Recent policy directives raise concerns over new U.S. postures towards great power conflicts and developing “tactical” nuclear weapons, underlining the need for a revival of the U.S. antiwar movement, write Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers.
By Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers
Following the recent announcement of a new National Defense Strategy that places a greater focus on conflicts with great powers, last week the Pentagon unveiled its Nuclear Posture Review, which announced an escalation of nuclear weapons development. With the NPR describing new U.S. efforts to develop “tactical” nukes, Russia responded by calling the proposals “anti-Russian” and “confrontational.”
The U.S. policy statements come at a time when the United States’ military is engaged in several dangerous conflict areas that could develop into an all-out war, possibly in conflict with China or Russia. It comes at a time when U.S. empire is fading, something the Pentagon also recognizes and the United States is falling behind China economically.
New National Defense Strategy Means More War, More Spending
The new National Defense Strategy moves from a focus on the “war on terror” toward conflict with great powers as its primary concern. Michael Whitney, writing about the conflict in Syria, puts it in context:
“Washington’s biggest problem is the absence of a coherent policy. While the recently released National Defense Strategy articulated a change in the way the imperial strategy would be implemented, (by jettisoning the ‘war on terror’ pretext to a ‘great power’ confrontation) the changes amount to nothing more than a tweaking of the public relations ‘messaging.’ Washington’s global ambitions remain the same albeit with more emphasis on raw military power.”
The move from military conflict against non-state actors, i.e. terrorists, to great power conflict means more military hardware, massive spending on weapons and a new arms race. Andrew Bacevich writes in American Conservative that war profiteers are popping open the champagne.
Bacevich notes that the ‘new’ strategy is placed in the false claim that the U.S. is “emerging from a period of strategic atrophy.” The claim is laughable as the U.S. has been in never ending war with massive military spending throughout the century:
“Under Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and now Donald Trump, U.S. forces have been constantly on the go. I’m prepared to argue that no nation in recorded history has ever deployed its troops to more places than has the United States since 2001. American bombs and missiles have rained down on a remarkable array of countries. We’ve killed an astonishing number of people.”
The new strategy means more spending on weapons to prepare for conflict with Russia and China. Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis claimed, “Our competitive edge has eroded in every domain of warfare—air, land, sea, space, and cyberspace. And it is continually eroding.” He described the Pentagon’s plans for accelerated ‘procurement and modernization,’ likely spiking an arms race that would include nuclear, space and traditional weapons, cyber defense and more surveillance.
The Pentagon announced its Nuclear Posture Review on February 2, with calls for updating and expanding the nuclear arsenal in order to respond to perceived threats, in particular by “great powers,” such as Russia and China, as well North Korea and others. Peace Action noted that “the expansion of our nuclear arsenal called for in the Nuclear Posture Review would cost the American taxpayers an estimated $1.7 trillion adjusted for inflation over the next three decades.”
“Who will celebrate the National Defense Strategy?” asked Bacevich. “Only weapons manufacturers, defense contractors, lobbyists, and other fat cat beneficiaries of the military-industrial complex.” To boost production, Trump is urging the State Department to spend more time selling U.S. weapons abroad.
Escalating Conflicts Risk Global War
In his first year as president, Donald Trump handed over decision-making power to “his generals” and as expected, this resulted in increased warfare, bombing and deaths. There has been a nearly 50 percent increase of airstrikes in Iraq and Syria during Trump’s first year, leading to a rise in civilian deaths by more than 200 percent compared with the year before. Trump has also broken the record for special forces, now deployed in 149 countries or 75 percent of the globe.
Many areas risk escalation to full-scale war, including conflict with Russia and China.
In Syria, the seven-year war, which has killed 400,000 people, began during Obama’s presidency under the stated policy of defeating ISIS but had as its transparent goal the removal of President Bashar al-Assad. This January, Secretary of State Tillerson made this objective clear, saying that even after the defeat of ISIS the US would stay in Syria until Assad was removed from office.
The U.S. is now moving to Plan B, the creation of a de facto autonomous Kurdish state for almost one-third of Syria defended by a proxy military of 30,000 troops, mainly Kurds. Marcello Ferrada de Noli describes that in response, Syria – aided by Russia, Iran and Hezbollah – “continues victorious and unabated in its pursuit to retake the full sovereignty of its nation’s territory.” Turkey is moving to ensure no Kurdish territory is created by the U.S.
