First stop, a very interesting view into the thinking of Russians via an RT Russia Today program:
The most fascinating bits of it are the perspective on Syria and problems in the Middle East. Then the calling of Hillary a “Neo-con” who is interested in wars and regime change. That last bit sent me off to double check what a neo-con is, and found it started as Democrats and does lean to the positions Hillary advocates. More on that later.
The major point on Syria shows up at about 5 minutes in. That “main street establishment” is calling for a “war on Syria, Russia, and by extension, Iran as well”. Calls out John Kerry and Samantha Powers, then complains that while Russia was invited into Syria by the legitimate government, the USA is an interloper without legal basis (which is basically true).
They then cite a N.Y. Times Article claiming it is calling for a war with Russia. (Which I would link to if I had enough detail to find it quickly, but it didn’t pop up)
The essential theme is that the USA is working hard for Regime Change in the middle east, including Syria, and that’s just not really legal or moral. There is also a nod to Yemen and the Saudi’s bombing it to rubble. Left out is that Yemen is about 1/2 Sunni and 1/2 Shia and it is mostly the Shia that the Sunni Saudi’s are busy bombing.
They also point out the ‘Civil War’ in D.C. and Obama having checked out for the rest of his term. True or not, it is what is being believed in Russia… At about 16 minutes, we get the assessment of Hillary as a war monger wanting to ‘bloody the nose’ of Russia… Then at about 25 minutes, Hillary is called a corrupt lying neocon looking for war. I can’t where they are wrong…
In the end, I’m left with the suspicion that we’re in a Proxy War, but with us and Russia as the proxies between the Sunni Saudi side and the Shia Iranian side, both playing Russia and the USA as backers. But perhaps the players are themselves being played.
OK, so what Do I make of this?
Pivot To Islam
It is my opinion that Putin has figured out what Soros and his Globalist buddies are up to, doesn’t like it, and is seeing the Muslim World being ripped a new one in a Globalist War being passed off as an “Arab Spring” and sees an easy ally against the Globalists.
I note in passing that a move to eliminate the use of oil via solar, wind, and eCars would also be a move to damage the markets of OPEC and Russia and play into that Globalist desire to diminish them. The coal play oppression not so much, though…
Putin, today, announced a willingness to cut Russian oil production in league with OPEC. That’s just huge.
Putin Says Russia Ready to Join OPEC Effort to Limit Oil Supply
Elena Mazneva Stepan Kravchenko
October 10, 2016 — 5:38 AM PDT Updated on October 10, 2016 — 6:44 AM PDT
Freeze or cuts are ‘only proper decision’ for current market
Russia calls on other oil exporters to also limit production
Russia, the world’s largest energy exporter, is ready to join OPEC in limiting oil production with either a freeze or a cut, said President Vladimir Putin.
“Russia is ready to join in joint measures to limit output and calls on other oil exporters to do the same,” Putin said on Monday at the World Energy Congress in Istanbul. “In the current situation, we think that a freeze or even a cut in oil production is probably the only proper decision to preserve stability in the global energy market.”
This caused oil prices to spike up today.
Now the USA and EU and UK are on one side, Russia, OPEC, and Islam (mostly the Shia side, but with this, Saudi is interested) on the other.
The Saudi are running low on money with low oil prices, so this will be a very big deal to them.
Saudi Arabia crushed by cheap oil – and the cuts are coming
by Matt Egan and Alanna Petroff @CNNMoneyInvest
December 28, 2015: 1:53 PM ET
Saudi Arabia’s finances are getting slammed by the crash in oil prices.
The government spent way more than it collected in 2015 — leading to a budget deficit of nearly $100 billion.
Oil accounts for 75% of Saudi Arabia’s revenue, and when crude prices were sky high, the country enjoyed frequent budget surpluses. Now oil has collapsed below $35 a barrel, compared to over $100 in mid-2014.
Saudi Arabia also said it spent more than expected on social security benefits and salaries for government workers and military members.
As a results, cuts are coming: The budget calls for a 14% reduction to 840 billion riyals ($224 billion), down from 975 billion ($260 billion).
Saudi Arabia is even thinking about cutting the massive discount it gives its citizens on gasoline. The Ministry of Finance confirmed it is “reviewing” a change to government subsidies on energy, water and electricity.
Saudi Arabia revealed other steps to fix its finances, including implementing a budget ceiling, reviewing public spending on projects and training 3,500 workers to improve the government’s accounting practices.
The country hopes to boost revenue by introducing a previously-approved VAT tax and by adding fees to “harmful goods” like tobacco and soft drinks.
Despite those moves, Saudi Arabia said it expects its budget deficit to basically remain the same in 2016. That’s not good because outside observers have warned the Saudis to get their fiscal house in order fast.
So with this one move, Russia has made an alliance with Syria, Iraq (as it is now governed by Shia), Iran (via the Shia support, the anti-US stance, and the OPEC move), and at least called a truce with the Sunni in Saudi via this OPEC move.
