoroughly counter-productive: France, under the incoherent leadership of Louis XVI, created what would become for France an all too often fair weather friend, the somewhat ingrate USA.

Moreover something strange happened: France was ruined by EXACTLY THE SAME FINANCIAL MECHANISM which is ruining country after country nowadays. France had to roll her long term debt with short term borrowing. The War of Independence of America had cost (the equivalent of) trillions. If France had spent as much during the Seven Year War, she would have kept Canada.

By 1789, half of the French budget was going to paying interest on the national debt. In other words, what threatens to happen now to many powers, including the USA, happened then to the world’s greatest power.

Louis XVI ought to have refused to pay the plutocrats one more cent. Instead he wobbled, as usual, and convoked the General Estates, in the hope that the latter could somehow persuade the hyper wealthy to pay more taxes. The hyper wealthy had blocked for years attempts at fiscal reform by enlightened ministers of Louis XVI such as Necker (Adam Smith’s professor) or Turgot… They did it again, but the Third Estate had long lost patience, and now that it was all together in Paris, it could raise hell.

The Third Estate renamed itself the “Commons” (“Commune”) and proclaimed itself a Constituent Assembly (with the aim of writing an advanced constitution and defaulting on the debt). The incorrigible Sade, a victim of Lettre de Cachet, a resident in an apartment at the Bastille, screamed from his window that people were being murdered at his jail. Sade was believed by the rabble. It was a lie, but the Bastille was taken, and occupied by the outraged People. Louis XVI ordered the army to crack down. La Fayette, of American fame, prestigious head of the army, and a strong enemy of slavery, refused to fire on the People.

Three years later, Britain, Prussia, Austria, Russia and their fellow plutocrats invaded France, which reacted by proclaiming herself a republic, one man, one vote. The British invasion was repelled in Toulon, Provence, by a brilliant plan from an artillery captain, Napoleon. The Prussian were repelled by new, state of the art guns and explosives at Valmy, invented for the occasion (these innovative gunnery would help Napoleon’s victories).  

Great Britain became a global hegemony in the 19C, with France playing second fiddle.

Thus an important paradigm was created, even among the victims and opponents of the leveraged financial system that Britain profited from: the rule of leveraged plutocracy and its fractional reserve system had brought economic supremacy. They forgot the important detail that this happened through the rule of empire imposed by maximum force, and the most vicious morality imaginable, that of the “Devil” (Pluto) unrestrained.

Tellingly, early American presidents knew how the sausage was made: after all German troops paid by Britain had fought against the Colonists. And after all, those colonists who opposed independence were the richest ones. American revolutionaries proposed to establish the “Order of the Leech” for them, or to honor them with titles such as “Their Rapaciousness”. The American rebellion is called a Revolution, because it was fundamentally anti-plutocratic.

The first American presidents were highly hostile to central banking and other plutocratic conspiracies of Rothschildian inspiration. To destroy central banking was viewed by Jackson, on his deathbed, as his greatest achievement, (although he had doubled USA controlled territory under his presidency).

This mighty aura of the invisible hand of financial leverage had infused the superficially learned minds of a core component of mostly French socialists. When they pushed for the European integration, they integrated in their model the very same system which had made Great Britain so powerful, thinking they would get powerful, like those savages who get strong by eating the brains of their enemies. Instead, they got kuru.

Indeed, so doing, though, they made the same mistake as the Islamists did in the Ninth and Tenth centuries. Islam had been conceived as a war machine against the Roman empire (Muhammad himself said). It was highly successful that way. But an ideology of conquest is not an ideology of peaceful progress.

Many times in history an ideology of conquest was unable to switch to a sustainable state. The Mongols presented with an obvious example, and not just in China, but all over. As the Yuan, they were able to hold onto China for just a century (1271 to 1368 CE).

Islam was a perfect war ideology tuned to defeat the Greco-Romans, and time was of the essence,  Muhammad explained. In a few decades, Islam conquered most of Greco-Roman territory (before being stopped on the sea by Constantinople advanced technology, and on land, by excellent Frankish steel).

Once installed, Islam turned to increasing fascism and theocracy (the Qur’an and the “Sharia”, were invented twenty years, and a full century, respectively, after Muhammad’s death; it’s probable that Muhammad would not have been amused).

