Friday READ – 25 April 2014
Posted by greydogg, 99GetSmart
* LAVROV: AMERICANS ARE NOT READY TO ADMIT THEY CANNOT RUN THE SHOW
Ukraine’s foreign ministry has given Russia a 48-hour ultimatum to explain its military exercises near the nation’s border; or, as foreign minister Andriy Deshschytisa warns “we will now fight with Russia troops.”
As AP reports:
Ukraine’s foreign minister has blasted the Russian decision to start military maneuvers along Ukraine’s border and said his country will fight any invading troops.
Andriy Deshchytisa said Russia’s decision Thursday to launch the military exercises ‘very much escalates the situation in the region.’
Talking to The Associated Press in Prague, Deshchytisa says his country has been taught a lesson by Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula. He says ‘having this experience, we will now fight with Russian troops if … they invade Ukraine.’
He says ‘Ukrainian people and Ukrainian army are ready to do this.’
Deshchytisa says the new Russian military exercises are taking place ‘even closer to the Ukrainian border than it was planned earlier’ and demanded the withdrawal of Russian troops. […]
* SHILLING FOR WALL STREET
By Mike Krauss, The Greanville Post
What is at stake in the Ukraine?
Paul Craig Roberts is a former senior member of the Reagan administration and former editor of the Wall Street Journal who fearlessly exposes the continuing corruption of the government in Washington. He coined a phrase to describe the U.S. corporate dominated media: “presstitute media.” New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman recently provided a good example of what Roberts is talking about.
In his column, Friedman explained the crisis in the Ukraine as the failure of the “West” (the U.S. and its European allies) to confront “Putanism” — meaning those Russian “bullies” who Washington says decided to invade and annex parts of the Ukraine when the former and thoroughly corrupt Ukrainian president was, as Friedman put it, “overthrown.”
The implication is that the Ukrainian people were making progress to freedom and democracy which Russia wanted to prevent.
That is a total distortion. And Friedman knows it. […]
* DE-ESCALATION IN UKRAINE AS SEEN BY JOE BIDEN
By Nikolai Bobkin, Voltaire
The Vice-President of the United States, Joe Biden, travelled to Kiev to preach appeasement with Russia. Indeed, the pro-US coup government clearly lacks enough popular support to safeguard Washington’s interests. Moreover, his use of the term “de-escalation” smacks of a Freudian slip: he recognizes that the policy of the Obama administration has been geared so far towards escalation and that the time has come to reverse it.
According to the White House statement, the Vice-President Joe Biden’s visit to Ukraine was to demonstrate the support of Ukraine by the United States. Washington realizes the interim government in Kiev is on the verge of collapse. But its fall would be tantamount to a defeat suffered by the United States. Biden landed in Kiev to make the US save face and define the ways to retreat if need be. Under the pretext of global commitments, the White House is focused on the local-scale mission to maintain power in Ukraine in the hands of its puppets… The country is in disarray; the plan to convert it into an anti-Russian springboard has failed. Here is another US global failure and Biden had to cover it up by statements calling for «defense of Ukraine’s unity and independence and the restoration of its national honor and pride». But the results of the visit tell a different story.
First, nobody has any doubts now that the imposters in Kiev fully depend on Washington. The crisis in Ukraine is spreading around to encompass the whole nation. The situation needs urgent measures to be taken. The Americans make another mistake trying to substitute the comprehensive management of the national crisis with the stated «de-escalation» in the East.
Second, it is becoming clear for Washington that the Kiev rulers cannot defend US interests in Ukraine as expected. The American influence spreads only on a limited number of individual Ukrainian politicians with rather low rating of popularity. The US frustration was demonstrated by the way the would-be election slated for May was discussed by the parties. No pre-election campaign is possible when the central powers have occupied the whole regions using force. The whole election process boiled down to a long list of candidates, but there is no one there the United States could rely on. How could a «democratic» victory be guaranteed when the majority of population has no wish to express its will at all? But Vice-President Biden told Kiev to go on with the mission. […]
* U.S. REJECTED OFFERS BY AFGHANISTAN, IRAQ, AND LIBYA TO SURRENDER … AND PROCEEDED TO WAGE WAR
Source: Washingtons Blog
America Wanted War … Not a Negotiated Peace
The Daily Mail reported yesterday:
A self-selected group of former top military officers, CIA insiders and think-tankers, declared Tuesday in Washington that a seven-month review of the deadly 2012 terrorist attack has determined that [Gaddafi offered to abdicate as leader of Libya.]
‘Gaddafi wasn’t a good guy, but he was being marginalized,’ [Retired Rear Admiral Chuck ] Kubic recalled. ‘Gaddafi actually offered to abdicate’ shortly after the beginning of a 2011 rebellion.
‘But the U.S. ignored his calls for a truce,’ the commission wrote, ultimately backing the horse that would later help kill a U.S. ambassador.
Kubic said that the effort at truce talks fell apart when the White House declined to let the Pentagon pursue it seriously.
‘We had a leader who had won the Nobel Peace Prize,’ Kubic said, ‘but who was unwilling to give peace a chance for 72 hours.’
Similarly, Saddam Hussein allegedly offered to let weapons inspectors in the country and to hold new elections:
In the few weeks before its fall, Iraq’s Ba’athist regime made a series of increasingly desperate peace offers to Washington, promising to hold elections and even to allow US troops to search for banned weapons. But the advances were all rejected by the Bush administration, according to intermediaries involved in the talks. […]