February 10, 2015


Our Nobel Peace Prize-winning president is considering a new war--not against a dirt-poor muslim nation, but against a superpower with nuclear weapons. Few of us know much about this oncoming war, because we feel no threat from the Ukraine which Obama is now thinking of arming. “The possibility of lethal defensive weapons is one of those options that is being considered,” Obama said, in addition the “other means we can put in place to change Mr. Putin’s calculus.” PUTIN'S CALCULUS? What sort of gibberish is that? How do you bomb that? We're going to start a proxy war by arming Ukraine and then possibly getting in deeper? But don't worry--there won't be any boots on the ground...yet. Despite the fact that ISIS is nowhere near the US and the US people have said we don't want to be the world's police any more, the US refuses to let that conflict be handled by the well-armed countries which neighbor the trouble zone. And these nations won't step up to the plate as long as the US is prepared, as they have been so far, to drop 80% of the bombs. Besides, ISIS isn't that large of an enemy, so we have to find a new war if our military contractors and weapons manufacturers are still gonna get paid.

So how about Russia? No one is challenging a conflict that we've already moved millions of dollars worth of weapons nearby and are threatening to move them to.Here's what Steven Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies at NYU had to say:

"Now, you referred to me as emeritus. That means old. That means I remember things. And I remember that when we hit these kind of Cold War extremes back during the last Cold War, people spoke out in opposition in this country, not only folks like the three of us, ordinary folks, but I’m talking about senators, members of Congress—even the administration was divided—The New York Times, The Washington Post. We have the silence of the hawks now. The American war party is on the march. You can see how close we are to, literally, a military confrontation with Russia. And there is not one word of establishment, mainstream opposition in this country.

So, is this good or bad? Do we go to war? Did we have a debate before we invaded Iraq? We did. And those of us who opposed it lost the debate. But we had a debate. That "democracy now," not today, not in the United States. There is no debate whatsoever. So, the danger is great. There is no opposition. All these people you’re showing—Strobe Talbott, General Hodges, anybody else you put on the screen, because only they speak to the American people—they’re on the march".

No debate on war because then we might be forced to admit that both political parties represent war. And who is the Democrats' great hope for 2016? Hillary Clinton, who said this of Putin's actions in Ukraine:

"Now if this sounds familiar, it's what Hitler did back in the '30s."

Stephen Cohen: "But the demonization of Putin has become so extreme in this country, I do not recall—and I entered this field back in the '60s—the United States ever demonizing a Soviet communist leader the way our leaders do—Obama, Mrs. Clinton referring to him as a Hitler. Look, if Putin is Hitler, clearly we have to go to war. That's the logic, is it not? Is it not? And where are the voices that say this is crazy? He may be a Russian nationalist. He may be threatening. But Hitler?"

So Putin's "calculus" may be threatening to the people in Ukraine. And this requires your tax dollars to fix a situation over there. Obama is considering military action  and Hillary seems more unnerved by Putin. I don't think the Ukraine is worrying Americans, but it's certainly popped up recently as something very worrying to our leaders. Because they always want to start wars and you can't start one without a new enemy.

This is a great discussion by an expert on what it looks like we're gearing up for.

Another informative segment.