Saturday, June 03, 2017

To understand the current Russia vs. US mess we have to learn about the events of Feb 22, 2014.

I've been trying to understand the current Russia vs. US mess and why the "neo-cons", national security establishment, establishment Republicans/Democrats and globalists are all trying so hard to nix what should be a common sense alliance with Russia to end the greater threat of ISIS.

I thought that it all began with the events of Feb 22, 2014 when the President of Ukraine was overthrown after refusing to sign "Euromaidan".

I was wrong.  

This rabbit hole goes deep.  We will never know the manuevering that went on behind the scenes but here are some BASIC primers on the subject.  How basic?  Just some Wikipedia entries that give a quick overview.  Be warned though.  It becomes obvious just from these entries (and I don't know the views/leaning of the people who wrote them) that the tangled mess that is Ukraine has everyone covered in shit.

Yeah.  That's just a quick primer and it doesn't even begin to touch on the subject properly (in my opinion).  

We're seeing superpower games being played here and the public is being fed propaganda by both sides.

The one thing that gives any clarity is the Nuland mess.  That was the first time Russia used intercepted communications to expose a US operation. I believe that to be an inflection point in this ciris.  This is when the situation spun out of control.  

My political leanings tend to label Nuland as a villain in this crisis and many seem to agree with that thinking.  Below is an article via Consortium News by Robert Parry...
The Mess that Nuland Made

As the Ukrainian army squares off against ultra-right and neo-Nazi militias in the west and violence against ethnic Russians continues in the east, the obvious folly of the Obama administration’s Ukraine policy has come into focus even for many who tried to ignore the facts, or what you might call “the mess that Victoria Nuland made.”

Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs “Toria” Nuland was the “mastermind” behind the Feb. 22, 2014 “regime change” in Ukraine, plotting the overthrow of the democratically elected government of President Viktor Yanukovych while convincing the ever-gullible U.S. mainstream media that the coup wasn’t really a coup but a victory for “democracy.”

To sell this latest neocon-driven “regime change” to the American people, the ugliness of the coup-makers had to be systematically airbrushed, particularly the key role of neo-Nazis and other ultra-nationalists from the Right Sektor. For the U.S.-organized propaganda campaign to work, the coup-makers had to wear white hats, not brown shirts.

So, for nearly a year and a half, the West’s mainstream media, especially The New York Times and The Washington Post, twisted their reporting into all kinds of contortions to avoid telling their readers that the new regime in Kiev was permeated by and dependent on neo-Nazi fighters and Ukrainian ultra-nationalists who wanted a pure-blood Ukraine, without ethnic Russians.

Any mention of that sordid reality was deemed “Russian propaganda” and anyone who spoke this inconvenient truth was a “stooge of Moscow.” It wasn’t until July 7 that the Times admitted the importance of the neo-Nazis and other ultra-nationalists in waging war against ethnic Russian rebels in the east. The Times also reported that these far-right forces had been joined by Islamic militants. Some of those jihadists have been called “brothers” of the hyper-brutal Islamic State.

Though the Times sought to spin this remarkable military alliance neo-Nazi militias and Islamic jihadists as a positive, the reality had to be jarring for readers who had bought into the Western propaganda about noble “pro-democracy” forces resisting evil “Russian aggression.”

Perhaps the Times sensed that it could no longer keep the lid on the troubling truth in Ukraine. For weeks, the Right Sektor militias and the neo-Nazi Azov battalion have been warning the civilian government in Kiev that they might turn on it and create a new order more to their liking.
Full story here.

My question.  How did the US end up supporting Neo-Nazis and Islamic Jihadist in Europe?  Why is this game being played at the expense of an alliance that could see ISIS killed (finally), stability brought to the Middle East (Russia could easily keep Assad in his cage if they so desired) and Iran at bay (same here...Russia could easily keep Iran from overstepping).

Additionally it would force the Chinese to reassess their stances from the South China sea, to their dealings with N. Korea to even their support of Pakistan.

In short I have to wonder.

What is the reality behind the Ukraine crisis that we would ignore the possibility of achieving a more stable world?

No comments :

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.