During high school I was one of the few in my class who was pro American (US). It was during the Vietnam War. The Americans fought against communism, I thought. The same Americans who liberated us earlier of the Nazis. With this liberation the US has for many of us (including me) obviously built up a solid credit and the US still looks like the most important ally in the fight against evil.
A long time, actually too long, I also believe in the good intentions of the Americans. I’m not talking about ordinary American citizens but about the governments of the past decades. The wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan, among others, the first Iraq war and after 911 the so-called war on terror, I still believed in the good intentions of the US. After the second Iraq war, the Arab Spring and the ‘intervention’ in Libya, I started to doubt. The development of the EU strengthened my doubts, even more after the coup in Ukraine and the war in the Middle East.
Since 2013 I indulge myself more in the matter (you have to do something with your free pension time) and actually only last year I came to the conclusion that the US is not fighting the evil in this world but is evil itself. The US does not fight a war on terror but a war of terror.
The immediate reason for writing this column was an article last week in Trouw ‘Russia is making friends’. From this article the following quote:
‘Yet the Iraqi government does not dare to ask Russian air support. Because The US has many pressure means to keep Iraq away from Putin. The US Congress, for example, recently passed a law that allows the arming of anti-government movements and separatists in Iraq. Such a step could probability result in the collapse of Iraq’.
Arming anti-government movements and separatists, resulting in the disintegration of Iraq. Where have we heard that before? Libya, certainly overthere, but right now also in Syria. There are rumors that the US and its NATO ally Turkey, support the ‘moderate’ fighters in their war against the Assad regime.
From alternative sources (other than the MSM) I heard about that previously. In a number of articles (a.o. this brief one, this longer and this longer article) it is claimed that IS is not only supported by the US but also created by the US. Obama confirms that (made a mistake?) here.
At first you won’t believe that, do you? But then when you hear that the Russians are bombing IS now much more frequent and more effective than the US is and hear the objection of the US against cooperation with the Russians it makes you at least wonder. According to this article, it is a brilliant move (and checkmate) made by Putin offering such a cooperation. In the article it is summarized as follows:
‘Moscow, realizing that instead of undertaking an earnest effort to fight terror in Syria, the US had simply adopted a containment strategy for ISIS while holding the group up to the public as the boogeyman par excellence, publicly invited Washington to join Russia in a once-and-for-all push to wipe Islamic State from the face of the earth. Of course The Kremlin knew the US wanted no such thing until Assad was gone, but by extending the invitation, Putin had literally called Washington’s bluff, forcing The White House to either admit that this isn’t about ISIS at all, or else join Russia in fighting them. The genius of that move is that if Washington does indeed coordinate its efforts to fight ISIS with Moscow, the US will be fighting to stabilize the very regime it sought to oust’.
Yes, more often we hear from Putin. Just for the record, I’m not a big fan of Putin. He also belongs, with Obama, Merkel and some other high EU officials, to the club of, I won’t be too unpolite, rulers who obviously don’t have te best in mind for the ordinary citizens on this planet. A good article (in Dutch) by Wierd Duk (Dutch reporter) is ‘Karel van Wolferen: Poetin ontpopt zich steeds meer als een staatsman’ (Putin is emerging more and more as a statesman). A quote from this article below. It’s about the ‘unique’ (I prefer to call it pernicious) role of the US.
‘Those plans are to the effect that the United States has a unique role in the world and must be able to enforce that dominant status with regime change manoeuvres and use of military force. ‘It is our priority to avoid the rise of a new rival on the former territory of the Soviet Union or elsewhere’, is an oft-quoted statement from 1992 by Paul Wolfowitz’.
It’s known that the US wants to get rid of Assad. Perhaps less well known is why they want to get rid of Assad, and that has nothing to do with the so-called ‘War on Terror’. It is claimed that The US is not bombing ISIS but the oil infrastructure of Syria. You don’t say, surprisingly it’s about oil and the power(im)balance between superpowers. That is explained here (1) and here (2). From the 1st article the following quote:
In 2009 … Assad refused to sign a proposed agreement with Qatar that would run a pipeline from the latter’s North field, contiguous with Iran’s South Pars field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey, with a view to supply European markets – albeit crucially bypassing Russia. Assad’s rationale was “to protect the interests of [his] Russian ally, which is Europe’s top supplier of natural gas.
