Rumsfeld, Bolton, Perle, Wolfowitz, Kagan, Zoellick,Schmitt - all valiant 'Chicken Hawks'

"At present the United States faces no global rival. America’s grand strategy should aim to preserve and extend this advantageous position as far into the future as possible."

PNACers seem to harken back to fuedalism. They are politically primitive.
 Jane Smiley

 "The PNAC program, in a nutshell: America’s military must rule out even the possibility of a serious global or regional challenger anywhere in the world.

 "Nineteen Arabs were named as hijackers of the 9/11 planes, but they've been a dream come true for the PNAC 'think-tank' whose 2000 Statement of Principles stated a "catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor" would advance their policies, i.e. justify wars and "regime changes".
 Quotes from The PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses"

The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) originated in a Washington based think tank in 1997 founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan. Its stated goal was to promote the view that "American leadership is both good for America and good for the world"

In discussing the PNAC report Rebuilding America's Defenses (2000), Neil MacKay, investigations editor for the Scottish Sunday Herald, quoted Tam Dalyell: "'This is garbage from right-wing think tanks stuffed with chicken-hawks, men who have never seen the horror of war but are in love with the idea of war. Men like Cheney, who were draft-dodgers in the Vietnam war.  These are the thought processes of fanatic sociopath Americans who want to control the world."

The PNAC group have left a spectacular trail of costly failed ventures in terms of lives lost and nation states destroyed, such as in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan but they don't give up and are now attempting a repeat in Syria, Iran and Ukraine while uttering warlike challenges to Russia. President Vladimir Putin stands in their way by blocking Nuland's regime change in Syria, defending the aspirations of Russian speaking Ukrainians living in regions bordering Russia and defusing US threats against Iran's peaceful nuclear ambitions. He has also consistently condemned before the fact PNAC's interventions. The US media consistently labels him as an enemy of Washington's peaceful intentions.

US foreign policy is hopelessly entangled in PNAC's goals for 'Regime Change' in Syria and this explains the bizarre US polic y of arming Jihad terrorists and in Kiev allying, on an end justifying the means basis,with corrupt and Nazi elements in the government thus inflaming the conflict and distrust between Kiev and Ukrainians living in areas bordering Russia. This destructive interference in the Ukraine is being led by the notorious Victoria Nuland of "fuck Europe" fame and her husband Dick Kagan (who had a leading role in the design of PNAC) and  supported by President Obama. Strangely the EU led by knee-jerking neocons like Anders Fogh Rasmussen, José Manuel Barroso, and strangely tolerated by Merkel and Hollande, are supportive of these costly US led disasters occurring in their back yard. Past European leaders like Willie Brandt, Helmut Schmidt, Jacques Chirac and Charles De Gaulle would have brought all of this destructive nonsense to an abrupt halt and sent PNAC and its NATO war machine packing back to America.

What is the future for PNAC, in a World dominated by unrivaled US financial and military dominance since WWII? The good news is that US share of the World's GDP that once stood at 50%. has since declined today to 26% which is comparable with EU figures. As the World's economy becomes  increasingly multi-polar with the GDP of other leading regions and nation states (e.g. India, China, Brazil, SE Asia) growing at several times the rate of the US we can expect  that the concept of PNAC (The Project for the New American Century) is on a collision course with reality.  Despite this the US unfortunately continues to use NATO as their roving battleship to batter down nations such as Russia that threaten PNAC's hegemonic ambitions. Brussels complies because they find NATO useful to strengthen relationships, including  military commitments, with countries in Eastern Europe that were once members of the Warsaw Pact.

PNAC and NATO are organizations designed for conflict and by their very nature and mandate require an enemy. If the humanitarian concerns of regions in conflict such as currently in Ukraine, Syria and Iran were of genuine concern, then European, Russian and the Washington would preside over joint meetings to arrange financial aid and support. Putin has put forward recommendation for such meetings but Obama and his vassals in Brussels refuse to talk with him because it conflicts with the avaristic hegemony of PNAC to gain control of the oil and industrial resources in the region and for Brussels to piggyback on this ambition.

The West is playing a dangerous game with Washington's right wing led by PNAC promoting further military build up in Eastern Europe and wanting to move NATO into the Ukraine up against Russia's doorstep. Its forcing European nations to take sides and encouraging revolution in a deeply divided Ukraine. Its producing a powder keg.  A powder keg kicked off World War I and it could happen again.

As far as I know America is the only nation who proclaims their leadership is good for the world. Try claiming that throughout the Nations of Latin America,  Iraq,  Iran, India, China, Brazil - the list is long. PNAC is an aggressive invention of the right wing in America that has failed miserably in the past  and is predictable to repeat the same in the future. Armed with NATO and in the hands of mediocre politicians of which there is an abundent supply of these days, it will continue to do great harm. 

Vladimir Putin - great leader or villain?