On the North Korea front, the U.S. has continued massive military exercises, practicing war games that include nuclear attacks and assassination of their leadership. The latest dangerous talk coming from the Trump military is regarding the need to give Pyongyang a “bloody nose” – aggressive rhetoric that hints at a possible U.S. first strike. This could lead to war with China and Russia, as Beijing has said if the United States attacked first it would defend North Korea. This comes while North and South Korea are actively seeking peace and are cooperating during the Olympics. At least the U.S. has pledged not to hold any provocative war games during the Olympics scheduled this month in Pyeongchang, South Korea.
Other hotspots to keep an eye on are in Iran, Afghanistan and Ukraine.
Iran: The United States has sought regime change in Tehran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution removed the U.S.-backed Shah. The current debate over the future of the nuclear weapons agreement and economic sanctions are focal points of conflict. While observers find Iran has lived up to the agreement, the Trump administration continues to claim violations. In addition, the U.S., through USAID, the National Endowment for Democracy and other agencies, is spending millions annually to build opposition to the government and foment regime change, as seen in recent protests.
In addition, the U.S. (along with Israel and Saudi Arabia) is engaged in conflict with Iran in other areas, including Syria and Yemen. There is regular propaganda demonizing Iran and threatening war with Iran, which is six times the size of Iraq and has a much stronger military. The U.S. has been isolated in the UN over its belligerence toward Iran.
Afghanistan: The longest war in U.S. history continues after 16 years. The Pentagon has been hiding what is happening in Afghanistan because the Taliban has an active presence in about 70 percent of the country and ISIS has gained more territory than ever before resulting in the Inspector General for Afghanistan criticizing the Defense Department for refusing to release data. The long war has recently included Trump dropping the largest non-nuclear bomb in history and resulted in allegations of U.S. war crimes that the International Criminal Court seeks to investigate. The U.S. has caused devastation throughout the country.
Ukraine: The U.S. supported a coup in Ukraine that sparked a conflict in 2014 on the Russian border, a conflict that continues to claim lives daily. The U.S. spent billions on the coup, but documents outlining the Obama administration’s involvement have been withheld. The coup was complete with Vice President Biden’s son and John Kerry’s long term financial ally being put on the board of Ukraine’s largest private energy company. A former State Department employee became Ukraine’s finance minister. The U.S. continues to claim Russia is the aggressor yet the Trump administration is providing arms to Kiev, which enables it continue its military operations in eastern Ukraine.
These are not the only areas where the U.S. is creating regime change or seeking domination. In a recent statement that raised eyebrows across the Americas, Secretary of State Tillerson warned Venezuela may face a military coup while winking that the U.S. does not support regime change (even though it has been seeking regime change to control Venezuelan oil since Hugo Chavez came to power). Tillerson’s comment came as Venezuela negotiated a settlement with the opposition. Regime change is the mode of operation for the U.S. in Latin America.
The U.S. supported recent questionable elections in Honduras, to keep the coup government Obama supported in power. In Brazil, the US is assisting the prosecution of Lula, who seeks to run for president, in a crisis that threatens its fragile democracy protecting a coup government.
In Africa, the U.S. has military in 53 of 54 countries and is in competition with China, which is using economic power rather than military power. The U.S. is laying the groundwork for military domination of the continent with little congressional oversight — to dominate the land, resources and people of Africa.
Opposition to War and Militarism
The antiwar movement, which atrophied under President Obama, is coming back to life.
World Beyond War is working to abolish war as an instrument of foreign policy. Black Alliance for Peace is working to revitalize opposition to war by blacks, historically some of the strongest opponents of war. Peace groups are uniting around the No U.S. Foreign Military Bases campaign that is seeking to close 800 U.S. military bases in 80 countries.
Peace advocates are organizing actions. The campaign to divest from the war machine kicks off from February 5 to 11 highlighting the economic cost of war. A global day of action against the US occupation of Guantanamo Bay is being planned for February 23, the anniversary of the US seizing Guantanamo Bay from Cuba through a “perpetual lease” beginning in 1903. A national day of action against US wars at home and abroad is being planned for April. And Cindy Sheehan is organizing a Women’s March on the Pentagon.