As centuries passed, the countries Islam had subjugated, converted increasingly to the Muslim faith, and senseless Sharia. Left to its own instruments, Islamist civilization stagnated ever more (this happened in several distinct, unrelated places, demonstrating the limitation of overwhelming theocracy).

In total contrast, the Franks who took power in Gaul around 480 CE, were able to marry an ideology of conquest with one of bon vivant (the good life). In the end, they proved the successful nemesis of military Islam.

Similarly the great Anglo Saxon financial machine was conceived, under Dutch influence, as a war machine against France (ironically, as France saved repeatedly the Netherlands from Spanish occupation, as I said, creating a massive moral hazard, which adversely affected France in the 18 C).

The French socialist builders of Europe, which is extended France, used, to build Europe, the so called free market. It is a free market, because it is free for plutocrats. On the free market, the European states were also supposed to shop for money, as if states had become housewives. Now they are desperate housewives.

A system which had been built for war, against, well, not just the world, but, first of all, France, was adopted enthusiastically by somewhat demented, and certainly deluded… French socialists, probably self congratulating about their own openmindedness of borrowing tenets of “capitalism”.

And those forward looking Europeans did on the ruins of Europe, destroyed, well, by fascist regimes financed and organized by Wall Street in the 1920s and 1930s. (I include in the concept of “Wall Street” corporations such as Texaco, and Standard Oil, IBM, Ford, GM, etc.; I conflate finance, the CEO class, and corporations)

In other words, from lack of historical knowledge, or outright corruption, the builders of Europe established their house for the hens to be guarded by the foxes.

Why? Because, naturally, the states leveraged themselves as much as they could. That came to mean that they would borrow more to pay interest on the preceding debt. This could be survivable only if that debt shrank, relatively speaking. That can happen with high growth and high inflation, as the debt would become small relative to (nominal) GDP.

But the European Central Bank got the mandate of little (2%) inflation. And high growth became impossible as the population aged. All the more since the initial debt was used for current spending, by the… states (which acted like crazed  consumers with many credit cards, using the latest to pay the oldest, a Ponzi scheme onto themselves).

Debt is a good strategy if, and only if, the capital it brings allows to indulge in some activity that brings in much more revenue than the interest on the debt one has to service. Spending debt on welfare is not so, except if the money is spent on potentially revenue enhancing research, and, or on revenue enhancing education (of the young).

The small croc is eaten by the big one. This is where we are at. A naïve attempt at beating them by joining them, and only ruin to show for it!

***

EUROPE’S ORIGINAL SIN: KNEELING AT THE FOOT OF THE GOLDEN CALF:

It is traditional among Anglo-Saxon historians and economists to celebrate the Anglo-Saxon economic model. They do not realize that they are congratulating themselves about a piece of military history rather than a piece of economics.

What came to be identified (unfairly) as the Anglo-Saxon financial system has been much admired, because it has been so successful. This is said, again and again, and taken for granted.

So successful that model was considered to be that French socialists, such as Delors, and other forward looking Europeans, adopted it for the whole of Europe. The “free market” could do no wrong. And they made the free market the enabler of the European currency union. Namely they decided that European countries would purchase money on the free market… of money.

That was, of course, a total surrender of sovereignty. Indeed, the number one prerogative of the state, since times immemorial, has been to strike coinage. That had the distinct advantage to make the adoption of their European integration project more savory to wealthy supporters and banks.

And indeed, the later can celebrate: not only they have the Greeks on their knees, but now even the French and the German taxpayers.

***

LATEST MISLEADING IDEA FROM SOPHISTICATED PLUTOCRATIC PROPAGANDA:

Paul Krugman, who hates the idea of European Union in general, and the euro in particular, now is trying to extract himself out of his own contradictions in Original Sin And The Euro Crisis by claiming that:

“how can I reconcile my scorn for warnings about bond vigilantes with what is happening to Italy?… developing countries were especially vulnerable to financial crises because they borrowed in foreign currency…. The key point is that by joining the euro, Italy took a bite of the apple — it converted its advanced-country status, as a nation issuing debt in its own currency, into original sin, with debts in someone else’s currency (Europe’s in principle, Germany’s in practice). That is the root of its new vulnerability.”