At the same time, he’s got the EU by the winter heat… and has the USA blocked out of decent relationships with anyone in the Arab Sunni / Shia world. At best we can hope for tepid tolerance, not active support. This firms his entire southern border all the way to China, gives him allies with their hands on the oil spigot of the EU, and lets him make trouble as desired without a whole lot of risk.
Further, they have positioned newer better air defenses in Syria and around their Naval Base in Syria. Essentially positioned to create a “no fly zone” for the USA to cope with.
Then we have this, with Turkey:
Russia-Turkey thaw? Putin, Erdogan sign gas pipeline deal
Published October 10, 2016
Turkey and Russia on Monday signed a deal to build a gas pipeline from Russia as the two countries pressed ahead with efforts to normalize ties.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan watched as their countries’ energy ministers sealed an intergovernmental agreement for the “Turkish Stream” project that would bring gas from Russia to Turkey. It would then be distributed to European Union nations.
The project, which had previously been suspended amid tensions between the two countries, was signed on the sidelines of the World Energy Congress.
In other steps aimed at restoring ties, Putin announced that Russia had agreed to a natural gas discount to Turkey and would resume importing fruit, vegetables and other agricultural goods from the country. The two countries would intensify defense contacts and also look into cooperation in space technologies. Russia is building Turkey’s first nuclear power plant, and Erdogan said the sides agreed to accelerate the project.
“I am convinced that the process of normalization of our ties will continue rapidly,” Erdogan told reporters during a joint news conference. “Our relations will (improve) in many fields, be it in defense industry, political, economic, trade, tourism or culture.”
“We will make up for lost time in the coming days,” Erdogan said.
Putin had first suggested the Turkish Stream project to carry gas beneath the Black Sea into Turkey in 2014, when a pipeline project to Bulgaria fell through amid EU countries’ opposition.
Note that last line. “EU countries’ opposition”…
So now we have Turkey, looking to pivot away from the West and US Dominance, making nice with Russia and Putin, and with EU destined gas to be routed through them to Greece such that both Russia and Turkey have a foot on the hose, if desired. Nice.
All that’s lacking is for Turkey to announce that Russia will be getting basing rights at the Incirlik Air Base
Just a very well played move. Putin is on the verge of establishing regional dominance from Greece to Iran.
What’s next, nuclear missiles on the edge of Europe?
WORLD NEWS | Sat Oct 8, 2016 | 2:04pm EDT
Russia moves nuclear-capable missiles into Kaliningrad
Russia has moved nuclear-capable Iskander-M missiles into the Kaliningrad enclave bordering Poland and Lithuania, the Defence Ministry said on Saturday, adding it was part of routine drills.
“These missile units have been deployed more than once (in the Kaliningrad region) … and will be deployed as part of military training of the Russian armed forces,” ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov said in a statement.
A U.S. intelligence official said on Friday that Russia had started moving the Iskander-Ms into the enclave on the Baltic in what he said could be a gesture to express displeasure with NATO.
Konashenkov said one of the missiles had been deliberately exposed to a U.S. spy satellite. “We did not have to wait for too long – our American partners confirmed it themselves in their revelatory endeavor,” he said.
Lithuania, neighboring Kaliningrad and a member of NATO, said it would protest to Moscow.
“The deployment not only increases tensions in the region, but also possibly violates international treaties which limit deployment of ballistic missiles of range of over 500 kilometers,” Foreign Minister Linas Linkevicius told a news briefing in Vilnius.
“There will be a NATO-Russia Council meeting, and this is shaping up as one of issues on the agenda,” he added.
“We will use all channels available to not only raise this question, but to demand that international agreements are adhered to.”
Some modifications of the Iskander can hit targets 700 km (450 miles) away, putting the German capital Berlin in range of Kaliningrad, Linkevicius said.
Oh, wait, Kaliningrad is closer to the heart of the EU than Finland, the Baltic States, the far reaches of Sweden and Norway, and the most eastern border of Poland… So I guess that’s nuclear capable missiles inside the NATO region…
Man Putin knows how to play a game of chess… He’s preparing for Hillary. They are fairly sure she will win, think she is a Neocon War Hawk, and will be set on Globalist Regime Change everywhere not already signed up for the Globalist Agenda. For the life of me I can’t see where he isn’t right.
What IS a “neocon”?
A neoconservative (also spelled “neo-conservative”; colloquially, neocon) in American politics is someone presented as a conservative but who actually favors big government, interventionalism, and a hostility to religion in politics and government. The word means “newly conservative,” and thus formerly liberal. A neocon is a RINO Backer, and like RINOs does not accept most of the important principles in the Republican Party platform. Neocons do not participate in the March for Life, stand up for traditional marriage, advocate other conservative social values, or emphasizing putting America first. Neocons support attacking and even overthrowing foreign governments, despite how that often results in more persecution of Christians.
Other than not trying to claim a ‘conservative’ cloak, that sure sounds like Hillary’s values and policies.
Some prominent spokesmen include Bill Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis Libby, Norman Podhoretz, Charles Krauthammer, Richard Perle, Robert Kagan, Christopher Hitchens, Bernard Lewis, Stephen Schwartz, Elliott Abrams, Ben Wattenberg and Carl Gershman.
