Friday, April 22, 2016

Toward a Global Realignment?


*NOTE: The content below is presented here for reasons of gaining an insightful look into the eyes and mind of the establishments champion Zbigniew Brzezinski; 

Brzezinski's lays out his advice regarding geopolitical and economic conquest in the 21st Century.

There are some very interesting admissions by Zbigniew Brzezinski in the video and text below that also clarifies the western establishments position while shedding light on the way they perceive the ongoing geopolitical conflicts throughout the world.

Reflections on Global History in the 20th Century: Towards a New Vision for the 21st Century 2 – (Dec 14, 2015)



Toward a Global Realignment

By: Zbigniew Brzezinski

As its era of global dominance ends, the United States needs to take the lead in realigning the global power architecture.

Five basic verities regarding the emerging redistribution of global political power and the violent political awakening in the Middle East are signaling the coming of a new global realignment.

The first of these verities is that the United States is still the world’s politically, economically, and militarily most powerful entity but, given complex geopolitical shifts in regional balances, it is no longer the globally imperial power. But neither is any other major power.

The second verity is that Russia is experiencing the latest convulsive phase of its imperial devolution. A painful process, Russia is not fatally precluded – if it acts wisely – from becoming eventually a leading European nation-state. However, currently it is pointlessly alienating some of its former subjects in the Islamic southwest of its once extensive empire, as well as Ukraine, Belarus, and Georgia, not to mention the Baltic States.

The third verity is that China is rising steadily, if more slowly as of late, as America’s eventual coequal and likely rival; but for the time being it is careful not to pose an outright challenge to America. Militarily, it seems to be seeking a breakthrough in a new generation of weapons while patiently enhancing its still very limited naval power.

The fourth verity is that Europe is not now and is not likely to become a global power. But it can play a constructive role in taking the lead in regard to transnational threats to global wellbeing and even human survival. Additionally, Europe is politically and culturally aligned with and supportive of core U.S. interests in the Middle East, and European steadfastness within NATO is essential to an eventually constructive resolution of the Russia-Ukraine crisis.

The fifth verity is that the currently violent political awakening among post-colonial Muslims is, in part, a belated reaction to their occasionally brutal suppression mostly by European powers. It fuses a delayed but deeply felt sense of injustice with a religious motivation that is unifying large numbers of Muslims against the outside world; but at the same time, because of historic sectarian schisms within Islam that have nothing to do with the West, the recent welling up of historical grievances is also divisive within Islam.

Taken together as a unified framework, these five verities tell us that the United States must take the lead in realigning the global power architecture in such a way that the violence erupting within and occasionally projected beyond the Muslim world—and in the future possibly from other parts of what used to be called the Third World—can be contained without destroying the global order. We can sketch this new architecture by elaborating briefly each of the five foregoing verities.

First, America can only be effective in dealing with the current Middle Eastern violence if it forges a coalition that involves, in varying degrees, also Russia and China. To enable such a coalition to take shape, Russia must first be discouraged from its reliance on the unilateral use of force against its own neighbors—notably Ukraine, Georgia, the Baltic States—and China should be disabused of the idea that selfish passivity in the face of the rising regional crisis in the Middle East will prove to be politically and economically rewarding to its ambitions in the global arena. These shortsighted policy impulses need to be channeled into a more farsighted vision.

Second, Russia is becoming for the first time in its history a truly national state, a development that is as momentous as it is generally overlooked. The Czarist Empire, with its multinational but largely politically passive population, came to an end with World War I and the Bolshevik creation of an allegedly voluntary union of national republics (the USSR), with power resting effectively in Russian hands, took its place. The collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of 1991 led to the sudden emergence of a predominantly Russian state as its successor, and to the transformation of the former Soviet Union’s non-Russian “republics” into formally independent states. These states are now consolidating their independence, and both the West and China—in different areas and different ways—are exploiting that new reality to Russia’s disadvantage. In the meantime, Russia’s own future depends on its ability to become a major and influential nation-state that is part of a unifying Europe. Not to do so could have dramatically negative consequences for Russia’s ability to withstand growing territorial-demographic pressure from China, which is increasingly inclined as its power grows to recall the “unequal” treaties Moscow imposed on Beijing in times past.