Well, this is silly. The only reason why German GDP is larger than French GDP is that the German population is larger (a bit more than 80 million, against France’s 66 millions). But, at this point, the German population is sort of shrinking, whereas France has the highest birthrate in Europe, enough to grow, even without a legal immigration of 200,000 a year. Relatively soon France ought to be larger than Germany. Now if one adds the population of Italy (60 million), and Spain (40 million), one clearly sees that Germany is no giant of the euro zone.

There is a problem with the price of bonds, true. But who controls this? Well, not Germany. The “bond vigilantes” Krugman claims to scorn, most of them capitalists operating from their Anglo-Saxon dens, in other words the leveraged plutocrats, control the price of bonds.

So Krugman’s latest blast against the euro is another devious viewpoint. Krugman is paid for his nationalistic, plutocratic serving stance. This is how he started his career, as an extreme leftist serving Marxist president Reagan, hand in hand with democrat Summers, as twenty year old geniuses who brought us the economy and finance we have now (Marxist by today’s standards, of course).

The worse part is that Krugman has achieved the status of Very Serious Person. He goes to europe and injects his venom. Last he talked in Mainz, next to Frankfurt. In Frankfurt sits the European Central Bank, the ECB, which refuses to use Quantitative Easing (which means that it leaves that monopoly to the American central bank, the Fed, and leaves total freedom for derivatives armed speculators manipulating bond prices). Who heads the ECB? Or, more exactly, what?

Not too hard a question. Of course. A ex senior partner at Goldman Sachs, Draghi,  now heads the ECB. Draghi: what a drag, what a lousy joke. Draghi will drag Europe under Goldman Sachs.

In truth, those who hate always find a reason to hate. All the more when they have interest to do so. In all this, we are very far from the anti-plutocratic roots of the French and American revolutions of 1789 (when the constitutions were written).

The Dark Side is how humanity has moderated its own worse demographic and ecological excesses, as it evolved, over millions of years.

Except, nowadays, with high technology, everything has changed. We need new wisdom, not to go back to an economic model equipping the few with immense wrath, and whose greatest gift has been the extermination of entire continents’ populations.

Europe was supposed to introduce new wisdom after the disaster of fascism unleashed in the period which one hoped had ended in 1945.

Instead, Europe embraced the very ideology and financial system that caused the terrible wars between 1754 and 1815 CE. And caused the repeat of roughly the same, between the 1860s (when the  wealthy landowner, the plutocrat Bismarck, guide of Prussia, went on a rampage, starting with Denmark) and 1945 CE. Stupid.

A leveraged fund, MF Global, founded by an ex governor of New Jersey, Corzine, who used to head Goldman Sachs (strange that name is all over, from Greece to the white house) just failed. Its leverage was 100. Its real assets were 1/100 of what it theoretically “managed”. With leverage like that, the debts of countries such as Greece or Italy are easily manipulated. Don’t expect Krugman to focus on that anytime soon, he is supposed to divert attention towards other things.

Leveraged finance, pushed to its extreme, leads to leveraged war. Time for a re-think.

***

Patrice Ayme

FROM RUSSIA WITH HATE.

August 27, 2008

GEORGIA TOLLS FOR THEE.

Moscow, per its genesis and  intrinsic nature, is anti-Western. As simple as that. Nothing irremediable, but a serious disease nevertheless.

This dreadful pathology was long hidden by the fact Moscow claimed to be Marxist, and socialist, and many in the West were, and are, genuine socialists. Basically, all of Western Europe, Britain included, is socialist (and the USA is not too far behind!). So there is a lot of sympathy for socialism in the West, and Moscow used that sympathy as a trick to advance itself (seducing thus Roosevelt’s gullible advisers at the Yalta conference).

That Moscow is deeply anti-Western was also hidden by the fact that Stalinian fascism, after being allied to, and an indispensable life support system of Hitlerian fascism, was attacked by it, and conducted a desperate fight against it. The USSR suffered 20 million dead, but with unbelievable ferocity orchestrated by Stalin, was able to win the crucial battles of Moscow (December 1941; between 900,000 and 1,600,000 total casualties) and Leningrad (total casualties above 1.5 million). Retreating troops were shot on sight by NKVD “blocking” sections (NKVD = KGB = FSB = Putin); prisoners, or soldiers gone missing, were viewed as traitors, and condemned to death (in first approximation).