There are many opportunities to oppose war in this new era of “Great Power” conflict. We urge you to get involved as you are able to show that the people say “no” to war.
Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers co-direct Popular Resistance. [This article originally appeared at https://popularresistance.org and is republished with author’s permission.]
We know what would have happened if JFK had told the generals to just go ahead and do what you think needs to be done, we wouldn’t have had the last 55 years; All of Kennedy’s military advisors wanted to invade Cuba during the missile crisis. What most didn’t know then was that the Russians had given launch authority to the local commanders in the case they were invaded. Isn’t North Korea similar, in that we can’t seem to understand how fearful a small country can feel when confronted by a superpower?
The Discrimination Problem: Why Putting Low-Yield Nuclear Weapons on Submarines Is So Dangerous
Sometime back I reported a blogger’s conclusion that while Hillary was just plain evil, the Trumpies are stupid. What other name can you give a bunch who are so IQ challenged as to allow such a dumbass idea to get to “serious” discussion?
https://warontherocks.com/2018/02/discrimination-problem-putting-low-yield-nuclear-weapons-submarines-dangerous/
“Antiwar Movement”??!! You must be kidding………………
Why “Movements” hardly “Move” in America?!
I have attended so many meetings and events in America under the banner of one “Movement” or another. Anti-war “Movement” that succeeded mainly in standing helplessly while wars continued and spread bringing death and destruction to other countries and to America itself. Palestine Solidarity “Movement” that watched as Palestinians lost more land and people and got their cities and buildings devastated every time the Antisemitic Apartheid Jewish State decides to mow the lawn!! Even the 9/11 Truth “Movement” still after more than 16 years and with overwhelming amount of undisputed SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE behind it unable to achieve much if any in terms of brining the real criminals to justice.
The question that keeps coming back to my mind is why “movements” do NOT “move” (or hardly move) in America?!
I will just limit myself here to what I have noticed in the many meetings and events that I attended over the years in one “Movement” or another. That also includes exchanges over e-mail lists of some “Movements”.
The first thing that I noticed is that one can very easily identify sub-groups within any “movement” and I will identify the sub-groups that can make any “movement” stop or at best continue to “move in circles”.
The Infiltrators:
The first sub-group is made of the infiltrators. Those are the ones who have a stake in making sure that the “movement” fails. Those could be agents of a governmental organization or a lobby of a foreign country. In some cases, they are just individuals who want to sabotage a movement for their own personal reasons.
The Idiots:
Those are the ones who are simply stupid or ignorant or both. Unfortunately those are not small in number!! Everyone who has watched a movie or seen a video on you tube about something all of a sudden considers him or herself an expert who can give an assessment on what real experts have to say!! A case in point is the individual who thinks that “Since George W Bush cannot make a bowl of cereal, then the official story about 9/11 must be true”!! ………………..hmmmmm!
The Extra Extra Extra Large Egos:
Those are the ones who would sacrifice the whole “movement”, or more,to satisfy their own egos.
They will attack anybody who disagrees with them on any thing and would consider him/her an existential threat to them!!
The Socializers:
Those are the ones who take activism as means for very cheap socializing and feeling that they still matter.
The “Attention Wh**es”?
Those are the ones dying for attention to feel that they are still alive. They have an opinion about every thing and they like to respond to every single e-mail to the group list!!
The Money Makers:
Those are the ones who want to be paid activists!!! They are looking for ways to make money through their activism!
The Conscience-Driven But Not Tactful:
And then there are the ones who are driven by their conscience but they lack the skills needed to achieve the desired results.
I am sure you can think of other subgroups that you might have encountered yourself.
The big challenge that faces the REAL ACTIVISTS is to not only to work for their cause but also to overcome the negative influence of the Infiltrators, the Idiots, the Over-Blown Egos, the Socializers, the Attention Wh**es”, the Money Makers, and the Not Tactful!!
In other words, the real challenge that faces any “movement” comes actually from within the movement itself………………..before it even goes out into the world OUTSIDE the “movement”.
How to deal with that?!
That is a question that REAL activists in any issue have to figure out if they want to achieve results!! How to do damage control on all these subgroups!!