Third, China’s dramatic economic success requires enduring patience and the country’s awareness that political haste will make for social waste. The best political prospect for China in the near future is to become America’s principal partner in containing global chaos of the sort that is spreading outward (including to the northeast) from the Middle East. If it is not contained, it will contaminate Russia’s southern and eastern territories as well as the western portions of China. Closer relations between China and the new republics in Central Asia, the post-British Muslim states in Southwest Asia (notably Pakistan) and especially with Iran (given its strategic assets and economic significance), are the natural targets of Chinese regional geopolitical outreach. But they should also be targets of global Sino-American accommodation.

Fourth, tolerable stability will not return to the Middle East as long as local armed military formations can calculate that they can be simultaneously the beneficiaries of a territorial realignment while selectively abetting extreme violence. Their ability to act in a savage manner can only be contained by increasingly effective—but also selective—pressure derived from a base of U.S.-Russian-Chinese cooperation that, in turn, enhances the prospects for the responsible use of force by the region’s more established states (namely, Iran, Turkey, Israel, and Egypt). The latter should also be the recipients of more selective European support. Under normal circumstances, Saudi Arabia would be a significant player on that list, but the current inclination of the Saudi government still to foster Wahhabi fanaticism, even while engaged in ambitious domestic modernization efforts, raises grave doubts regarding Saudi Arabia’s ability to play a regionally significant constructive role.

Fifth, special attention should be focused on the non-Western world’s newly politically aroused masses. Long-repressed political memories are fueling in large part the sudden and very explosive awakening energized by Islamic extremists in the Middle East, but what is happening in the Middle East today may be just the beginning of a wider phenomenon to come out of Africa, Asia, and even among the pre-colonial peoples of the Western Hemisphere in the years ahead.

Periodic massacres of their not-so-distant ancestors by colonists and associated wealth-seekers largely from western Europe (countries that today are, still tentatively at least, most open to multiethnic cohabitation) resulted within the past two or so centuries in the slaughter of colonized peoples on a scale comparable to Nazi World War II crimes: literally involving hundreds of thousands and even millions of victims. Political self-assertion enhanced by delayed outrage and grief is a powerful force that is now surfacing, thirsting for revenge, not just in the Muslim Middle East but also very likely beyond.

Much of the data cannot be precisely established, but taken collectively, they are shocking. Let just a few examples suffice. In the 16th century, due largely to disease brought by Spanish explorers, the population of the native Aztec Empire in present-day Mexico declined from 25 million to approximately one million. Similarly, in North America, an estimated 90 percent of the native population died within the first five years of contact with European settlers, due primarily to diseases. In the 19th century, various wars and forced resettlements killed an additional 100,000. In India from 1857-1867, the British are suspected of killing up to one million civilians in reprisals stemming from the Indian Rebellion of 1857. The British East India Company’s use of Indian agriculture to grow opium then essentially forced on China resulted in the premature deaths of millions, not including the directly inflicted Chinese casualties of the First and Second Opium Wars. In the Congo, which was the personal holding of Belgian King Leopold II, 10-15 million people were killed between 1890 and 1910. In Vietnam, recent estimates suggest that between one and three million civilians were killed from 1955 to 1975.

As to the Muslim world, in Russia’s Caucasus, from 1864 and 1867, 90 percent of the local Circassian population was forcibly relocated and between 300,000 and 1.5 million either starved to death or were killed. Between 1916 and 1918, tens of thousands of Muslims were killed when 300,000 Turkic Muslims were forced by Russian authorities through the mountains of Central Asia and into China. In Indonesia, between 1835 and 1840, the Dutch occupiers killed an estimated 300,000 civilians. In Algeria, following a 15-year civil war from 1830-1845, French brutality, famine, and disease killed 1.5 million Algerians, nearly half the population. In neighbouring Libya, the Italians forced Cyrenaicans into concentration camps, where an estimated 80,000 to 500,000 died between 1927 and 1934.