But now the smokescreens are dissipating. Moscow has invaded Georgia, a country that existed for more than thrice as long as Moscow itself. A country with its own culture, language, religion, alphabet. A country always nestled among the mountains, south of the formidable range of the Caucasus. Georgia was the first country in the world to make Christianity its state religion (around 300 CE).

Moscow said Georgia, with one-fourth of its tiny army in Iraq, attacked its forces first. Never mind that those Russian forces were inside Georgia officially recognized frontiers already. Where Muscovite tanks are, it’s Russia, and attacking them is an unforgivable act of hostility. Moscow had deployed, or was in the process of deploying, more than 3,000 tanks, from many directions, inside Georgia, by the time the fighting broke out. The Georgians tried to block the mountain tunnel the Russian invaders were coming out of. (It has long been reproached to the Tibetans to not have resisted by force to the Chinese invasion, thus demonstrating a sort of consent; the Georgians were determined not to do this mistake; the Russians suffered significant losses, especially of bombers, heightening Moscow’s rage.)  

The time of the final confrontation is at hand between the mentality of the West and the anti-Western mentality of Moscow. That anti-Western mentality is more than 1,000 years old (indeed it is much older than Moscow itself). This confrontation is much bigger than any problem connected with the US mistake of having invaded Iraq, because invading Iraq was deeply anti-American. Invading Iraq was contrary to American nature. Whereas invading Georgia is exactly what Moscow has always been about, ever since that city blossomed as the double agent stooge of the Mongols (before 1480).

Why is Moscow so enraged, so invasive? Because its mentality came from a confrontation between some Slavonic monks, disciples of Cyril and Methodius (two saintly brothers who invented a special alphabet and celebrated mass in Slavonic) and Western authorities (religious and political). The Western authorities viewed the disciples as divisive (and they were, as the fullness of time did show). The angry disciples got help from the just installed Bulgarian empire (the Bulgars were a nomadic people pushed 2,000 kilometers west by ancestors of the Mongols). The Bulgars converted to Christianity, but to the version of Christianity these irate disciples insisted on, complete with a new alphabet nobody had ever seen before (“Cyrillic”), and that nobody civilized could read. Thus the Bulgars inherited the conflict those disciples had with the Franks and the Pope. Next this happy crew went north into the land of the RUS’, the Swedes who had colonized Ukraine. They converted the Rus’, to their version of Christianity hostile to the West.

The result was that the growing Russia inherited a conflict it did not start. The alphabet and other mysteries of the same sort increased the alienation with the West. Two centuries later, the Mongols invaded, and destroyed the Russian army. Whereas Europe fielded vast armies that were soundly defeated in Poland, and then in Hungary, it ignored Russia’s fate. The Mongol victory in Hungary had been costly for the descendants of the Huns, and although the Mongols reached the Adriatic, they did not stay.

But they did stay in Russia, as the “Golden Horde”. Russia was left under the Mongol yoke for more than two centuries. The “Grand Duchy of” Moscow grew up, by rising the tribute for the Mongols over an ever extending domain. Working for the Mongols taught some special antidemocratic ways to Moscow, and a great distrust of the rest of Europe. The early republics of Rus were forgotten. Russia never forgave Europe to have let it down, and Moscow’s Mongolian ways won over democracy and enlightenment. The more antidemocratic and obscure, the better, and the Russian soul was left to whine about the tragedy of the human condition, while never forgetting to invade here, there, and everywhere. No doubt the mentality inherited from those travails helped it build the largest, most stable empire the world has ever seen. It knew its greatest extent under Stalin.

Then, entrapped in Afghanistan, and left behind in nearly all civilizational ways by the democracies, the USSR disintegrated, as the captive nations escaped Moscow’s grab. Putin whines about it: “the collapse of the USSR was the greatest tragedy of the twentieth century”. Sob. Notice Putin speaks about “tragedy”, not “humiliation” (Putin’s apologists in the West generally have it that he is not a tragic figure, but an humiliated one: they are not paying attention!).

