McCain, Nuland and Other Buffoons Slur Germans Over “Bullshit” Peace Overtures

[John McCain never fails to show his ass in a room full of foreigners.]

What US politicians REALLY thinkcold feet“, “Bullshit“, “anxiety about the Germans” in Ukraine crisis




Munich – While in eastern Ukraine a bloody war that breaks the security conference in Munich the next dangerous conflict. A diplomatic battle of nerves around the question of whether the West should supply weapons to the government in Kiev. The enemies are actually allies: the US against Europe, particularly Germany.

Behind the soundproof doors of the conference rooms at the hotel “Bayerischer Hof” Americans speak downright derogatory remarks about the Germans.

Friday evening, shortly after 19 clock. On the sixth floor of the luxury hotel American four-star generals, diplomats and senior US officials meet after BILD information about a confidential conversation in the “Briefing Room” and pull on the German ago.

• “defeatist” cites a US Senator Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen (56, CDU), because they no longer believe in the victory of the Ukrainians. The word “German Defätistin” is repeatedly heard by IMAGE Information in this round.

Federal Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen (CDU, here with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg) applies under US diplomats as “defeatist” because they do not believe in a win against Ukraine Russia
Photo: AP

• Obama’s top diplomat for Europe, Victoria Nuland called the journey of the Chancellor to Putin as “Merkel Moscow stuff,” another US foreign policy speaks of the “Moscow-bullshit” of Europeans.

• And US Senator John McCain talks himself into a rage: “History shows us that dictators will always take more if you let them. They will not let their brutal behavior dissuaded when you fly with them to Moscow -. Just as one is once flown in this city “

Merkel’s diplomatic initiative in Ukraine crisis is at the heart of American anger. The reason: Americans do not believe that Putin can be moved without massive pressure to an agreement. And pressure do not intend to build the Europeans.

“They fear damage to their economies, sanctions against the Russians,” said Nuland. “It pains me to see that our NATO partners now getting cold feet,” another US politician says according to BILD information.

► Obama’s close confidante Victoria Nuland is that einschwört their American counterparts in this opening evening of the Security Conference: “We can fight the Europeans, rhetorical fight against them …”

Several US politicians still seem to doubt arms shipments for Kiev. Whether that maybe “just a tactic,” so that Europeans finally make a “false promise” more pressure on Putin, one asks. “No, that’s not a tactic to drive the Europeans,” Nuland replied dryly. “We would send no four divisions in Ukraine, as the Europeans fear. It is a relatively moderate supply of anti-tank weapons. “

“But what are we to tell the Europeans because if we really decide on arms sales?” Asks a US Congressman. “What then is our story?”

US national security adviser Victoria Nuland called the journey of the Chancellor to Putin, “Merkel Moscow stuff”
Photo: AFP

► In the meeting also sits on the Nato commander, General Philip Breedlove. He replies: “We would not be able to deliver as many weapons that Ukraine can defeat Russia. This is not our goal. But we must try for Putin to raise the price on the battlefield to slow this whole problem so that sanctions and other measures to flourish. “

Again top diplomat Nuland switches that speaks fluent Russian and Dick Cheney served as national security adviser. “I would like to urge you to use the word defensive systems that we would deliver against Putin’s offensive systems”

NATO commander General Phlip Breedlove wants to raise the price on the battlefield for Russia
Photo: AP

► General Breedlove said the US politicians, as such weapons delivery would actually look like: “Russian artillery kills by far the most Ukrainian soldiers. Therefore, it would require systems with which they located and the fire can be answered quickly. The communication of Ukrainians is either disrupted or completely absorbed. That’s why they need tap-proof communication device. Then I am not going to talk about some anti-tank missiles, but we see massive supply movements from Russia to Ukraine. The Ukrainians need the ability to turn off these transports. And then I would add a few small, tactical drones. “

Brisant: The planned weapons and systems are technically demanding that US troops would train the Ukrainian army probably. Thus, the United States would intervene with their own troops in the conflict.

