Garland Nixon answers crucial questions
[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS
Print this article
Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP...
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW
[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS
“A nuclear war-fighting strategy for the United States” and said that such “war involves first-strike attacks against ICBMs, SLBMs and strategic bombers” but not against cities, because “It is the threat of counterforce destruction that deters war. However paradoxical it seems, deterrence is related to a war-winning capability. … Victory depends on counterforce destruction. [Such] war involves first-strike attacks against ICBMs, SLBMs and strategic bombers.” He discussed and dismissed the then-dominant view in the U.S. (and still today accepted by Russia), known as “Mutually Assured Destruction” or “MAD,” in which nuclear weapons exist only in order to deter (not to win) a nuclear war (that the destruction would be unacceptably high on each side), as being no longer valid for America, and he assumed that the Soviet Union was instead planning to win not deter a nuclear war. Martel was assuming that the Soviet Union were lying to say they believed in MAD. On those assumptions, he argued explicitly for the U.S. to win a nuclear war, WW III. He said that this was now, or soon would be, possible, because though:
Opponents of MAD [such as he] seek to reverse the axiom that nuclear war is unthinkable, unwinnable, and unsurvivable. They [he] believe that immediate survival and eventual recovery are possible. If an adversary such as the Soviet Union accepts nuclear war as thinkable, winnable, and survivable and plans accordingly, it is more likely to defeat an opponent, such as the United States, who accepts MAD.
He was attributing to the Soviet Union the win-WW-III objective that he was advocating for the U.S. to adopt. His even deeper underlying assumption was that a war, including a nuclear war, is a contest in evilness between two sides, and that America must therefore be even more evil than he was assuming that the Soviet Union already was: that this would inevitably be a contest in hate and in psychopathy — a contest in destructiveness, and nothing more than that — and that the U.S. simply must win it. He didn’t provide any reason why the U.S. must win that type of contest. But, if it’s a win-lose game instead of any sort of even merely possible, and merely partially, win-win game, then one wouldn’t need to: everything then is win-lose — there is no win-win.
America’s rulers have, in fact, been aiming to achieve. Other than in a few small-audience far-outside-the-mainstream newsmedia (such as this one), nobody at all was calling attention to the fact that (and why) NATO is intensely evil and must be abolished immediately. Neoconservatism — advocacy for an all-encompassing U.S. global empire — has virtually 100% control in The West. Western publics have been so surrounded by neoconservative media, they cannot think outside that box, of hatred against ’the enemy’ that America’s billionaires have targeted to ‘regime-change’, whatever that might happen to be at the given moment — but ESPECIALLY now concerning both Russia and China (though capitalism now predominates in both of those U.S.-targeted countries). The evil is, and has always been, imperialism (never really capitalism or communism), but no one in Western media is allowed to call attention to this brute fact, that imperialism is always the enemy, which fact explains international relations today.
That Ph.D thesis from Martel continued:
A Counterforce Strategy
A counterforce strategy consists of direct attacks against the opponents nuclear forces. This means an attack, for the United States, against the entire range of Soviet nuclear forces: ICBMs in their silos, SLBMs in port and at sea, strategic bombers at their fields and in flight, and the command, control and communication (C ) network. The rationale for counterforce is that an enemy cannot fight a nuclear war if its forces are destroyed or crippled.
How does counterforce differ from MAD? For MAD the destruction of counterforce targets is secondary to the destruction of civilian targets. …
A War-Fighting Strategy
In contrast to MAD, with a war-fighting strategy nuclear war is an enterprise that can be fought and won for a well-defined political purpose, but not for retaliation or revenge alone.
In other words, he alleges: MAD is evil, and the only decent way to think about nuclear weapons is the same way that non-nuclear weapons are thought about: VICTORY!!! That’s “not for revenge or retaliation alone.” He implies, but does not say, that MAD is. He says that, unlike the goal (victory) of America’s winning a nuclear war, MAD is NOT “for a well-defined political purpose” — it is ONLY “for revenge or retaliation.”
The professors who approved that thesis were Edward Feit, Guenter Lewy, Stephen Pelz, and Glen Gordon. None of them had a background in the field, but even if they had, the quality of thinking in this thesis was blatantly poor, and thus there can be no excuse for it to be allowed to pass in any Ph.D. program, though it's typical in the social ’sciences’ — not just in America, but worldwide. That’s the condition of the social ‘sciences’ up till our time.