In contrast to traditional conservatives, neoconservatives favor globalism, downplay religious issues and differences, are unlikely to actively oppose abortion and homosexuality. Neocons disagree with conservatives on issues such as classroom prayer, the separation of powers, cultural unity, and immigration. Neocons favor a strong active state in world affairs.
On foreign policy, neoconservatives believe that democracy can and should be installed by the United States around the world, even in Muslim countries such as Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia.
Neoconservatives were prominent in the George W. Bush administration by supporting an interventionist domestic policy they called ‘compassionate conservatism’ and a strong foreign policy, and especially favored the Iraq War and its efforts to spread democracy worldwide.
Golly, and it is just those Republican NeoCons who are dead set against Trump…
Just to keep things balanced, a view from the left leaning side:
Neoconservatism (commonly shortened to neocon) is a political movement born in the United States during the 1960s among conservative leaning Democrats who became disenchanted with the party’s foreign policy. Many of its adherents became politically famous during the Republican presidential administrations of the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and 2000s.
The term “neoconservative” refers to those who made the ideological journey from the anti-Stalinist Left to the camp of American conservatism. Neoconservatives typically advocate the promotion of democracy and promotion of American national interest in international affairs, including by means of military force and are known for espousing disdain for communism and for political radicalism. The movement had its intellectual roots in the Jewish monthly review magazine Commentary, published by the American Jewish Committee. They spoke out against the New Left and in that way helped define the movement. C. Bradley Thompson, a professor at Clemson University, claims that most influential neoconservatives refer explicitly to the theoretical ideas in the philosophy of Leo Strauss (1899–1973), though in doing so they may draw upon meaning that Strauss himself did not endorse.
Seymour Lipset asserts that the term “neoconservative” was used originally by a socialist to criticize the politics of Social Democrats, USA (SDUSA). Jonah Goldberg argues that the term is ideological criticism against proponents of American modern liberalism who had become slightly more conservative (Both Lipset and Goldberg are frequently described as neoconservatives).
Neoconservatism was initiated by the repudiation of the New Deal coalition by the American New Left: Black Power, which accused Northern Jews of hypocrisy on integration and supported Israel in the Six-Day War; “anti-anticommunism”, and which during the late 1960s included substantial endorsement of Marxist–Leninist politics; and the “new politics” of the New left, which Norman Podheretz said was too close to the counterculture and too alienated from the majority of the population. Many were particularly alarmed by what they claimed were anti-semitic sentiments from Black Power advocates. Irving Kristol edited the journal The Public Interest (1965–2005), featuring economists and political scientists, which emphasized ways that government planning in the liberal state had produced unintended harmful consequences. Many early Neoconservative political figures were disillusioned Democratic politicians and intellectuals, such as Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who served in the Nixon Administration, and Jeane Kirkpatrick, who served as President Ronald Reagan’s UN Ambassador.
A substantial number of neoconservatives were originally moderate socialists associated with the right-wing of the Socialist Party of America (SP), and its successor, Social Democrats, USA (SDUSA). Max Shachtman, a former Trotskyist theorist who developed a strong antipathy towards the New Left, had numerous devotees among SDUSA with strong links to George Meany’s AFL-CIO. Following Shachtman and Meany, this faction led the SP to oppose an immediate withdrawal from the Vietnam War, and oppose George McGovern in the Democratic primary race (and to some extent, the general election). They also chose to cease their own party-building and concentrated on working within the Democratic Party, eventually influencing it through the Democratic Leadership Council. Thus the Socialist Party ceased to be in 1972 and SDUSA emerged (Most of the left-wing of the party, led by Michael Harrington, immediately abandoned SDUSA). SDUSA leaders associated with neoconservatism include Carl Gershman, Penn Kemble, Joshua Muravchik, and Bayard Rustin.
Norman Podhoretz’s magazine Commentary of the American Jewish Committee, originally a journal of liberalism, became a major publication for neoconservatives during the 1970s. Commentary published an article by Jeane Kirkpatrick, an early and prototypical neoconservative, albeit not a New Yorker.
Golly. Sure looks like NeoCon is “Liberal Masquerading as A Conservative”… It started with Democrats. They moved to the Republican party as the Democrats moved to a more pacifist stance. They advocate for interventionist globalist policies and wars of conversion and regime change. Yet hold no real conservative social values. Nor really any conservative fiscal values.
To me, it looks like this describes not just Hillary, but her counterparts in Ryan, and the Republican Establishment.
It is that kind of perspective that I enjoy from watching RT. It challenges me to go look up what they assert. More often than not, I find them knowing more about America from outside than we get from an inside perspective on the nightly news.
Hillary as NeoCon. Who knew… yet it fits all the facts save claiming the title ‘conservative’. No wonder the Bernie Bunch didn’t like her. No wonder I liked Bernie. No wonder the RINOs hate Trump and are going for Hillary. No wonder… yet I wonder…