More recently, in Afghanistan between 1979 and 1989 the Soviet Union is estimated to have killed around one million civilians; two decades later, the United States has killed 26,000 civilians during its 15-year war in Afghanistan. In Iraq, 165,000 civilians have been killed by the United States and its allies in the past 13 years. (The disparity between the reported number of deaths inflicted by European colonizers compared with the United States and its allies in Iraq and Afghanistan may be due in part to the technological advances that have led to the ability to use force more precisely, and in part as well to a shift in the world’s normative climate.) Just as shocking as the scale of these atrocities is how quickly the West forgot about them.

In today’s postcolonial world, a new historical narrative is emerging. A profound resentment against the West and its colonial legacy in Muslim countries and beyond is being used to justify their sense of deprivation and denial of self-dignity. A stark example of the experience and attitudes of colonial peoples is well summarized by the Senegalese poet David Diop in:

“Vultures”

In those days,
When civilization kicked us in the face
The vultures built in the shadow of their talons
The blood stained monument of tutelage…

The growing evocation of these memories, in the Muslim world and increasingly beyond, shows how the past still influences the present, but it certainly does not justify the violent behaviors that are transpiring in the Middle East today.

Given all this, a long and painful road toward an initially limited regional accommodation is the only viable option for the United States, Russia, China, and the pertinent Middle Eastern entities. For the United States, that will require patient persistence in forging cooperative relationships with some new partners (particularly Russia and China) as well as joint efforts with more established and historically rooted Muslim states (Turkey, Iran, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia if it can detach its foreign policy from Wahhabi extremism) in shaping a wider framework of regional stability. Our European allies, previously dominant in the region, can still be helpful in that regard.

A comprehensive U.S. pullout from the Muslim world favored by domestic isolationists, could give rise to new wars (for example, Israel vs. Iran, Saudi Arabia vs. Iran, a major Egyptian intervention in Libya) and would generate an even deeper crisis of confidence in America’s globally stabilizing role. In different but dramatically unpredictable ways, Russia and China could be the geopolitical beneficiaries of such a development even as global order itself becomes the more immediate geopolitical casualty. Last but not least, in such circumstances a divided and fearful Europe would see its current member states searching for patrons and competing with one another in alternative but separate arrangements among the more powerful trio.

A constructive U.S. policy must be patiently guided by a long-range vision. It must seek outcomes that promote the gradual realization in Russia (probably post-Putin) that its only place as an influential world power is ultimately within Europe. China’s increasing role in the Middle East should reflect the reciprocal American and Chinese realization that a growing U.S.-PRC partnership in coping with the Middle Eastern crisis is an historically significant test of their ability to shape and enhance together wider global stability.

The alternative to a constructive vision, and especially the quest for a one-sided militarily and ideologically imposed outcome, can only result in prolonged and self-destructive futility. For America, that could entail enduring conflict, fatigue, and conceivably even a demoralizing withdrawal to its pre-20th century isolationism. For Russia, it could mean major defeat, increasing the likelihood of subordination in some fashion to Chinese predominance. For China, it could portend war not only with the United States but also, perhaps separately, with either Japan or India or with both. And, in any case, a prolonged phase of sustained ethnic, quasi-religious wars pursued through the Middle East with self-righteous fanaticism would generate escalating bloodshed within and outside the region, and growing cruelty everywhere.

The fact is that there has never been a truly “dominant” global power until the emergence of America on the world scene. Imperial Great Britain came close to becoming one, but World War I and later World War II not only bankrupted it but also prompted the emergence of rival regional powers. The decisive new global reality was the appearance on the world scene of America as simultaneously the richest and militarily the most powerful player. During the latter part of the 20th century no other power even came close.

That era is now ending. While no state is likely in the near future to match America’s economic-financial superiority, new weapons systems could suddenly endow some countries with the means to commit suicide in a joint tit-for-tat embrace with the United States, or even to prevail. Without going into speculative detail, the sudden acquisition by some state of the capacity to render the America militarily broadly inferior would spell the end of America’s global role. The result would most probably be global chaos. And that is why it behooves the United States to fashion a policy in which at least one of the two potentially threatening states becomes a partner in the quest for regional and then wider global stability, and thus in containing the least predictable but potentially the most likely rival to overreach. Currently, the more likely to overreach is Russia, but in the longer run it could be China.