2007, all of the peer-reviewed studies on this subject have concluded that the results would be way beyond what Martel was simply assuming in his 1981 thesis, which entirely ignored that question (other than his mere — and unstated — assumption that the only results from the war would be the local ones in the specific areas where the explosions would be occurring). All of the peer-reviewed scientific analyses since 2007 (none of which are in the social-science fields) have concurred that an historically unprecedented mass starvation would occur worldwide, but especially in the northern hemisphere, and that, for many years, there would be little-to-no food-production anywhere in the world; and, the most recent (in 2022) concluded that 360 million people would die directly from the explosions, and over 5 billion, more than half of the world’s population, would die from starvation during just the first two years. So, that’s the latest scientific estimate of what the effects could ultimately turn out to be from Obama’s 2014 coup in Ukraine that started the war there, as being at least the initial battleground, in what is now clearly the war that is being waged between the Governments of U.S. and Russia.
On 2 March 2022, the neoconservative Loren Thompson, chief of the Lexington Institute, headlined at Chief Executive magazine, “An Expert On Nuclear Strategy Explores The Current Russia Risks”, in which he (a political ‘scientist’) was interviewed on the question of “You’ve spent most of your career, especially the time you spent teaching at Georgetown [University], thinking about the things that nobody likes to think about — the strategy of nuclear war. What’s your sense of where we are right now?” and he answered: “Today, and for the foreseeable future, the United States and Russia will always be only one afternoon away from being destroyed in a nuclear war. We have no effective defenses, and it only takes the weapons of each country about half an hour to reach targets in the other country.”
999 miles or 1,608 km away, Turkey, which is 1,091 miles or 1,796 km away, and Italy, which is 1,355 miles or 2,181 km away. However, other NATO members include the formerly Nazi-allied Finland, which was part of Hitler’s Operation Barbarossa invasion against Russia during 1941-1944, and it is only 507 miles or 815 km away. That would be about 7 minutes of missile-flying-time away; and, so, if Finland now will accept America’s nukes, then The Kremlin would have only 7 minutes in which to confirm that the launch had occurred and to press the button to unleash its thousands of nukes against Finland and all U.S. allies, to retaliate for America’s attempt to behead Russia’s central-command too fast for Russia to be able to protect against it. Obama had intended that America would ultimately place its missiles in Ukraine, whose border is only 300 miles, or five minutes, away from The Kremlin. The U.S. probably won’t win in that battleground, but, if Finland asks and America says yes to U.S. missiles there, that would probably start the nuclear phase of WW III.
the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists says that the world is closer now, than ever before, to nuclear war — closer than even during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.
Print this article
Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP...
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW
[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS
by Amiad Horowitz • People's World
In the combined “Western” zones of occupation, where a focus on anti-communism was becoming the norm, de-Nazification took a back seat. Many former Nazi military leaders, government officials, and scientists were welcomed back into positions of power with open arms, as long as they were able to help fight against communism.
The CIA’s “Operation Paperclip” saw U.S. intelligence and its allies take hundreds of Nazi scientists back to the United States to work on weapons research and development and the budding space program. Arguably the most infamous of these scientists was Wernher Von Braun, a member of the Nazi Party and the SS, who helped develop rockets for Hitler, was brought to the U.S., where he designed missiles for the U.S. military and worked for NASA.
The anti-communist allies that occupied western Germany didn’t only embrace Nazi scientists. Many former high-ranking officers from the Nazi military were brought back to head up the development of a new armed force in postwar Germany. Adolf Heusinger, a leading general in Hitler’s military, eventually became Chairman of the NATO Military Committee. Hans Speidel, another high-ranking German general during WWII, was the first four-star general in the reconstituted army of the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany).
The policy of accepting Nazis into positions of authority was justified by fierce anti-communist propaganda. In fact, some in the U.S. and British leadership didn’t want to de-Nazify Germany at all. General George S. Patton was famous for wanting to ally with the defeated Nazis and invade the Soviet Union after the war. So strong was the hatred of communists and so real was the fear that capitalism might be replaced worldwide with socialism that the leaders of the U.S. and allied capitalist governments were happy to work with the perpetrators of the most mechanized genocide in human history.
Fast forward to today and it’s clear that the world is witnessing a new round of “Nazi rehabilitation.” While previously such rehabilitation was fueled by fears of the defeat of capitalism, this time the fear is that the U.S. will lose its position as world hegemon.
