Economist Michael Hudson was in on the formation of US policy when he was working for Herman Kahn at the Hudson Institute. He provides a fascinating account that seems to support Doctorow.
Incidentally, Hudson also worked as a Wall Street economist back then. He is 85 now, a couple of months older than I am. He reports from experience on the economic dimension of US policy, in particular, foreign policy through international economic institutions. See, for instance, his book Superimperialism.
Historian Carroll Quigley, who was permitted inside, also reported on the intentions and method of the financial elite at gaining world dominance through finance.
"The powers of financial capitalism had (a) far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank... sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1966, VII, page 324.
Carroll Quigley (1910-1977) was Professor of History at Georgetown University, member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), and mentor to Bill Clinton.
This quote begins a section of the chapter on the BIS. Tragedy and Hope and other Quigley works are available at his site.
Regarding the Doctorow dispute, I think that there are overlapping interests at work and so looking for a single efficient cause is too narrow an approach. I would say that Doctorow is essentially correct about Isreal being a US proxy, and it seems that this is how the US deep state views it. However, Johnson also appears to be correct to a degree with his Rotweiler metaphor. Generally, positing a single cause or a single independent variable is too narrow. I am qualifying my assertions here since we can only observe events from the outside, and as Hudson's account shows, there is a lot we don't know that happens behind the curtain.
Thank you for this informative comment. I had watched the Hudson-Wolff video. I am always amazed by these guys, especially Hudson, who informs my last "Special Article" (Part 2）on hegemony. I am not sure how to characterize "financial capitalism" from a social -anthropological perspective. What are its goals? In any case, a kind of perverse social infantilism -- a hoarding behavior.
The two great economic/financial forces underpinning capitalism are production and finance. Marx characterized this as M-C-M' by which meant money (investment)-commodity (production-distribution-consumption). The basis of capitalism is investment and profit extraction. Marx observed that profit is mostly economic rent, that is, an amount in excess of whtat is needed to bring the commodity to market.
Capitalism is about rent extraction. through production (rent extraction from wages by paying workers less than they are actually worth and interest on debt, which is passive (unearned) income.
So the point of production is extraction of surplus value through worker exploitation and the point of finance is rent extraction chiefly through debt (compound interest).,
which is the priveledge of ownership of the means of production is rent from profit more money (profit as return on investment). And the privildege of ownership of money as the means of investment is interest as debt.
In a healthy captialistic economy production and finance are in balance. If finance is too low, then growth suffers and capitalism is about growth since there is too much saving and not enough investment in replacement of capital goods and innovation.
If finance is dominant over production, then growth suffers because the economy is crushed by debt. This is the meaning of financialization. According to Hudson, the problem is private debt as capitalism has turned away from income based on production to passive income based on rent extraction through debt. It's called "debt slavery." The objective of finance capital now is to make everyone a debt slave. The result is economic stagnation and rising inequality. As Hudson observes, history shows that this unsustainable and what can't be paid back won't be.
"You won't own anything and be happy." (Schwab) The idea is that we (owners) will rent you (workers) everything."
The other factor opeartive at the heart of capitalism has been economic liberalism (free trade), neo-imperialism, and neocolonialism, which are the carry over of late feudalism and rise of early capitalism. Hudson goes into this in Super Imperialism, for example.
This overlaps with financialization in that neoliberalism, neo-imperialism, and neocolonism have replace the actual plundering with debt slavery imposed on the nations of the Global South as the source of resources.
From a social -anthropological perspective, all this is grounded in dominance as an evolutionary trait. It is deeply engrained and nearly impossible to surmount when the selection process in so-called democratic countires favors the "dark triad" of personality traits — narcissism, Machiavenianism, and psychopathy.
That's it in a nutshell.
"I call it more mystical: "They are THE Enemy of Humanity. They are EVIL Incarnate."."
"the intentions and method of the financial elite at gaining world dominance through finance."
I call it more mystical: "They are THE Enemy of Humanity. They are EVIL Incarnate.".
Because they use ages old methods to cache and cage those rich ones who in essence are ALL very lonely and in need of love... and as any Narcissist or Psychopath knows, easily trapped in blackmail.