Instead, the following year, Assad pursued negotiations for an alternative $10 billion pipeline plan with Iran, across Iraq to Syria, that would also potentially allow Iran to supply gas to Europe from its South Pars field shared with Qatar. The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the project was signed in July 2012 – just as Syria’s civil war was spreading to Damascus and Aleppo – and earlier this year Iraq signed a framework agreement for construction of the gas pipelines. The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline plan was a “direct slap in the face” to Qatar’s plans.
As described in the aforementioned article ‘Karel van Wolferen…..etc.’ since the fall of the Soviet Union the US wants to avoid the rise of a new rival. Well it seems, with the rise of Putin’s Russia, that it’s not working so well.
Attempts to compromise and isolate Russia happend recently, for instance the US/EU coup in Ukraine. More about that in this article ‘The Origin of the New Cold War’ from which this quote:
‘Furthermore, in the other key documentary source on this overthrow, which is the phone-conversation between U.S. President Barack Obama’s two chief operatives who arranged the overthrow, a conversation that occurred 18 days before the overthrow, Victoria Nuland instructed Geoffrey Pyatt to have Arseniy Yatsenyuk appointed to lead the junta-regime that would become installed when the coup was completed. Everyone should hear that conversation; it is massively important, in a historical sense, especially because it proves that this was a coup and not anything of a democratic nature — it proves that Western goverments and press have been lying through their rotten teeth about this being some sort of victory for ‘democracy,’ when in fact it was the exact opposite of that’.
But much earlier and for a longer time the US is busy with their ‘new cold war’ against Russia. In this article, ‘US-NATO-Chechen Militia Joint Operations Base’ you can read more about the US-backed and Al-Qaeda-linked Chechen terrorism against Russia. The article ends with the following text:
‘We Americans, bogged down in a perpetual so-called ‘war on terror,’ waging illegal and unjustified wars globally in the name of that ‘war on terror’ and so-called ‘Islamist terrorists,’ happen to be the world’s biggest mastermind, creator, financier, and supporter of ‘Islamist Terror.’ We used this as our number one method, modus operandi, during the Cold War throughout the Middle East, Northern Africa and the rest of the Muslim world. We made and trained and employed Bin Laden. No, it should be plural. We trained and employed and supported many Bin Ladens around the world. Then, after the Cold War, we continued the trend throughout Central Asia, the Balkans, Caucasus, and Xinjiang. Today we still remain the world’s number one terrorist nation. Either through illegal and unjustified wars of aggression or those blamed on some ‘Islamist Extremists’ which happen to be directly masterminded, instigated, financed and supported by us’.
With this column, which is already way too long, and the articles to which I refer, I tried to ‘summarize’ the evil role of the US in the world. I’m going to finish with one more reference to this article ‘Absolutely Crucial statement by Foreign Minister Lavrov’ and a quote from it on the, currently in Netherlands discussed, association treaty with Ukraine:
‘Honourable Leslie Gelb, whom you know all too well, wrote that Ukraine’s Association Agreement with the EU had nothing to do with inviting Ukraine to join the EU and was aimed in the short term at preventing it from joining the Customs Union. This is what an impartial and unbiased person said. When they deliberately decided to go down the path of escalation in Ukraine, they forgot many things, and had a clear understanding of how such moves would be viewed in Russia. They forgot the advice of, say, Otto von Bismarck, who had said that disparaging the millions-strong great Russian people would be the biggest political mistake’.
To conclude, my answer to the question ‘Where would we be without The United States of America’ ……… I have no idea ……. (perhaps MH17 was not shot down) ….. but I’m afraid that without the (role of the) US comparable shit would have happened with other crazy rulers. Scum that is not afraid to put millions of people into misery to achieve their insane goals.
And having said that, one more question bubbles up ‘What does this all say about the US allies, including ‘our own government?’
In god we trust …… how dare they put it on their dollar (which incidentally has more weird stuff on it)?
List of articles (if you want to know more)
ISIS, Iraq, Syria
TTIP (we don’t want that)