The (usually unstated) assumption that human life will continue on Earth into an indefinite future, is (given overwhelming scientific evidence) wishful thinking. Industrial civilization is rapidly destroying the supporting conditions for more evolved life forms on this planet. It is entirely possible that the damage we have done already will guarantee our extinction within a generation or two. That we are continuing and actually accelerating these destructive processes makes this terminal result almost certain. Willful ignorance will not avert the doom descending on all of us now…….
Why this belief or assumption by government spokesmen and the media pundits that life throughout America will become an intolerable burden if the regime in Washington does not micromanage the doings of the entire rest of the planet? Why should my life become a living hell just because China, with five-times the number of people as the USA, grows a larger economy than we have over the course of the next several decades? Or because Russia can freely trade with Europe, and maybe enjoy the lion’s share of the energy markets there because of its proximity and wealth of natural resources? Or because the Shiite countries of the Middle East can function in peaceful alliances with their fellow believers? Or because the two Koreas find ground upon which to co-operate or even unify?
Why do all these scenarios purportedly detract from the potential quality of life in America? Will life no longer be worth living if we are unable to spout “the USA is number one in everything,” whether or not that has ever been true? We’ve already betrayed our expectations in so many ways, and it’s always been our own damned fault. I’ve got a clue for the hegemonists: eventually even India, with its soon-to-be largest population in the world, will have a larger economy than the United States. It’s simple math, if you preclude the “remedy” of destroying them militarily. Beating up Russia, China or any other country because they are thriving while we are not is as honest and effective as kicking the dog when you come home from a bad day at the office.
I have a bad habit of thinking out and detalization of different hypothetical scenarios to “solve” some of the known problems that countries/the world face. Both benign and disasterous in outcome.
And reading this article suddenly put me into a state of gut-wrenching dread. With a single sentence: “At least the U.S. has pledged not to hold any provocative war games during the Olympics scheduled this month in Pyeongchang, South Korea.”
Summing up everything USA has been doing since Dubya’s times, emphasizing all resent escalation and waht just been written in the article above, and adding these Olympics into the picture builds up too many coincidences. “Blowing up” the Pyeongchang Olympics will create a “new and improved” 09/11, almost a flawless one.
1) It’s in South Korea – just how convinient is that??? Just when USA is onto DPRK? Anything that happens wcan and will be immediately blamed on North Korea. Suicide bombing, chem attack, shooting, a wee aginst the wall of USA lodgings while looking at the USA flag over the left shoulder – anything and everything. If I am to name one coincidence I’d never believe, it will be this one.
2) The 2014 Sochi Olympics doping scandal, and continuing tailored humiliation of Russia (last events – CAS exculpates a small contingent of “clear” russian champions, IOC responds – “put where sun shineth not, we don’t care, and by the way it’s time to reform your CAS, you do not make decisions we want” – talks for inself) will be a proving ground to add Russia to the blame, because Bloody Tyrant Putin wanted revenge (he is an insane warmonger dreaming about killing us all, everyone knows it, right? right?), in cahoots with DPRK.
3) Olympics, despite everything, is still a planetary symbol of peace, or at least of a cease fire. Obviously obsolete in reality of our time, but still a symbol. Following that, this will lead to a global cryout against designated culprits so loud and furious, that if we compare “Syria’s chem attacks”, “Crimea’s annexation” and MH17 catastrophe to dynamite sticks, this one will be a MOAB. All common sense will be abandoned immediately.
4) It’s not in the USA like the WTC, so hardly any american people will be eager to blame their own Administration for making the provocation themselves like it was with Dubya. Of course there will be this kind of reaction, but compared to 09/11 it will be insignificant. At the same time, loss of american sportsmen will be a wonderful fuel for warmongering flames.
I never was into deep conspiracy theories much (mostly scoffing at them, actually), because, IMHO, that way lies only madness, but this… this seems to be just floating on the surface. And it scares me to death.
I really hope and pray I am just making things up.
P.S. Admittedly, I could not think about how can China be added to the picture. Hopefully, like a deterrent of such scenario.
Bingo! Excellent analysis!
“The move from military conflict against non-state actors, i.e. terrorists, to great power conflict means more military hardware, massive spending on weapons and a new arms race. Andrew Bacevich writes in American Conservative that war profiteers are popping open the champagne”
This is the central mantra of the deep state.
They needed to explain the upset election on their own terms. They would of course not indict the real reasons Trump won but would instead turn the consternation of most of the politicians in Washington into what they wanted which was the surefire way to ignite a military buildup.