The current round of Nazi rehabilitation began with the Azov Battalion and other Ukrainian fascist groups who are currently filling the role of foot soldiers in the United States’ proxy war against Russia in Ukraine.
Just a few years ago, the Azov Battalion was considered by the FBI to be the center of the international neo-Nazi movement, because right-wing extremists from around the world would travel to Ukraine to get military training from the group.
The mainstream corporate U.S. media regularly featured stories about the fascist ideology and brutal military tactics of Azov and allied groups. In 2019, for instance, Time magazine did a major feature on the “white supremacist militias” active in Ukraine. Even in the first few weeks after Russia invaded Ukraine, NBC News was still saying “Ukraine’s Nazi problem is real.”
However, once Russian troops crossed the Ukrainian border, with Vladimir Putin saying that U.S.-led NATO expansion threatened Russian security, the Azov Battalion was suddenly recast as heroic resistance fighters, much like Braun and Heusinger over half-a-century ago.
On March 16, 2023, many in Latvia—a NATO and EU member state—celebrated the memory of those Latvians that joined in to fight alongside the Nazis during WWII and joined the foreign division of the SS. These “heroes” helped exterminate Jews, Roma, the disabled, gay people, communists, and the others who were on Hitler’s hitlist. These accomplices to genocide are today being commemorated as national patriots.
There are similar trends in other eastern European countries.
In Poland, there are laws that silence anyone who speaks about the large number of Polish people who collaborated with the occupying Nazi regime between 1939-45. The so-called “Holocaust Law” penalizes anyone who publicly speaks or publishes any written document that mentions any of the well-established historical evidence that many Polish citizens worked with the Nazis during WWII.
When this law was first passed in 2018, the Israeli government protested it, leading to a diplomatic rift between the two countries. However, since Israel recently began its own trend of rehabilitating Nazis and openly welcomed Azov Battalion members into the country, the Netanyahu government accepts the Polish position and will follow the Polish curriculum on future educational trips to Poland for Israeli youth.
Mark Twain once said, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it does often rhyme,” and unfortunately we are witnessing that phenomena once again. At the start of the Cold War, Nazis were embraced by the capitalist world in order to aid their confrontation against the USSR and the socialist bloc.
Today, at the start of Cold War 2.0, literal Nazis are once again being welcomed as soldiers for the so-called “liberal” world order to aid in the fight to preserve the United States’ hegemonic power in Europe and beyond.
Notes
(1) While volunteering as a nurse, she cared for wounded Red Army soldiers, and assisted them in escaping the then Nazi-occupied Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic. For this, she and 11 other communists of the anti-fascist underground were imprisoned, tortured, and when the teenagers refused to reveal any secrets, publicly executed by the German Wehrmacht.[4]
The German Nazi invaders decided on a public hanging to make an example of Bruskina, along with two other members of the resistance, 16-year-old Volodia Shcherbatsevich and World War I veteran Kiril Trus. Before being hanged, she was paraded through the streets with a placard around her neck which read, in both German and Russian: "We are partisans and have shot at German troops", the latter had of course never actually occurred, Masha having been a nurse. Members of the resistance were routinely made to wear similar signs whether or not they had actually shot at German troops as a display of power and authority by the Nazi invaders, theoretically demonstrating their total control of the occupied nation and its peoples.
She and her two comrades were hanged in public on Sunday, October 26, 1941, in front of Minsk Kristall, a yeast brewery and distillery plant on Nizhne-Lyahovskaya Street (15 Oktyabrskaya Street today). The German Nazi authorities would not allow the victims to be cut down and buried for three days, during which time the bodies were displayed publicly as a warning to other anti-fascists, Jews and Communists.[7]
A witness of the execution said: When they put her on the stool, the girl turned her face toward the fence. The executioners wanted her to stand with her face to the crowd, but she turned away and that was that. No matter how much they pushed her and tried to turn her, she remained standing with her back to the crowd. Only then did they kick away the stool from under her.
—PYOTR PAVLOVICH BORISENKO
Olga Shcherbatsevich, the mother of executed 16-year old activist Volodia Shcherbatsevich, was hanged the same day along with 10 other members of the Soviet anti-fascist resistance in front of what is now the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus.[8]SOURCE: WIKIPEDIA: MASHA BRUSKINA
Print this article
Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP...
