Russia and China are the only nations able to challenge America’s hegemonic agenda effectively, strategically allied, supporting each other politically, economically and militarily—a formidable anti-new world order force.
Hostility toward Moscow intensified after Washington toppled Ukraine’s democratically elected government, replacing it with Nazi-infested putschists—followed by Crimeans overwhelmingly voting to rejoin Russia, and breakaway Donbass freedom fighters effectively opposing fascist rule.
Fabricated accusations of “Russian aggression” persist, proliferated by media scoundrels. Moscow alone among world powers works tirelessly for restoring peace and stability to Ukraine and Syria—unattainable because Washington wants endless conflicts, falsely blaming Russia for its own wrongdoing.
Damascus most of all has US officials stymied. For the first time since America’s humiliating Southeast Asia defeat over 40 years ago, it’s losing the battle for Syria—Russia’s intervention a year ago changing things dramatically.
Losing Syria threatens Washington’s regional imperial agenda. Conflict continues, virtually certain to escalate before one day ending, perhaps years from now.
Unlike other US wars since the rape of Yugoslavia, all post-9/11 ones still ongoing, America is losing to combined Russian and government forces in Syria.
Retaliation is in the form of vicious, unrelenting Russia bashing, including Hillary disgracefully equating Putin with Hitler, Trump maligned for calling normal relations with Moscow a good thing.
Neocons infesting Washington want confrontation, not mutual cooperation, hammering Russia with baseless accusations.
They include phony war crimes charges in Syria, hacking DNC emails Moscow had nothing to do with, and nonsensical claims about interfering with America’s electoral process, saying it’s to help Trump succeed Obama, not Hillary.
On October 11, the Wall Street Journal reported “[t]he White House vow[ing] to hit Russia with a ‘proportional’ response” after Homeland Security and US intelligence officials falsely accused it of hacking DNC emails “to interfere with the outcome of the presidential election.”
On Tuesday, White House press secretary Josh Earnest indicated “a range of responses” being considered, saying, “[T]he president has talked before about the significant capabilities that the US government has to both defend our systems in the United States but also carry out offensive operations in other countries”—entirely illegal, Earnest failed to explain.
According to the Journal, “[N]ational security experts and cybersecurity analysts have said ‘proportional’ responses carry other risks as well.”
“They could escalate into a more adversarial conflict between both countries. But the absence of a response could signal that such behavior will be tolerated in the future.”
With militantly anti-Russia Hillary’s ascension to power almost certain in January, the risk of war between the world’s dominant nuclear powers is exponentially greater than ever.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book as editor and contributor is “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.” Visit his blog at sjlendman.blogspot.com . Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.
RSS
Why Russia bashing is so intense
Posted on October 13, 2016 by Stephen Lendman
Russia and China are the only nations able to challenge America’s hegemonic agenda effectively, strategically allied, supporting each other politically, economically and militarily—a formidable anti-new world order force.
Hostility toward Moscow intensified after Washington toppled Ukraine’s democratically elected government, replacing it with Nazi-infested putschists—followed by Crimeans overwhelmingly voting to rejoin Russia, and breakaway Donbass freedom fighters effectively opposing fascist rule.
Fabricated accusations of “Russian aggression” persist, proliferated by media scoundrels. Moscow alone among world powers works tirelessly for restoring peace and stability to Ukraine and Syria—unattainable because Washington wants endless conflicts, falsely blaming Russia for its own wrongdoing.
Damascus most of all has US officials stymied. For the first time since America’s humiliating Southeast Asia defeat over 40 years ago, it’s losing the battle for Syria—Russia’s intervention a year ago changing things dramatically.
Losing Syria threatens Washington’s regional imperial agenda. Conflict continues, virtually certain to escalate before one day ending, perhaps years from now.
Unlike other US wars since the rape of Yugoslavia, all post-9/11 ones still ongoing, America is losing to combined Russian and government forces in Syria.
Retaliation is in the form of vicious, unrelenting Russia bashing, including Hillary disgracefully equating Putin with Hitler, Trump maligned for calling normal relations with Moscow a good thing.
Neocons infesting Washington want confrontation, not mutual cooperation, hammering Russia with baseless accusations.
They include phony war crimes charges in Syria, hacking DNC emails Moscow had nothing to do with, and nonsensical claims about interfering with America’s electoral process, saying it’s to help Trump succeed Obama, not Hillary.
On October 11, the Wall Street Journal reported “[t]he White House vow[ing] to hit Russia with a ‘proportional’ response” after Homeland Security and US intelligence officials falsely accused it of hacking DNC emails “to interfere with the outcome of the presidential election.”
On Tuesday, White House press secretary Josh Earnest indicated “a range of responses” being considered, saying, “[T]he president has talked before about the significant capabilities that the US government has to both defend our systems in the United States but also carry out offensive operations in other countries”—entirely illegal, Earnest failed to explain.
According to the Journal, “[N]ational security experts and cybersecurity analysts have said ‘proportional’ responses carry other risks as well.”
“They could escalate into a more adversarial conflict between both countries. But the absence of a response could signal that such behavior will be tolerated in the future.”
With militantly anti-Russia Hillary’s ascension to power almost certain in January, the risk of war between the world’s dominant nuclear powers is exponentially greater than ever.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book as editor and contributor is “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.” Visit his blog at sjlendman.blogspot.com . Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.