Since the next twenty years may well be the last phase of the more traditional and familiar political alignments with which we have grown comfortable, the response needs to be shaped now. During the rest of this century, humanity will also have to be increasingly preoccupied with survival as such on account of a confluence of environmental challenges. Those challenges can only be addressed responsibly and effectively in a setting of increased international accommodation. And that accommodation has to be based on a strategic vision that recognizes the urgent need for a new geopolitical framework.
-----------------------------------

*The author acknowledges the helpful contribution of his research assistant Paul Wasserman, and the scholarship on the subject of colonial brutality by Adam Hochschild, Richard Pierce, William Polk, and the Watson Institute at Brown University, among others.

Zbigniew Brzezinski is a counselor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and was the National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter from 1977-81. He is the author, most recently, of Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power.

Thursday, April 7, 2016

Saudi Arabia’s Terminal Decline


By: Stewart Brennan

It’s been said many times that Saudi Arabia has 25% of the Worlds known oil reserves and that's a huge amount, because global economics depends heavily on oil energy to foster growth…but what happens when after 60 years of extraction the oil in Saudi Arabia goes into terminal decline? The answer is economic collapse

BREAKING NEWS!


The above headline should have raised the attention and anxiety levels of many people around the world...but this very significant statement seems to have passed by without much notice...but it should be a huge wake up call.

“OIL” is the sole natural resource that Saudi Arabia possesses, so their plan to sell off all their oil assets tells me that they have now passed a critical point in their oil production and have entered a serious phase of “Terminal Decline”…You can be sure that the oil left in the ground is not worth 2 Trillion dollars so I would caution and say “Buyer Beware!” but also caution that if Saudi Arabia has indeed gone past their peak, then the world is in for a very bumpy ride as indeed the Saudi’s have already dragged us through their insane extremist mindset in Syria, Yemen, Libya, and many other places across Asia, Africa and the Middle East to hide this fact…

The panic within the house of Saud is there for all to see and became evident in a 2013 open letter by Prince Alwaleed, the nephew of deceased king, Abdullah, where he revealed that “92% of the Saudi government budget relies on oil revenues”. He also expressed that "Revenue diversification is a must, and that it necessitates a clear vision that should be implemented immediately," He also called on Saudi authorities to prepare plans to generate nuclear energy and renewable energy to "reduce local consumption of oil as soon as possible". These startling concerns point to the Saudi’s being in an advanced state of “Terminal Decline” and that the action required by the Saudi regime was extremely urgent.


For a country that claims to be swimming in oil, the alarm here is quite clear, that there just isn’t going to be enough oil for the country to sustain its future needs. The timing of the announcement is also interesting as their total financial support of the ISIL terrorist army had not yet come into being, nor had they declared war on Yemen at that point...and oil was trading well over $100.00 per barrel.


Today, the oil revenue of Saudi Arabia does not even cover the Saudi government budget so we must look at all the reasons for why that is.

Saudi Arabia ramps up austerity to avoid budget deficit


Video Source: Press TV

Low Market Price for Oil

Much has been said about Saudi Arabia keeping their oil output high to drive global prices lower to keep shale oil competition out of the market…that would be true if the Saudi’s were in a strong financial position to launch such an economic war…but they clearly were not in good financial shape and they knew it…And since the Saudi’s needed money it would have been better for them to reduce their production and drive the market prices higher rather than keeping the price low through a higher production…It makes no logical sense that they would lower the price of oil when they knew it would cause them economic disaster…this is one area that panic could have influenced their actions…but they knew that losing this economic gamble would drive them to financial ruin…now they are in a position that they need to sell off all their oil assets…and they are indeed in a panic.

Also of special note, within Prince Alwaleed’s open letter is that he calls for the acquisition of nuclear energy as an alternative to oil…this statement should give everyone pause considering the sociopathic and sadistic actions this regime has employed against the people of the region through their outright sponsoring of terrorism and twisted belief in supremest ideology.