The interesting thing is that the "masters of the universe" gave Prof. Quigley a ringside seat on all this. They were not ashamed of the world knowing that that they were the only ones or at least the most qualified to manage the future of humanity.
This is still the attitude of the Davos crowd angling for inter-agency as a replacement for the nation state and thereby democratic republics. While the plutocracies control nation states, the control is not absolute owing to elections and the emergence of maverics and rogues (like Trump) through the electoral process.
The unelected agencies of the EU like the European Commission have already largely replaced traditional liberal bourgeois democracy in Europe. Moreover, by adopting the euro EZ nation states have transferred monetary sovereignty to the ECB (European central bank), which issues the EZ currency and sets monetary policy.
One problem with plutocratic elites in this century is their belief that they,personally, are immune to the consequences of their actions. Proxy wars are games for them.
There is a strategy behind this. The idea is that hot wars are expensive in terms of own side's life, which doesn't go down well in liberal democracies so there is political risk in using one's own troops.
But superior to hot proxy wars are threats of force, then economic warfare if that doesn't work. This is what the US/UK tried initially with Russia and failed.
The next step is proxy war, which was adopted in full force when the US/UK told Z not to sign the initialed agreement to settle. When NATO chose to back a full-on proxy war to defeat Russia strategically, Scott Ritter correctly said, "This is a game changer."
Now the proxy war is lost and the options are either declare victory and fold the tents, or else escalate. As Martyanov observes, the only viable option is to go to terrorism. This appears to be the next step unfolding.
Regardless of who is top dog, USUK & Israel are enmeshed. To quote Killary, "At this point, what difference does it make?"
Their bad karma will take us all down. Live by the nukes. Die by the nukes.
I am suspicious of *all* the "retired" 3-letter stackers/analysts, including Mark Wauck, who banned me over a mild disagreement, without warning. Was I over the target? On quick research I discovered his *bil* sold state secrets to Russia. Wauck was 1st to notify the FBI of suspicions. Now Wauck comes out pro-Russia. Really?!?
Johnson has his own credibility problems. He is "good friends" with Stephen Bryen, a treasonous traitor who sold state secrets iirc to Israel & was "punished" by being fired & re-hired into a position with greater access to state secrets. And now is using substack to profit off the slaughter of innocents.
I no longer subscribe to Johnson, but do read his posts. I don't do podcasts so happily missed the derisive laughter. Who knows, maybe it was intended to misdirect if you were flying too close to the target. Or maybe he took it personally Johnson was initially seriously pro-Israel, spouting the party line. His readers, myself included, pushed back hard with piles of verified facts. He was forced to change his tune to maintain believability.
Just do your thing, Julian. Don't waste precious time over them. There will be differences of opinion.
I have characterized Johnson as part of the MSAM (Main Stream Alt Media) to which a lot of people are flocking as a result of the inadequacy of the MSM. I have noticed occasionally errors and what seems to me to be sloppy analysis--but also some very good stuff. I sense that Johnson doesn't have time to really research. He relies on old friends, who may or may not know what they are talking about, but circulating the gossip that passes for information in
governmental agency. Or, he quotes Simplicius who also has some good stuff but produces deluges of gossip culled from Twitter and Telegram that can be misleading. Johnson doesn't have time because most of what he does his chatter with his buds --the Judge, MacGregor, etc. As an analyst he is not in the same league as Hudson, or Alastair Crooke or Cooke or Alex & Piquet at Black Mountain or Schryver or the guys at the Grayzone even the ever irascible, of the shrill Andrei M. He is still worth following, however.
... Meanwhile in the East-European front... (Get your Focus back !!)
The Breakthrough in the (Mainly South- as yet) Donbass-front is accelerating.
When Siversk has fallen, as it wil soon, Slavyansk and finally Kramatorsk will follow.
Kursk is now a meat grinding Trap for Kiev-NAZI's & NATO-'Volunteers' and when it collapses, Russia will go for a bufferzone towards Sumi.