The same kind of manipulation followed the economic collapse in 2008. The citizens were riled up. The establishment needed a way to focus attention away from the economic sector which was responsible for the economic collapse so they invented the Tea Party. A freshly minted new party with aims to rail against the unpatriotic government and taxes which would serve their wishes.
It is always at a time of great upheaval that the wealthy will seek to profit from it. The media played its part and millions of citizens were wrapped up in the narrative that there was a hero party freshly minted that would attack the evil government. With 24/7 saturation coverage of the newly minted Tea Party average citizens were fooled into believing that the economic woes of the stock market were the doing of the government and not the excesses of the stock market itself. Specifically, the woes were due to excessive taxes.
No rebuttal was offered by the MSM and the Tea Party was given the appearance of a real movement even though the movement was stoked and fostered by the wealthy and was a definite diversionary tactic to push the blame from themselves onto their favorite target, the government.
Once the wealthy accomplished their mission the quickly dispensed with a political party they had created. Today there is no need for a Tea Party. The wealthy got what the wanted. They turned the tide of public opinion away from themselves and recreated it into a movement to get themselves tax breaks.
This ability to manipulate the masses should be of grave concern because if the media and the kings of Wall Street can so easily turn the tide of public anger over their failures into a tax break scheme we are all vulnerable to the unaccountable manipulators who have the ability to fool enough of us to turn our attention away from the real reasons something happened all for their benefit.
So what does this have to do with Russia gate? Everything!
Once again there is a disturbance in the “force” among the American people with the election upset and this means that it is time for the power brokers to gain advantage and redirect us all away from what really happened and the real reasons why it happened and turn the whole chaos into gold.
Enter Russia gate and the promise of a new cold war with Russia. Russia gate is the new Tea Party. It is the new distraction designed to turn us all away from the real reasons the election happened out the way it did and concoct a Russian conspiracy to justify massive spending on defense.
Tactical Nukes, war with Russia. Nothing could be more near and dear to their hearts (if they have them) to stoke the fires of war and create another fantasy to serve their purposes while distracting local domestic reasons the election happened the way it did.
There is absolutely no talk in the press about the real reasons Trump won topped by the fleecing of the republican candidates by a media which used Trump to extract or extort all the money from republican Super PACs as they tried in vain to overtake the Trump media baby. Baby because they gave birth to Trump.
What is troubling is how close they are and gaining ground for destabilizing the nuclear balance of power.
Destabilization of the nuclear balance of power has long been at the top of the agenda of the MIC. Every concession they get be it anti-ballistic missile technology or tactical nukes serves to break down the balance of power and create the requirement for a massive military spending campaign. They have to destabilize the balance in order to justify more military spending which will further destabilize the balance of power which is exactly their aim.
So yes, they would like no other scenario than to blame Russia thus create the need to increase the military budget.
It is inevitable that we are going to me manipulated by a government and their handmaiden servants of the press into duping us to spend more for defense by convincing us to believe that the last presidential election result was thrown, hacked, influenced and ultimately was successful in electing a president by the Russians.
As long as they have the ability to influence us they will endeavor to deceive us into evermore fanciful narratives which suit their purpose of economic gain while threatening to destabilize peace to enable their plans to make tons of cash.
Tactical nukes, anti ballistic missile defense systems and a host of other military strategies deemed unacceptable which were left off the table from decades gone by are being reignited against common military wisdom in order to make military contractors rich.
The Tea Party campaign against our government which sough to make the wealthy even more wealthy with giant tax breaks was bad enough. The new cold war against Russia to make military contractors wealthy is scary.
Jebus! What great powers are they hoping to have conflicts with?
I think this really highlights the deep weakness of the Empire now. It has resorted more and more to brute force – kill them all mentality. Force is not just the preferred choice it is increasingly the only choice. All other power lost, exposed as corrupt and engaged is mass slaughter for purely Imperial aims. The Empire has nothing but a huge military which it can’t really use without destroying civilization. It has used nuclear weapons before for political it may finally think its all or nothing.
I’m not sure how”new” this focus is, but it’s certainly getting worse.