Another big give away that I believe furthers the argument of Saudi Arabia’s Terminal oil Decline was that in November 2013, the Saudi’s announced that they were going to deport hundreds of thousands of foreign workers who mostly worked in the oil industry, and its supporting community. They cited that it was to create jobs for their own people and yet the deportations were brutal and massive in scope. As most managerial people know, training unskilled workers to do the jobs that skilled and experienced workers held before them is a very costly and time consuming process…especially when a large segment of the skilled foreign worker pool is replaced…results don't happen overnight so things just don’t add up unless the thought of peak oil comes into the picture…

Saudi Arabia to deport thousands of Egyptian workers - (2013)


Source: Press TV

When a nation deports people on a massive scale such as this, they are preparing for an economic calamity and or an immanent war. This was a very drastic and paranoid move by the Saudi government in 2013…and as we look back, the war on Yemen and their own economic collapse had not happened yet. 

Corruption in the House

Going back to an article from 2003 titled “The Fall of theHouse of Saud” written by ex CIA officer “Robert Baer” in “The Atlantic”, the number of family members in the house of Saud, was between 10,000 to 12,000 and rising. He reports that they were emptying the royal treasury by their increasing demand for royal stipends while also boldly engaging in criminal activity.

Fraud certainly took its toll on the Saudi government budget, but I have no doubt, that some of those criminal schemes were put to an end by King Abdullah while he was building and funding his terrorist army and training schools in other nations.

Indeed, the Saudi’s support and funding of fanaticism, terrorism, and war throughout the Middle East, Africa, and Eurasia has taken a severe toll on Saudi money reserves, so much so that they have actually had toborrow billions of dollars to meet this years budget.

The Saudi’s were the largest exporter of oil to the world, with 25% of known global oil reserves. They made a lot of money over the past 45 years and it looks increasingly clear that many of the Saud family members have squandered their entire fortune on maintaining a lavish criminal lifestyle while also shouldering the cost of their violent ideology while warring on neighbouring countries…all while the general population of Saudi Arabia lives in a state of brutal abject poverty…

Documentary - Saudi Arabia Uncovered


Saudi Arabia is now trying to ward off national bankruptcy by implementing austerity measures. According to the IMF, the Saudi’s would need the selling price of oil to be around $106.00 per barrel just to avoid a budget deficit. But in 2013 according to the IMF, Saudi Arabia needed $89.00 per Barrel to balance its budget and in 2012 it needed $78.00 per barrel to balance its budget.

The Saudi argument in 2013 for their budget deficit was that the shale oil Industry in the USA was responsible for their decline in oil sales, but today the shale oil industry is in complete decay. The amount of cash required for a barrel of oil, to balance the Saudi budget, has risen exponentially year on year. Where more than 90% of the budget is dependent on the sale of oil…

Here’s the thing, once an oil pocket recedes past a certain point, water has to be pumped in to maintain the outflow…however, as the oil is extracted, more water has to be pumped in to maintain pressure and therefore more water has to be separated from the oil which in turn increases the cost of extracting it. The costs rise exponentially until the oil well is no longer productive. Once the increased cost of oil extraction passes the actual market price per barrel then it is no longer profitable…if your budget requires $106.00 per barrel and the price of oil is below that, then losses are going to occur. Today’s oil prices are hovering between $30.00 and $40.00 per barrel…. UMMMM, Houston, they have a problem…

If the Saudi’s need money, then ideally, all they have to do is cut production to drive the oil price up, but instead they will sell their oil assets? It doesn’t add up, unless they have gone into terminal decline and need to sell off their oil assets to secure some sort of future…

The global economy is contracting and therefore oil is not in as big a demand as it would be with a growing economy, and that really is the global situation today, economic contraction worldwide…but it doesn’t answer the question as to why the Saudi’s would sell off their ONLY resource and their only future, because oil powers economic growth, not just for the present, but for the future as well…there are many things the Saudi's could do to save money...one would be to stop buying weapons from all the western countries, and cut some of those royal stipends that seem to find their way into offshore accounts...