Collapse of the USSR as “greatest tragedy”? What about the time the kid next door stole the big red balloon of little Vlad? The “greatest tragedy”: never mind Nazism and its 60 million dead. Never mind Stalin who boasted to Churchill that he “killed even more Soviet citizens than Hitler did”. The greatest disaster, according to Putin, was the relatively small shrinkage of the world’s largest empire, when dozens of nations escaped its yoke (many of those nations were way older than Moscow, such as Poland, the Baltic republics, Ukraine, Georgia, and many “Muslim” republics). The twenty thousand tanks and fourty thousands nukes were not used to keep the empire together, but everything else was. And it did not work. No doubt Putin, the ex-KGB officer has noticed this, and that is why he invaded Georgia with more tanks than Hitler used to invade the USSR.

So now Putin wants to grab it all back. Georgia is just a trial run, testing the waters the way Stalin or Hitler used to (after all, if Putin admires Stalin so much, and since Stalin was fascinated by Hitler, it all fits together).

For Putin, the more appealing objective is Ukraine. But it will not stop there. A Colonel General of the Russian army suggested Poland would have to pay too. Of course Putin can only be besides himself that Bulgaria, that started the entire adventure in alienation land, is now safely tucked inside the European Union. Kosovo is way beyond Bulgaria, when coming from Moscow, so the fact  that Bulgaria is now a part of the EU has got to be resented as another enormous outrage by Gorbachev, Putin, and their hateful ilk.

The Europeans have to carry the main economic weight of confronting Moscow at this point. The Europeans need the courage to go all the way, and forget about begging for energy from Moscow, down on their knees. They can do it, but it will be tough. Otherwise Moscow will reinvade as much as it can (until the unavoidable military struggle).

Gorbachev, the Russian tsar before Putin, impudently condemns the fact that Kosovo voted for its independence repeatedly. Voting is a big no-no for Moscow. Invading is what Moscow does. Voting gets in the way.

Kosovo has been its own country forever. It was part of Illyricum, from which many formidable Roman emperors came (Diocletian, Constantine). A baby from a family of Illyricum could be born in York, Britain, as Constantine was. Meanwhile, the first Russians did not even exist, and had not gone anywhere near the future site of Moscow (a settlement founded around 1147 CE).

The Serbs were invited to settle in the area by emperor Heraclius (7th century). The Serbs are the guests, the Kosovars are the original stock. And, although the Serbs fought a battle against the Turks in Kosovo, they mainly stayed out of it for a very long time.

Moreover the Serbs have voted recently twice to confirm implicitly that Kosovo could go its own way, and that Serbia would join the European Union instead. Ultimately, belonging both to the European Union will reunify Serbia with Kosovo, in the fullness of time!

Kosovo, besides, is 40 times the population of South Ossetia. South Ossetia has been a province of Georgia for 3,000 years. It has its own little tini tiny language and particularism, a method of divide and rule invented by Stalin, all over the USSR (and especially in the Caucasus). Now Moscow has decided that South Ossetia is part of Moscow’s empire.

Is Kosovo also part of Moscow? What about Berlin? After all, Berlin is much closer to Moscow than Kosovo. That new method is simple: Moscow distributes passports to some residents of a foreign country, and then claims Russians are under attack, and invade. In the initial fighting in South Ossetia, Moscow claimed the Georgians killed 2,000 Ossetians in the major city (thus, 2,000 Russians!). At last real count the fighting inside that city killed only 137 (or so). And who has been using bombers bombing inside Georgia, including Ossetia? Moscow. (Georgia shot down several bombers: one more anti-Russian crime). Now Moscow is distributing Russian passports to Ukrainians living in Crimea. Soon it will have to “rescue” them, no doubt.

Oh, by the way, why is Moscow so obsessed about Kosovo? Kosovo is smack dab in the Middle of the Mediterranean region (100 kilometers from the sea). Kosovo never had anything to do with Moscow, except as an object of desire. The Muscovite desire for the Mediterranean sea. Moscow wants all the seas. It has many of them, but not that one. It is painful. Moscow wants it all, like Staphylococcus Aureus. It is high time to draw the line. The line is that if Moscow wants to keep on with its anti-Western, antidemocratic, invasive mentality, it can stay in its own sand box. After all, it is the largest in the world.