I’ve downloaded that 2018 Nuclear Posture Review Report, but haven’t yet tried to read it because I’m pretty sure my eyes would glaze over without seeing some introductory materials first. An early result of that search turned up this piece:
The Most Dangerous Aspect of Trump’s Nuclear Posture
by Michael Krepon January 23, 2018
The author references this from that 2018 Report:
His comments:
h**ps://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1204665/the-most-dangerous-aspect-of-trumps-nuclear-posture/
The planned “enforcement” would appear to have at least two vehicles, and probably more. Obama & Company did a lot of work with the B-61 gravity bomb to make a model which could be “dialed” down to a very small (but classified) yield. Since earlier models could be cranked up to 340 kilotons of explosive equivalent and down to a mere 300 tons, I’d assume the new one isn’t a lot different. “Gravity Bomb” is a key part here – I’d expect this thing to be used on comparatively helpless nations like North Korea and Iran. That’s because you’ve got to fly an airplane right into their country and let it fall from a height.
The “Long Range Stand Off Weapon” is something else again. The Wiki doesn’t give a clue about how far the thing will fly, but “Long Range” ought to be some kind of indicator. It is supposed to be quite stealthy, and will carry some version of that B-61 bomb mentioned previously. This would be something meant to put the fear of God into China or Russia. Or any other uppity nation with a good air defense system.
What worries me is that these things are obviously planned to be used to maintain the US Empire. I’m guessing, of course, but I suspect the neocon planners have looked at how Chernobyl and Fukushima have played out, and have concluded that using relatively small nuclear weapons would be “acceptable”. For example, precisely what could Iran do if some B-61s smashed into a few of their underground sites? Same is almost as true for North Korea. The fallout from the NK impacts would hardly compare to what Japan is already experiencing from Fukushima.
Obviously I know almost nothing about this subject, but what little I’ve recently learned really is something that worries me. Again, I think the US is building these small nukes because it plans to use them to achieve what one fellow on the Internet Tubes called full-spectrum dominance.
h**ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B61_nuclear_bomb#Mod_12
h**ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W80_(nuclear_warhead)
h**ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Range_Stand_Off_Weapon
“emerging from a period of strategic atrophy” now that’s a good one. Recently I have been watching the Paul Jay series of ‘undoing the New Deal’ on therealnews.com, and in one of the series historian Peter Kuznick points to how the U.S. missed a golden opportunity for peace with Russia when Stalin died. Molotov at the time of Stalin’s death reached out to then President Dwight Eisenhower for a possible meeting of the minds, where a new Soviet relationship could have been established with the mighty U.S., who already had acquired ten times the military capacity over it’s rival Russians. Eisenhower delivered his ‘The Chance for Peace’ speech, but for only his words to be undercut by John Foster Dulles two days later, who reeled against the communist nation, and never looked back after making his threats. Imagine how Eisenhower’s speech, if left undeterred by Dulles, could have changed the whole destiny of this planet, and with one speech to begin with that could have started a process towards a peaceful conclusion. Ah, but then where would this leave the ever popular MIC?
If we Americans blow up this planet in our quest for world hegemony, it won’t be because we truly wanted to spread democracy or anything like democracy, in as much as we profited from all of these horrendous no win wars of conquest. The only hope, is if we Americans protest the hell out of this warmongering nation, and take the warmongers to the wood shed for all time. America needs to promote it’s Soft Diplomacy, and in so doing join the rest of the world towards making earth a better place to live upon.
here’s Ike’s ‘The Chance for Peace’ speech;
https://www.eisenhower.archives.gov/all_about_ike/speeches/chance_for_peace.pdf
Here is a portion of Eisenhower’s ‘The Chance for Peace’ speech;
“First: No people on earth can be held, as a people, to be an enemy, for all humanity shares the common hunger for peace and fellowship and justice.
Second: No nation’s security and well-being can be lastingly achieved in isolation but only in effective cooperation with fellow nations.
Third: Any nation’s right to a form of government and an economic system of its own choosing is inalienable.
Fourth: Any nation’s attempt to dictate to other nations their form of government is indefensible.
And fifth: A nation’s hope of lasting peace cannot be firmly based upon any race in armaments but rather upon just relations and honest understanding with all other nations.”
In our today’s world Ike would be called treasonous by the likes of Rachel Maddow, or Don Lemon. But read Eisenhower’s words, and know that this kind of approach would work but all to well, but there again ‘where’s the profit in that’?