Maybe the Saudi’s should not invest themselves in criminal wars! After all, funding global terrorism and waging war on other countries like Syria and Yemen does drain a treasury dry now doesn’t it...just ask the Americans…add to that the internal fraud, lavish lifestyles and the funded projects of its twisted Ideology all over the World…but I digress…

I believe that Saudi oil is in severe terminal decline, and since the US dollar is deeply connected with Saudi Arabia who controls OPEC, the American’s might be trying to distance themselves from the Saudi’s as we are witnessing with the list of people just thrown under the bus by the planned leak of the “Panama Papers”. 

The leaked documents include the Saudi King along with some of his associates from Qatar, Jordan, and U.A.E. How wonderfully convenient if you are trying to distance yourself from a few used up dictators and their involvement of war crimes and crimes against humanity by having a leak…adding Petro (Petrol) Poroshenko means he is no longer useful as well…

Could they be preparing for an immanent stock market crash? After all, a sharp decline of 25% in global oil production will certainly have an effect on the global stock markets. Anyone who is in debt will want to be sure that they are liquid when it happens, but don’t stash your cash in Panama…because one might find themselves shaken down in the upcoming lawsuits that will help the US recover some of their 19 Trillion dollar deficit before they go down in flames…

Then again, maybe the US is desperate to find a way back into the Middle East and offered Putin a bribe or a blackmail threat when John Kerry showed Vladimir Putin what was in his briefcase…judging by all the smirks, the Russians already knew what John Kerry was up to…


Video Source: Russia Today

If the Saudi’s are in terminal decline, and I believe they are, then the US Oligarch’s will do anything to retain their power and that means they need a way back into the Middle East but at the moment, they have no choice but to deal with Russia or continue in the same direction that the Saudi Regime is headed…bankruptcy…after all, oil is what powers an economy and the US must import a great deal of oil to power its military and keep their economy afloat…the energy future belongs to Russia…
----------------------------------
Dedicated to Michael C. Ruppert
----------------------------------
LINKS:

Friday, April 1, 2016

The US Plan for Syria


By: Stewart Brennan

Why does the US continue to insist on regime change in Syria even though they have no right to do so? I mean, we were all brought up in the west to believe that the Democratic process, is the only way to change a government…a democratic process that the American’s claim to embrace and champion. So when the US and Saudi Arabia insist that the Syrian government must go, what they really show is dictatorship and what they really want is a puppet government that will bend to their economic dictates.

To understand why the US government insists on regime change in Syria, we have to step back and look at the entire picture to get to the heart of why the US is pushing for it, or in the event that they don’t get their way with regime change, why they will insist on Balkanizing Syria into two or three states…to do that we need to look at it from an economic perspective, which is really the heart of what drives the American Military policy and everything they are interested in…

The one important tool that powers an economy and drives economics is energy, to be more precise, oil and gas.

The fact that Eurasia and the Middle East holds about 75% of the world’s known oil and gas is no secret. It is also no secret that every American adventure in these regions have been to wrest control of the oil and gas from Independent nations as we saw by the US coup of Mohammed Mosaddeq in Iran in 1953, and by the US Invasion of Iraq in 2003 when Saddam Hussain decided to sell his nations oil in Euro’s…

What we see when an independent nation refuses to go along with the dictates of the US and its European allies, such as Iraq 2003, Libya 2011, and Syria 2011, we see war crimes and the total obliteration of nations by militaristic means either directly as they did to Iraq with an invasion and occupation, covert means as they did to Syria by arming funding and training terrorist to remove the government, or by a combination of the both as they did to Libya…

Iran, Russia, and Syria are independent nations in the heart of the oil rich region, as are Saudi Arabia and the gulf state nations. However, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, and Bahrain are already under US control and influence, which is why these nations can get away with the atrocities they have been committing. Any friend of the US economic coalition is pardoned for war crimes and crimes against humanity…witness Israel, Turkey, Ukraine and Saudi Arabia…

The Two Main US Allies in the Destruction of Syria are Saudi Arabia and Turkey, why is that?

