The Terrifying Reality Of Western Aggression Against Russia

[theo]

http://kingworldnews.com/terrifying-rea ... on-russia/

I've never seen KWN as particularly insightful behind its splashy headlines and lofty predictions, but the below article is truly disappointing. Its basically a badly organized propaganda rant. It is also sad to see Celente basically shilling for RT and Russia. Comparing the small NATO force (3000 troops?) sent to countries bordering Russia to Napoleon's Grand Army is ridiculous. Does he know what a "trip wire" force is? Does he remember that about 40,000 NATO troops kept the Soviet Army out of West Germany for more than two generations?

His only good point is his comparison of US and Russian debt GDP ratios. Unfortunately, the Russian economy is pretty much a one-trick pony, being almost totally reliant of the price oil. Celente claims the price oil is being manipulated to hurt Putin, which may be the case. Still, such allegations need to be supported.

Anyway, I'm curious to read what you guys think.


Eric King: “Gerald, I know you’ve read and listened to the KWN interview with Dr. Paul Craig Roberts — your thoughts on what Dr. Roberts said.”

Gerald Celente: “When it comes to geopolitics and socioeconomic analysis, Dr. Paul Craig Roberts is in a league of his own. He made some remarkable points in his KWN interview that are being overlooked by the mainstream media. He also made the point about how everyone in the mainstream media is just regurgitating the government line. As he said, ‘How can people be so utterly stupid?’


Russia is not going to collapse. Russia is not going to bend and fold because of pressure from the U.S. and NATO. I sent you a famous graph that shows Napoleon’s plans to invade Russia. Napoleon left with 422,000 soldiers….

The French Emperor arrived in Moscow with 100,000 men. But after one of the most famous and brutal winter retreats in history, Napoleon arrived back to where the offensive first began with only 10,000 men — a staggering 98 percent casualty rate (see map below).


Celente continues: "And as we all know, Eric, Hitler launched the greatest military offensive in world history against Russia and was defeated."

Eric King: "Gerald, the U.S. recently announced they were sending 100 tanks to the Baltic States, but here's the problem: Just one World War II battle — the Nazi/Russian battle of Kursk in the summer of 1943 — involved a staggering 2,000,000 men, 6,000 tanks, and 4,000 aircraft. The Russians defeated the Nazis decisively. What does the U.S. think it will accomplish by sending 100 tanks near the Russian border?"

Celente: "Anybody who thinks they are going to take down the Russians is out of their mind. And, Eric, NATO is creating a 'Spearhead Force' of 3,000 to 4,000 troops. It's comical. As you said, that one World War II battle involved 2,000,000 men, 6,000 tanks, and 4,000 aircraft. What do they think 3,000 to 4,000 men with a few hundred tanks and some Humvees are going to do against Russia? Yet the New York Times makes it sound like this spearhead unit is a credible force in a fight against Russia.

As I said, Russia is not going anywhere and they are not going to fold under pressure from the United States or NATO. And as Dr. Roberts makes very clear: There are black swans that Russia can unleash against the West.

Russia’s Debt/GDP is roughly 11 percent. What is the Debt/GDP in the United States? According to the IMF it’s 112 percent. What is the Debt/GDP ratio in Japan? It’s a staggering 230 percent. And Russia is sitting on a lot of reserves of very valuable natural resources.


[i]So Russia is not going to fold because of some pressure coming from the United States or NATO. And the real tragedy of all this is the collapse is the ruble is really hurting the Russian people. This is being done by the West as a method of financial warfare. The latest sanctions against Crimea are just hurting the people of Crimea. These are sociopaths and psychopaths who are doing this.

History shows that 90 percent of the casualties of war are civilians, and 99 percent of these sanctions are hurting civilians. So these are acts of war and this is simply increasing tensions worldwide at a time when global economies are already stressed.

Look at what happened last week: You saw world oil prices shoot up roughly 6 percent in one day. And here we are on Monday and they are back down 3 percent. It’s a market manipulation that is being done by madmen and money junkies. The bottom line is that innocent people are paying a steep price for the sanctions being imposed upon them by governments that have no business in foreign entanglements.” [/i]

[68Camaro]

It's all over the map. Some truth mixed with hyperbole and distractions that aren't important. Putin will keep pushing until he has a much greater buffer between Moscow and Europe. He will use crisis to his advantage and unlike both euro zone and US he is not afraid to act. He will not go head to head with us he (for he would lose) nor will he provoke more than we will tolerate (and he is pushing to find out what he can got away with). He wants to make Europe dependent on his oil and gas as well as afraid not to appease him.

[theo]

I actually get that Putin might want a buffer between Russia and the Western powers or at least more influence with in the region. I just think the best way to get that is through economic development rather than military aggression. If Putin had a dynamic, diverse economy with a prosperous and free middle class it would allow him to exert greater influence over neighboring state while keeping the NATO powers at bay. The reason Putin likely favors using the military is that a free and powerful middle class is difficult to control. The more prosperous people are the more likely they are to resist Government interference. Putin, with his dictatorial tendencies, would never tolerate such dissent.

[Treetop]

I used to love celente. I think he slipped alot the last few years. He started looking for confirmation of his beliefs rather then trying to do his best to be objective and find the trends.

[68Camaro]

I used to love celente. I think he slipped alot the last few years. He started looking for confirmation of his beliefs rather then trying to do his best to be objective and find the trends.

Agree - I respected his articles in the past. Not this one. Doesn't mean I'll stop checking on his views, but it knocks him down some notches.

Craig Paul Roberts is another with a big reputation but with some crazy peripheral views that I can't respect. I've seen the same tendency toward conspiracy theory in many other commentators - even those that I otherwise respect - so you have to put on a filter to sort out what makes sense from what doesn't. No one is perfect and everyone brings bias to the table, and the most difficult thing for a commentator is to start predicting timing; they will inevitably be off in the timing, and then they will tend to start looking for ghosts that may or may actually be there. Back to the basics is always the best thing.