So much controversy between Europeans and Americans, it has recently been at the Munich Security Conference 2003 – just before the start of the Iraq war. Morning travels Chancellor Angela Merkel to US President Barack Obama in Washington. The two have much to discuss …

Russia confirms participation in Minsk quartet meeting over Ukraine crisis

Russia confirms participation in Minsk quartet meeting over Ukraine crisis

Xinhua net

MOSCOW, Feb. 8 (Xinhua) — Russian President Vladimir Putin said leaders of Germany, France, Russia and Ukraine have agreed to meet in Minsk next Wednesday, provided that certain positions are agreed upon by then, Interfax news agency reported Sunday.

“I have just finished conversations with leaders of Germany, France and Ukraine in the so-called Normandy Format,” Putin said during a meeting with Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko.

Meanwhile, the Belarusian president confirmed that the summit would be held on Wednesday evening local time, adding that Minsk will properly organize the meeting to achieve calm “in our common house.”

A Russian diplomatic source told Interfax that deputy foreign ministers of the four parties will meet in Berlin on Monday to prepare for the upcoming summit of their leaders.

British troops Provide Drones and Electronic Jammers To Jordan

British troops sent in to help Jordan fight Islamic State

express sunday

BRITAIN is set to send troops to Jordan to boost an Arab push against Islamic State in Syria and Iraq.

Jordanian plane and Brit troops in UKGETTY/IG  Britain will increase its involvement in Jordan to fight Islamic State

An initial batch of around 60 military planners will join a new coalition headquarters that will co-ordinate support for Iraqi and Kurdish troops.

The increase in British involvement follows Jordan’s decision to extend air strikes from Syria to Iraq.

Royal Artillery drones and electronic jammers from the Royal Signals are among units that will be in place by April.

The RAF Sentinel R1 spy-plane will be deployed to hunt down Islamic State commanders.

We will shortly be in a position to deploy as many as 2,000 troops mainly in a training capacity

Senior military source

This follows criticism by the Commons defence select committee that Britain was “not doing enough” to combat Islamic State.

Only three British soldiers were operating outside the Kurdish-controlled areas of Iraq, despite Defence Secretary Michael Fallon’s pledge to commit “hundreds” of trainers.

Senior military sources claim that the general election in May is slowing moves in Iraq.

“We will shortly be in a position to deploy as many as 2,000 troops mainly in a training capacity,” one said, “though a proportion will be ready for force protection purposes if that decision is taken.”

Select committee member Colonel Bob Stewart said there was “only one way to deal with people who behave in the most monstrous way under a masquerade for religious duty”.

Mistaken policies, missed chances

Mistaken policies, missed chances


by bunn nagara

There is no new Cold War, at least not yet, unless the West is determined to pursue it over all other needs.

THE more urgent the crisis, the more exaggerated and distorted events tend to be portrayed. That is the sad irony of media reports on troubling situations.

The “new” electronic media’s greater immediacy worsens the exaggerations and distortions. And among the most troubling situations today is Ukraine’s civil war.

Some observers have begun calling the conflict a “new Cold War”. But has it really come to that?

It may be tempting to expand issues to sensationalist proportions on a global scale. An impressionistic style plus simplistic speculation helps to attract attention to the pundits at least.

However, analysts have a responsibility to evaluate often subjective, open-ended events that are still developing prudently.

The pouting match between the US (and Europe) and Russia over Ukraine’s civil war and geopolitical affiliation is instructive.

Tough rhetoric is still shooting like tracer shells between Washington and Moscow. Europe’s more developed economies are again identified as US allies.

More weapons systems and new force structures are being devised, commissioned or deployed. Dozens of near clashes between opposing military forces have reportedly occurred over the past year.

Strategic calculations underpin much of this face-off. Competing spheres of geopolitical influence are supposedly at the heart of the big power rivalry.

So a “new Cold War” is said to be in full swing. Yet professional analysts need to avoid wrongful diagnoses and disastrous self-fulfilling prophecies.

Careful analysis would expose much of the alarmist projections as premature bluster. As usual vested interests have something to gain: arms dealers have billions to make and imaginative authors have books on the subject to sell.

A new Cold War suggests a replay of the decades-long Cold War between the “West” and the “East” of the Western hemisphere that reshaped much of the world. Nothing today has reached such depths or dimensions.

Western commentators typically blame President Vladimir Putin of democratic, post-Soviet Russia for the current impasse. Others including Russia blame much of it on creeping Westernisation and an expansionist Nato.

If it were just Putin’s fault, it cannot be another “Cold War” as that would require a systemic and ideological confrontation between major power blocs.