Well Saudi Arabia is attached to the hip with the US dollar, and are heavily invested in corporate America. If the US goes down, they go down with them…

Turkey hosts the main oil transit routes from the Caspian Sea basin that is controlled by Western Interests. In other words NATO and the US Military occupy Turkey therefore Erdogan follows whatever he is told by the US government.

Why is Syria Being Targeted?

Through its economic independence from the United States, Syria offers an independent transit route for Iran, Iraq and Russia to bring their oil and gas through to the Mediterranean and into Europe, bypassing US control.

We have to remember that Europe does not have the energy supply it requires to maintain its economic status and therefore has become increasingly dependent on the US to secure its oil and gas. The US in turn requires Europe to continue their economic partnership including buying everything in US dollars, the global reserve currency. Doing so allows the US to retain its economic hegemony around the world…but that hegemony is vulnerable when it comes to energy and who controls it…especially when it is not in US control.

The US government and its European partners are bankrupt and have watched their oil assets dwindle past peak. They no longer have control of their own destiny so they feel that they must plunder and control the oil and gas producing nations around the world to maintain their economic power.

The US failure in Syria is monumental in that the outcome will allow independent economic interests to provide Europe with the energy their economies need down the road. Europe will not need the US anymore…

The cost to the US will be its economic empire and their global reserve currency. Not that the US has any right to control something that does not belong to them, they do not have that right, but they act as if they do…like a bully.

The US Energy War with Russia

The US has threatened Russia in every venture it has tried when it comes to building energy supply lines as we have seen by the US / NATO military stand in Ukraine, Poland, Turkey, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia…and when it comes to building alternate energy supply routes from Russia through Eastern Europe in places like Bulgaria, the US puts the screws to the European Union and forces them to impose sanctions on Russia, citing Russian involvement in Ukraine…all of which are gross US fabrications…

The recent agreement for a direct gas pipeline between Germany and Russia through the Baltic Sea was met by a US economic attack on Germany and indeed further threats on Europe with the influx of Saudi and Turkish backed terrorists hidden amongst the legitimate victims of American Imperial wars…These active terrorist tools are now residing all over Europe just waiting for a phone call to do US / Saudi / Turkish bidding should the European’s continue to move towards an economic partnership with Russia…To the people of the EU, one should look no further than their own backyard and the security they have hired to guard it on the seas and in the air…including the 6 Billion Backyardigan extortionist man named Erdogan…

US Determined to Get Their Way

The US continues to call for regime change in Syria and if they cannot get that then Balkanizing Syria will become the Americans priority because having a government that they can control in Syria or having a balkanized state emerge from Syria under their influence, that lays between Iraq and the Mediterranean sea, would stop the Independent nations, of Iran, Iraq, and Russia from laying pipelines to Europe…the US will maintain its hegemony over the World if it controls Syria…plain and simple.

Therefore, the US is NOT an honest broker when it reaches out to Russia as a so called willing partner to end the terrorism in Syria, terrorists that the US armed, trained and funded to overthrow the Syrian government. The American government will never change their position on Syria. The question is, how far will the Americans go to force the issue…a World War?

Russia Today (Live)

World News 2017

Current Affairs - Important Interviews – 2017

Debate – Global Issues 2017

Important Information 2016 - 2017

South Front Military Review 2017

Syria - News 2017

Yemen News 2017

Turkey News 2017

Ukraine News 2016 - 2017

Palestine & Israeli Crime 2017

Iraq News 2017

Important Documentaries

Viewpoint, Discussion & Opinion - 2017

Abby Martin – Empire Files

US News 2017

Iran News 2016 - 2017

Global Economic News 2017

Egypt News 2016 - 2017

Libya News 2016 - 2017

Bahrain News 2016 - 2017

Sheik Imran Hosein - Islamic Eschatology

George Galloway – Comment & Opinion

The Words and Actions of Ken O'Keefe

English FA Cup 2016 – 2017

New Age Weather

Space News

Music for the Revolutionary Mind

Global Revolution LIVE!

Watch live streaming video from globalrevolution at livestream.com

Japan’s 3 Nuclear Meltdowns STILL ongoing (News Censored)