South & Centre are now advancing towards Zaporizhia, like i said they will in stead of going to Kiev, crossing the water reservoir that is dry and will freeze in Winter.
In Rammstein the NATO-plan is to allow long-range Missiles shooting deep into Russia.
So they need many many of those missiles. On safe places.
The location where NATO is bringing those is South of Kherson: Odessa and the Black Sea coast.
The Target will be Crimea and controle of the sea and the Aerospace above it.
So Russia is already sinking Bulk carrier shipping of those missiles towards Rumania, from where they are loaded on trains that go to Moldova, where they cross the border into Ukraine, West of Odessa.
Russia is recently Iskandring + Kinzhalling Odessa and other Black Sea port locations and ofc railways and Stations.
Shortly Russia patrols with Stealthy SU57 and long range MIG31 over Crimea, from where they shoot down F16s in the area of Odessa.
The supply line through Poland towards Kiev is not used except for personnel.
The Russian ground offensive westward will be:
1. Zaporizhia and maybe Dnipro, where they will cross the Dnieper and create bridges.
2a. Crossing Dnieper South, near Kherson going to Mikolaiv and North-East to Zaporizhia to protect the ZNPP.
2b. After success on 1, and 2a, a fast march will go to Transnistria to connect with the force that landed South of Odessa (3.) It will disconnect the main part left of Ukraine from its main supply-line and the sea, so it will be land-bound.
3. Possible a sea and air-landing South of Odessa to connect to Transnistria and completely cut off Odessa and the NATO-Supply-line.
And meanwhile the Russian Navy and Aero-force will block the bulk supply over sea including use of submarines.
If that scenario is played many factors and "surprises" can occur: Will Moldova allow NATO armies to enter ? France will probably NOT want to do that any more.
Will Romania allow F16s to fly over Ukraine to attack Russian army ? etc.
Strategic:
When Russia has taken Odessa (or even surrounded it): Aerospace and the whole Black Sea are Russian controlled. Supplying a force in Ukraine will have to be done through EU (Too slow and difficult) or the Baltics, what could start a local tactical Nuke war. The Arctic is in Russia's control.
Europe wil not accept long range missiles that can reach Russia. it will cause revolutions.
Trade using Sea will be stopped. The railways in Poland en Ukraine have different track widths, so goods have to be unloaded and loaded again. But Russia produces enough food to provide BRICS countries with it.
"From my point of view, the US government is factionalized. Not so much “disorganized” as factional.
You have a collapsing state - the US— prey to its own delusions and irrationality. Schizophrenic. "
Sums up the reality nicely. TY
I like Doctorow, he's logical, has integrity, is honest and self-reflective. Not a raging ego like Larry and so many others found everywhere today - MSM and alt media pundits. The Paranoid Schizophrenia extends far beyond the "deep state" and the war criminal psychopaths in Israel and Ukraine.
I think both sides in this argument are right to a degree. Doctorow took the heat for being the first to expose the quite obvious fact that the US actively supports the genocide. Many critics in the US would really like to believe US support is accidental, a symptom of political incoherence rather than by active design. It's more palatable to believe that an external force - the Zionists - are driving the agenda as it means there is a solution. It's harder to face that your own country, own government actively seeks to exterminate a people and start a nuclear war. Wilkerson recognised the underlying logic and put it in clearer terms - a fanatical section of the government (maybe even a majority) are actively pushing for more war even while another faction (ineffectively) calls for peace. The US government is mad, totally insane and delusional despite some "good eggs". The war will only end when those warmongers are turned to radioactive ash.
I think the AIPAC donations are designed to appear as Israeli advocacy and our political recipients believe this to a degree. But these donations have a hidden side in that Israel does the bidding of those funding AIPAC or else.
Biden spoke a semi-truth about Israel thirty years ago, "If Israel did not exist, we would have to create it." We do sustain Israel and that sustenance has a price.