Preface  
 Augst 7 2014: US sanctions against Russia to no ones surprise are severely backfiring with the Russian PM Dimitry Medvedev signing a decree on the full ban for imports of beef, pork, poultry meat, fish, cheese, milk, vegetables and fruit from Australia, Canada, the EU, the US and Norway. One wonders why these countries other than the US bothers to carry the overhead of governments since the all take their orders from Washington in this insane pursuit of self-destruction. The cost to Russia and the western nations of this food fight will annually amount to hundreds of billions dollars in lost revenues. While their unfit weak leaders fluff up their feathers and huff and puff their already weak economies face further damage. Wth the battle now extending to the airlines this is becoming an economic disaster. Why are we doing this to ourselves? Is leadership so weak now that there are no EU leader that can step forward and say "lets end this self destructive nonsense"?
.

May 1 2014: The Cold War is back as Russia and the US/EU battle over the Ukraine. On the east side the population is predominately Russian speaking and have strong historical relationships with Russia. To the West and in Kiev sympathies lean more to developing closer ties with the EU and accepting NATO. The IMF have just offered a loan to Ukraine in the vicinity of 17 billion US dollars and it has been accepted.  The demands for austerity and the selling  off of assets as part of packages produced an economic and social disaster in Russia during the Yeltsin period including imposing a brutal program of austerity to pay off the bankers. The IMF is now often referred to as global loan shark and has repeated these measures in over 70 countries including Greece and Portugal with the same disastrous results. The question at this point is whether the Ukraine, a deeply troubled nation with a highly educated population will accept living with the IMF's terms for austerity and the inevitable selling off of assets to the highest bidders. 

• Victoria Nuland travels to Kiev to hand out cookies to the riot police. It is not known whether she baked them or bought them from Lidl or Aldi.
• We are told  to vilify Vladimir Putin and this blog is an attempt to explain why.
• Ms Nuland was heard to say "Fuck the EU!! and Ms Merkel angrily asked for an apology. This offering of cookies might help.
•  
• 
• The New York Times and Fox News say that Vladimir Putin is a very evil so everyone in America who watches TV and the mainstream media know that he must be a very bad guy.
• Putin made an outrageous statement "Sometimes it seems to me that America does not need allies, it needs vassals." and this clearly shows the thoughts of a disrespectful very bad guy.
• He intervened but failed to prevent the CIA-NATO coup against Gaddafi that destroyed Libya as a nation-state with the loss of many lives so Obama and his Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasian Affairs, Victoria Nuland, are very offended and Putin must be a very bad guy 
• He prevented the US military from finishing off the Assad Government in Syria while funding Jihad rebels and in the process forced a peace that eliminated chemical weapons, including the rebels use of  Sarin gas by blocking the Jihad. Victoria Nuland is upset again because she had her heart set on bloodshed and regime change. This arrogant defiance of US striking power was further proof that he is evil and  must be a very bad guy.
• He was very critical at the outset of the US invasion of Iraq that has left the country in ruins. Here again Victoria Nuland and her husband Robert Kagan of PNAC fame who led the charge into Iraq are very upset. This is a gross insult of the intentions and use of US power and therefore he must be a very bad guy. Hillary Clinton has finally admitted that in supporting the invasion she made a mistake so maybe Putin, the bad guy, was right but all the same if the NYT says he is a bad guy. 
• He accepted the will of Crimeans in a free vote to return to their original Russian homeland, Hillary strangely called him a Nazi for supporting this, Poroshenko the corrupt chocolate king President of Ukraine and his close friend and equally corrupt and self enriched ally Yulia Timoshenko that he freed from jail are upset too, so this surely makes Putin a very bad guy.
• He  builds troops along his border as NATO points its missiles toward Russia and Obama has asked him not to do this so Putin must be a very bad guy
• Obama feels insulted and hurt when Putin doesn't agree with him so he is sulking and has decided to stop communicating with him because he is clearly a very bad guy.
• Putin is supplying natural gas to Western Europe and this stands in the way of promoting US fracking and shipping liquified gas to Europe at much higher prices and this is not good for US business and again clearly makes him a very bad guy.
• The twin tower attack in Volgograd by a Saudi financed Jihadist killed 32 people and this is just one of similar Saudi inspired attacks. Putin threatens a retaliation on our beloved Saudi allies who also brought down New York's twin towers, and supplies arms and money to Jihad rebels in Syria so he must be a very bad guy.
• Putin described the Victoria Nuland led gang in Kiev as an orgy of unelected radicals, fascists and corrupt misfits. That is true but he is insulting our Washington and EU allies so he must be a very bad guy.
• The mostly Russian speaking population in Eastern Ukraine show more trust, loyalty and affection for their Russian neighbours across the border than for the collection of unelected misfits in Kiev and this is surely because of the influence of Putin who must be a very bad guy.
• Obama has ordered spying to find out whether Putin is richer than the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson (who enrich the US Congress) and if so this will prove that just like them he is truly an evil and bad guy. 
• Putin's popularity rating in Russia averages around 85% according to the Washington Post. This compares with a very popular Merkel at 69%, Obama at 41% and Hollande at 26%. This proves that the Russian people know something that we don't know about this truly evil and bad guy.

Summary: Does all this seem totally insane? Of course it is. Vladimir trades insults with Obama and fails to show the respect that this Nobel Prize winning US President so richly deserves. From this I am sure you will agree that he must be a very bad guy or just maybe he might be a very good guy.