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW
[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS
!function(r,u,m,b,l,e){r._Rumble=b,r[b]||(r[b]=function(){(r[b]._=r[b]._||[]).push(arguments);if(r[b]._.length==1){l=u.createElement(m),e=u.getElementsByTagName(m)[0],l.async=1,l.src="https://rumble.com/embedJS/u4"+(arguments[1].video?'.'+arguments[1].video:'')+"/?url="+encodeURIComponent(location.href)+"&args="+encodeURIComponent(JSON.stringify([].slice.apply(arguments))),e.parentNode.insertBefore(l,e)}})}(window, document, "script", "Rumble");
Rumble("play", {"video":"v2d6rno","div":"rumble_v2d6rno"});
Streamed on: Apr 1, 2023 12:00 pm EDT
About Regis Tremblay
Regis is an American from the state of Maine who has been living in Russia for nearly four years. He is a veteran filmmaker who has led a life of adventure and worn many different hats.
He spent 30 years in a religious order and 14 years as a Catholic priest. He taught high school journalism in Tucson, Arizona, which, he says, planted some seeds, such as his love of story-telling and the many films he eventually produced. While in Arizona, he raised a family, ran a successful consulting company, and later, started a nonprofit. After that, he returned to Maine where he worked as a radio show host.
Regis has traveled around the world to make documentaries like “The Ghosts of Jeju,” which he filmed in South Korea in 2012. Jeju is an eye-opening documentary about an island where the United States opened a naval base, causing great harm to the local ecosystem and indigenous people of Jeju, whose protests fell upon deaf ears.
After filming Jeju, Regis traveled to Russia to finish producing “Thirty Seconds to Midnight,” a film about the growing threat of a nuclear confrontation between the United States and Russia.
These experiences were life-changing for Regis, who in 2020 moved to Yalta, Russia, to begin a new life.
Unfortunately, dozens of his interviews and videos have been censored by the tech giant YouTube which deleted his channel. Since then, Regis has made his films and interviews available on other platforms.
You can watch “The Ghosts of Jeju” here.
Here is “Thirty Seconds to Midnight.”
Another of Regis’ films, “Who Are These Russians and Why Do We Hate Them,” can be seen here.
And a short film that Regis made during his first trip to Russia in 2016, “Je Suis Russia,” can be seen here.
Regis is also the founder of “Friends of Crimea, USA,” an international association that develops intercultural communication, contacts and cooperation with organizations around the world that share the association’s goals. The Association meets regularly to assess the political, economic and cultural developments around the Republic of Crimea and explore case studies. A central aim of the Association is to draw academics, activists, artists, journalists, jurists, public policymakers, and other colleagues into activities.
You can read more about Regis Tremblay and find many of his videos and interviews on his website.
Deborah Armstrong currently writes about geopolitics with an emphasis on Russia. She previously worked in local TV news in the United States where she won two regional Emmy Awards. In the early 1990’s, Deborah lived in the Soviet Union during its final days and worked as a television consultant at Leningrad Television. She has a regular column at substack.com.
Print this article
Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP...
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW
[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS
Georgia Protests: US Seeks to Open 2nd Front Against RussiaMar 9, 2023
Protests in Georgia consist of US-backed opposition groups (literally waving US and EU flags) attempting to block a bill to increase transparency behind political groups to reduce foreign interference. - The US has already once overthrown Georgia’s government in 2003, according to the London Guardian. By 2008 after flooding Georgia with weapons and training its military, Georgia attacked Russia, according to a [much delayed] EU investigation. The US seeks to stir up trouble in Georgia again to “extend” Russia as explained in detail by the RAND Corporation’s 2019 paper, “Extending Russia.” - The US has pressured other nations attempting to pass bills to protect against foreign interference including recently Thailand. References: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe... Transparency International - Who Supports Us: https://www.transparency.org/en/the-o... |
New Atlas LIVE: Ukraine, Georgia, Nord Stream, US-China + More...
|
Georgias Incoming Color Revolution, US Blames Ukraine Oligarch for NS2 Blast, Guatemala ElectionsStreamed live on Mar 9, 2023
Georgia’s Incoming Color Revolution, US Blames Ukraine Oligarch for NS2 Blast, Guatemala Elections What is Really Going on w/ Lula, Truth About Human Rights Nicaragua Camila Escalante & Teri Mattso (Streamed live 86 minutes ago) |
Print this article
Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP…
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW
[/su_spoiler]
Don’t forget to sign up for our FREE bulletin. Get The Greanville Post in your mailbox every few days.
[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License