I suspect that the truth of the matter is that there has long been an alliance between the Deep States within Israel & the US. Israel was created by the UK & US (with the help of the Nazis, acting on their behalf) as a “Jewish Ulster” to protect their strategic interests (especially the Mosul-Haifa pipeline), Bibi is financed by the US while there are those in Mossad who claim it is merely a branch of the CIA. The power and money of the Zionist lobby can be partly explained by this. The US Military Industrial Complex and the Oil Lobby benefit from the Israel instigated wars, which have been ongoing for decades (e.g. the Iraq War of 2003). As was demonstrated during the Covid lockdowns and mass jabbing: Israelis & Jews can be readily sacrificed if it suits the Deep State. The same applies to the wars against the Palestinians. Israeli blood is cheap and can be readily shed…
Regarding the Doctorow kerfuffle—he may be right. At the core is: does the US do evil because it has been captured by the evil Zionists, or does it do evil because it is America; that is, because its systemic structure dictates it do evil. Well of course all those flag waving commentators are going to be upset by the later accusation. It is interesting that Nasrallah stated over and over that the mainspring of action is the US, not Israel. He has point blank stated this again and again. Not that the US is simply the one with the power, but that the US is the one with the plan--the one who calls the shots. It is not manipulated by Israel, it uses Israel for its purposes. His formulation was--US oil, the MIC and Christian Zionists call the shots. I basically agree with him, except the Evangelicals are not decision makers but simply side show clowns. Yes, the US power structure has is fractured, but the very top, the banks and major corporations--Wall Street, Energy, big Ag and the MIC-- the actual shot callers are not. They do what protects their interest and makes money. In the end, it's not hatred, or race--it's just business. What The Empire cannot defeat, it destroys. DPRK, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq. Huge embarrassing losses for the US right? No they were left smoking ruins--and the US marched on. That's how Empire works. The prime directive is divide and rule--or destroy. So what happens if there is a general war in the Middle East? Iran and Israel are both destroyed. Who cares? Israel is expendable-- like Ukraine, like Vietnam, like any other patsy proxy. A prime member of the China, Russia, Iran axis is set back a half century. The world's oil supplies are disrupted--the #1 customer being China. (No Russia can't simply pick up the slack) The US is self sufficient in oil and food. So who suffers and who benefits? Who makes money? We're talking about capitalism, after all. The Anglo-American Empire has ruled the world for centuries. This is another episode in that rule. It's nothing particularly surprising or extraordinary. They've done this many times before--just not on TV. I hope their game is finally up. I hope the correlation of forces, with the rise of China, is finally such that they are overpowered by history and economics. But what's happening for the actual decision makers is not crazy, or insane--it's just business.
"That's how Empire works. The prime directive is divide and rule--or destroy. So what happens if there is a general war in the Middle East? Iran and Israel are both destroyed. Who cares? Israel is expendable-- like Ukraine, like Vietnam, like any other patsy proxy. A prime member of the China, Russia, Iran axis is set back a half century. The world's oil supplies are disrupted--the #1 customer being China. (No Russia can't simply pick up the slack)" YUP!
May I ask a bit of a loaded question? Does a broader war in Europe hurt or help the Global American Empire? Zooming out very big picture. US supremacy in the 20th Century was based on two world wars in Europe and one in East Asia that left much of the world a ruin, and USA was 'last man standing'. Some certain people have been planning for a 'new American Century'. Would additional wars in Europe or East Asia increase America's hegemonic power, or decrease it? I don't know, but it may be worth thinking about...
Good observation, for sure. Believe the US's goal has been to prevent the integration of Europe with Russia's energy and China's growing economy. Thus far they have been very successful. Believe that was a big reason, perhaps the primary reason, why they initiated the Ukraine war. War and fear-mongering are essential to achieving this goal. The Chinese market for European goods and cheap Russian energy are great temptations for Europe. The US has to keep the pot boiling. But it needs to keep the war contained to Europe. It would be great to get the whole world fighting while keeping the American heartland secure. As you point out, that's how the US achieved its dominance. The problem the US faces is how to do that without getting sucked in. Their actions in Europe and the Middle East are increasingly reckless.
Could you spell out Micimatt again for us, please? I know that it’s military-industrial complex, and then the Academy is in there somewhere, and maybe the media?