Very good posts Joe. I wish that U.S. follow at least some of those five ideas President Eisenhower outlined in his speech. But with the current Ruling Powers running the country, it does not seem very likely that it is going to happen. They are bent upon in carrying their mission to subdue the entire planet and bring it under their complete control, no matter what the costs are.
Dave you said, “They are bent upon in carrying their mission to subdue the entire planet and bring it under their complete control, no matter what the costs are.” Yes and on the rare occasion that one of their elite should stray from the missions principle core aim, that the establishment strikes this courageous crusader for peace down at every turn.
From the ‘under the dead of night’ installation of America’s new owners the Federal Reserve, to the hidden hands cajoling the U.S. into two world wars, as to it’s post WWII crafting of forever endless proxy conflicts of death and destruction, to the cabals notches on it’s assassination list is full, the beat goes on, and we Americans are kept clueless as to what should really fear us the most. It’s called living in the Matrix.
Anyway, take it easy Dave. Joe
Thanks for airing that, Joe. I mentioned here awhile ago that Ike started his first presidency with a peace speech and ended his second presidency with his MIC speech. Coming out of WWII, it makes sense doesn’t it? Ike and JFK were the two great presidents of my lifetime; I will always miss them. Hey, check this out: transnational.live Peace.
I believe geeyp that the Dulles Brothers interfered with Ike’s attending the Paris Peace Summit in 1960, by either ignoring orders by Eisenhower to suspend U2 flights over Russia, or the U2 Gary Powers incident was a deliberate attempt by the Dulles Brothers to sabotage Eisenhower’s peaceful position he was going to present to the Russians at that crucial summit. Of course with the capture of the spy plane, Eisenhower’s position was ruined. Keep in mind that the planning of the Bay of Pigs was then going on near that same time period, as well. Then you have Eisenhower’s MIC speech January 17, 1961. Could we assume Ike dodged a bullet?
So, then here comes JFK. I think John Kennedy had a very interesting evolution over his 1000 days in office. Kennedy went from being a Pentagon expanding fool, to a ‘back channel’ peacenik, and with that change he pretty well secured his fate.
Yeah, the post WWII post FDR New Deal days are certainly an era of mischief and mayhem, and now here we are watching this Russia-Gate, FBI-Gate, whatever Gate play out. Joe
Joe, I got the impression that Ike trusted John Foster Dulles more than Allen Dulles, although only Ike himself could tell us that answer. The Gary Powers disaster was aimed at Ike, no question. Those two gentlemen were the equivalent then of Clapper and the last President’s CIA head. We have no statesmen now (except for Vladimir Putin and Sergei Lavrov).
I know very little history about Ike’s engagements with each Dulles brother, but I would imagine John Foster was the one Ike may have warmed up too a little better, but then that would be assuming that Allen wasn’t very engaging but yet maybe he was more engaging than his brother John..,I just don’t know, but life in this world would have been far better off if both Dulles brothers had spent their years lawyering by chasing ambulances, or doing land deed lean research’s.
In case you haven’t noticed geeyp I have lots of regret over the immediate post WWII years. I wish more Americans would study these post WWII years, because these years to me stick out as pivotal moments whereas the U.S. could have taken a much different road than it did with all these proxy colonist wars. If we Americans were to acquire this knowledge of what happened during those post war years, then I believe we would develop a much better way of our seeing to where we went wrong.
Our government tents to lie to our citizenry over foreign policy affairs, and in time history reveals this, but never is accountability called into action. This continual fault is laid out for all to see, as years go by, and even though newly released data prove the lie still nothing comes of it. We Americans are so in denial, and this avoidance is what dearly needs change, but before anything has the slightest inkling to get better, we Americans must make ourselves stand accountable to the truth. Joe
For any anti war movement to succeed it needs to detach itself from the other right wing party that of course is the democrats!! A new party with no attachment to either war monger party would have the best cbance af a coffee successful movement, and possibly it will be our last hope to save us all!!
I like your thinking. Now would be good time to band together the ‘no-party party’ people….think of all those independents out there.
Joe, I recall a description of John Foster Dulles given by Frank Clement, Governor of Tennessee, in the keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in 1956—”the greatest unguided missile” American foreign policy ever released. I watched the speech on a black and white TV. Clement could fire ’em up, and Repubs roundly criticized him. The Dulles brothers pretty much killed any chance of America getting on the right track.