***

Patrice Ayme.
http://patriceayme.com/

***

P/S: 1) The NYT published a simplified version of the text above in their electronic edition, minus the final section, that it cut out. It was an interesting wink: OK, we know who you are, and you are right, but we, at the NYT, have our own foreign policy, we are sure you understand. The NYT apparently wants people to think that the Russian government and its Gorbachev are reasonable. Thus, having grabbed Kosovo from Moscow is a crime. Never mind that Kosovo is next to Rome (and never had anything to do with Moscow, as we said). A precedent: the NYT, and US media in general, refused to be alarmed by the way Hitler treated Jews, and the way Hitler’s “kingdom” was, and that, for years (this led directly to the defeat of the French army, the occupation of Europe, and thus the Shoah, and 60 million dead). The present situation with Russia is very similar. After all, Hitler’s Reich started as a democratic republic. Soon  Chancellor Hitler made himself President too, just like Putin, but going the other way. Soon, with British cooperation, Hitler violated the Versailles Treaty (1935). That was the crucial step: France could not attack as long as Britain was collaborating with Hitler (the similar step now is the invasion of Georgia). A few years later, including severe alcoholics and other drastic social outcasts, the total population of inmates in Nazi concentration camps was only 4,700. It would soon explode into the millions, yes, but that discreet begining means that Hitler’s evil had to be detected in the detail of his actions. Guernica should have been plenty enough (1936). 

2) Ultimately, the only solution for Moscow is to quit the alienation it likes to roll in like some animals do in the mud. That means joining the European Union. That means forgetting on the resentment that seems to drive Putin all too much. Far from being an economic superpower, Moscow has a significantly smaller GDP than France (although with twice the population and about thirty times the area of France; or less than half the population of the USA, with nearly double its area!) It could be easily swallowed, once it satisfies the democratic requirements for membership. Right now, Putin is going the other way, though, since he declared grandly Russia should not bother with the World Trade Organization. Indeed, who needs trade, when one has so many tanks? And so many juicy neighbours to invade?

3) Ah, a last strategic perspective: the central Asian republics, determined to shake Moscow’s yoke, have set up a system of pipelines to send crude oil and gas directly to the rest of the world, bypassing Russia. All these pipes go through Georgia, and have to go through Georgia (to avoid Russia north of the Caucasus, and Iran to the south). Russian tanks got next to the pipes, and they were shut down (imagine Putin’s glee!). A fourth giant pipe is also planned. Still one more of these Georgian crimes! Thus the invasion of Georgia is also an attempt by Moscow to reestablish control of central Asia.

4) As far as Abkahzia and Ossetia being non Georgian, according to international observers, two thirds of the population of the former, ethnically Georgian, were ethnically cleansed (around 400,000 Georgians were expelled from their home area). And as far as the 50,000 South Ossetians with Russian passports are concerned, the presence of their province within immediate proximity of the very center of Georgia (Gori, where Stalin was born), and the capital of Georgia, Tbilissi, makes the claim that it is indeed a different country extremely dubious (there too thousands of Georgians were expelled).

5) Human Rights Watch says the pictures of five villages near the South Ossetian capital, Tskhinvali, are “compelling evidence of war crimes and grave human rights abuses”. Those are ethnic Georgian villages. The organization called on the Russian government to prosecute those responsible.

6) People who aspire to be taken seriously, like Obama’s Samantha Power (Kennedy School of Government, Harvard), argue that Russia was humiliated, and thus, attacked. This spin was disseminated by the Kremlin critters themselves. The Nazis had used it before as an explanation of why they wanted to kill everybody. This attempt to brandish humiliation as a prime motivator of human beings is an attempt to substitute a feel good hierarchy about what motivates humans most, to the, much more violent real thing. It is erroneous in the first approximation. When a bear, or a bull charges, it is not out of humiliation (too complicated), nor, of course, fear (because, if afraid, it would flee). A bull, or a bear, or a lion charges out of anger, rage, or hatred. And, first of all, because that is what it does when excited. Humiliation is not an option.

***