I get >100 new followers on Twitter (X) each week, but lose almost as much without me being able to find out who and why. One time i found a cluster of some 100's of people following @0ccupySchagen (notice the number zero in stead of the Capital O) One of my friends who doesn't use Twitter often, but who looks once in a while noticed that i didn't send Tweets any more, so he sent me an email to see whether i was still alive... He certainly did not alter his following me into that false account, so he was changed from me by SOMEONE to the false account, but after i noticed it to Twitter, that false account (it had ever sent 2 or 3 tweets...) disappeared. Secret powers...
OK.
Is the Zionist occupation force in Palestine a proxy of the United States ??
NO !
The Zionist Gang in Palestine is a Proxy. But not of the US of A.
The US of A, with The Neocons, the Senators and the Congress people is also a Proxy.
The Power is not in Countries any more.
There was a time that missiles shooting at the Moon or Mars could only be done by Countries (the BIG ones).
There are hidden structures among the "Western" elites which are more powerful than NATO.
They rule the DeepState(s) and they rule Netanyahu, the elite in the UK (both Conservatives and Labour) and in the EU.
They are THE Enemy of Humanity. They are EVIL Incarnate.
And we need to start fighting them, NOT each other. As BRICS is trying to do.
Always follow someone back who reacts on your tweets, find accounts you want to follow.
Your timeline will start to speed up, make "lists" on subjects (Ukraine, West-Asia, BRICS, etc. regularly look at the important lists, which shows all current posts about that subject.
When you are scanning your X-sources don't forget to RT interesting posts.
Use the "X" search function to find interesting posts.
That's the way i got many Palestine followers after Oct 7...
And don't forget to use Pictures / Images...
Sander
PS. An account that harasses you or sounds like it is wanting to report you ? BLOCK !!
Stop the infighting. I don't care. I am still going to read Gibert and Larry. If they didn't have different opinions i would only have to read one of them.
Economist Michael Hudson was in on the formation of US policy when he was working for Herman Kahn at the Hudson Institute. He provides a fascinating account that seems to support Doctorow.
https://scheerpost.com/2024/10/08/michael-hudson-and-richard-wolff-middle-east-exploding-ukraine-crumbling-us-take-action/
Incidentally, Hudson also worked as a Wall Street economist back then. He is 85 now, a couple of months older than I am. He reports from experience on the economic dimension of US policy, in particular, foreign policy through international economic institutions. See, for instance, his book Superimperialism.
Historian Carroll Quigley, who was permitted inside, also reported on the intentions and method of the financial elite at gaining world dominance through finance.
"The powers of financial capitalism had (a) far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank... sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1966, VII, page 324.
Carroll Quigley (1910-1977) was Professor of History at Georgetown University, member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), and mentor to Bill Clinton.
This quote begins a section of the chapter on the BIS. Tragedy and Hope and other Quigley works are available at his site.
http://www.carrollquigley.net
Regarding the Doctorow dispute, I think that there are overlapping interests at work and so looking for a single efficient cause is too narrow an approach. I would say that Doctorow is essentially correct about Isreal being a US proxy, and it seems that this is how the US deep state views it. However, Johnson also appears to be correct to a degree with his Rotweiler metaphor. Generally, positing a single cause or a single independent variable is too narrow. I am qualifying my assertions here since we can only observe events from the outside, and as Hudson's account shows, there is a lot we don't know that happens behind the curtain.
Thank you for this informative comment. I had watched the Hudson-Wolff video. I am always amazed by these guys, especially Hudson, who informs my last "Special Article" (Part 2）on hegemony. I am not sure how to characterize "financial capitalism" from a social -anthropological perspective. What are its goals? In any case, a kind of perverse social infantilism -- a hoarding behavior.
The two great economic/financial forces underpinning capitalism are production and finance. Marx characterized this as M-C-M' by which meant money (investment)-commodity (production-distribution-consumption). The basis of capitalism is investment and profit extraction. Marx observed that profit is mostly economic rent, that is, an amount in excess of whtat is needed to bring the commodity to market.