Some cite Ukraine’s critical role in geostrategically vital south-eastern Europe. Albeit a relative backwater of the continent, such was the birthplace of two world wars.

However, the world wars had been the biggest “hot” wars in history. The Cold War’s roots can be traced instead to tensions in the 1943 Teheran meeting between the “Big Three”: Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin of Britain, the US and the Soviet Union.

No such ideological divide or systemic differentiation exists between the big powers today, certainly none that can outlast individual leaders of the moment. Besides, Western leaders can no longer reshape the world on their own, as emerging economies particularly in Asia are now punching above their weight.

The Soviet Union is gone, with Russia now devoid of much of the USSR’s territory. The Warsaw Pact is also history, although Nato remains and keeps expanding in scope and jurisdiction.

Ukraine’s civil war is increasingly convoluted and complex, with any resolution distant and remote. But it is not spilling over national borders to engulf other countries or even spreading to Kiev itself.

There is still nothing definitive to mark the Ukraine conflict as a return to the Cold War. The sum of those parts that resemble the Cold War do not add up to the whole of a new Cold War.

A tragedy has to be how so much of the conflict has been unnecessary and avoidable. The Western powers exceed Russia in force and have thus defined the situation as it unravels.

In turn, much of the angst making for the conflict stems from a Western misreading of the situation.

This began with a misreading of the Ukrainian polity by failing to acknowledge Ukraine as a deeply divided country. Its ethnic and political differences between its eastern provinces and the rest of the country, centred politically in Kiev, have made Ukraine a fundamentally unstable nation.

The West has further misread Russia, which although nothing new remains definitive. This has meant a failure to recognise Russia’s legitimate strategic interests in its western border regions, particularly in the vicinity of the Black Sea and Crimean peninsula where its naval assets have long been stationed.

The Washington-Brussels nexus has also misread Putin himself. The West sees him as a tyrant after regarding Russian democracy as a sham, then feels exasperated that he still enjoys such high approval ratings among Russians.

It is precisely because Russia’s position is more than Putin, and that Russia is democratic, that its president has to do what the people want. That has meant a high 81% support among Russians as a poll by the US-based Associated Press and NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found last December.

Putin enjoys greater support among his people than any Western leader among theirs, the more so when Russia and its leader come under Western threats and attack. It is the same kind of persistent Western misunderstanding of other countries and their leadership, from Iran and Iraq to Cuba and China.

A Brookings Institution analysis last October identified the West’s personification of blame, as on Putin for all the ills that Russia is supposed to represent, as a part of the problem. Given the West’s ideological “high” from post-Cold War triumphalism, that problem is unlikely to be resolved soon.

To gauge the situation, apply the test of equivalence: what would the US do if the situation were reversed?

Suppose Nato had been dismantled for years and an energised Soviet Union zeroed in to recruit allies for the Warsaw Pact. Then Mexico suddenly became Soviet-friendly.

Legitimate US interests would be at stake and it can be expected to act, particularly after a great fuss had been made over tiny undeveloped Cuba decades ago.

Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev is no ally of Putin, having previously criticised him on occasion. But Gorbachev now says the US is deliberately provoking Russia and raising tensions.

Even Greece, the cradle of Western democracy, opposes Western sanctions against Russia. Certain European countries leading Russia-bashing have their own undeclared historical and personal baggage.

Poland is historically alienated by Russia, and current European Council President Donald Tusk is Polish. Germany is also prominent in the anti-Russia campaign, and Chancellor Angela Merkel as a former East German may have baggage of her own.

Yet Greece and even Germany are mindful of the unintended consequences of anti-Russia sanctions. Today’s integrated economies can also see those sanctions taking a toll in an already economically challenged Europe.

As the West pours more resources into a confrontation with Russia like before, larger problems from economic decline to terrorism requiring joint global efforts remain insufficiently addressed.

No side wins any war, not even a cold war. The Cold War resulted in the collapse of the Soviet Union and also massive losses in the West through resource wastages – with that part set to continue.

Meanwhile, India signals a growing partnership with the US while quietly cooperating with Russia and China. For Asian giants India and China to rise and rise more decisively, it helps if the developed West declined at the same time.

> Bunn Nagara is a Senior Fellow at the Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) Malaysia.