Capitalism is about rent extraction. through production (rent extraction from wages by paying workers less than they are actually worth and interest on debt, which is passive (unearned) income.
So the point of production is extraction of surplus value through worker exploitation and the point of finance is rent extraction chiefly through debt (compound interest).,
which is the priveledge of ownership of the means of production is rent from profit more money (profit as return on investment). And the privildege of ownership of money as the means of investment is interest as debt.
In a healthy captialistic economy production and finance are in balance. If finance is too low, then growth suffers and capitalism is about growth since there is too much saving and not enough investment in replacement of capital goods and innovation.
If finance is dominant over production, then growth suffers because the economy is crushed by debt. This is the meaning of financialization. According to Hudson, the problem is private debt as capitalism has turned away from income based on production to passive income based on rent extraction through debt. It's called "debt slavery." The objective of finance capital now is to make everyone a debt slave. The result is economic stagnation and rising inequality. As Hudson observes, history shows that this unsustainable and what can't be paid back won't be.
"You won't own anything and be happy." (Schwab) The idea is that we (owners) will rent you (workers) everything."
The other factor opeartive at the heart of capitalism has been economic liberalism (free trade), neo-imperialism, and neocolonialism, which are the carry over of late feudalism and rise of early capitalism. Hudson goes into this in Super Imperialism, for example.
This overlaps with financialization in that neoliberalism, neo-imperialism, and neocolonism have replace the actual plundering with debt slavery imposed on the nations of the Global South as the source of resources.
From a social -anthropological perspective, all this is grounded in dominance as an evolutionary trait. It is deeply engrained and nearly impossible to surmount when the selection process in so-called democratic countires favors the "dark triad" of personality traits — narcissism, Machiavenianism, and psychopathy.
That's it in a nutshell.
"I call it more mystical: "They are THE Enemy of Humanity. They are EVIL Incarnate."."
That's what is looks like.
Succinct, and to the point. Sad that not 1 person in 10,000 is aware of the basic truth contained in this comment.
Thank you.
"the intentions and method of the financial elite at gaining world dominance through finance."
I call it more mystical: "They are THE Enemy of Humanity. They are EVIL Incarnate.".
Because they use ages old methods to cache and cage those rich ones who in essence are ALL very lonely and in need of love... and as any Narcissist or Psychopath knows, easily trapped in blackmail.
Sander
I'll go with that. More succinct and to the point than my previous comment!
The interesting thing is that the "masters of the universe" gave Prof. Quigley a ringside seat on all this. They were not ashamed of the world knowing that that they were the only ones or at least the most qualified to manage the future of humanity.
This is still the attitude of the Davos crowd angling for inter-agency as a replacement for the nation state and thereby democratic republics. While the plutocracies control nation states, the control is not absolute owing to elections and the emergence of maverics and rogues (like Trump) through the electoral process.
The unelected agencies of the EU like the European Commission have already largely replaced traditional liberal bourgeois democracy in Europe. Moreover, by adopting the euro EZ nation states have transferred monetary sovereignty to the ECB (European central bank), which issues the EZ currency and sets monetary policy.
One problem with plutocratic elites in this century is their belief that they,personally, are immune to the consequences of their actions. Proxy wars are games for them.
There is a strategy behind this. The idea is that hot wars are expensive in terms of own side's life, which doesn't go down well in liberal democracies so there is political risk in using one's own troops.
But superior to hot proxy wars are threats of force, then economic warfare if that doesn't work. This is what the US/UK tried initially with Russia and failed.
The next step is proxy war, which was adopted in full force when the US/UK told Z not to sign the initialed agreement to settle. When NATO chose to back a full-on proxy war to defeat Russia strategically, Scott Ritter correctly said, "This is a game changer."
Now the proxy war is lost and the options are either declare victory and fold the tents, or else escalate. As Martyanov observes, the only viable option is to go to terrorism. This appears to be the next step unfolding.
Regardless of who is top dog, USUK & Israel are enmeshed. To quote Killary, "At this point, what difference does it make?"
Their bad karma will take us all down. Live by the nukes. Die by the nukes.
I am suspicious of *all* the "retired" 3-letter stackers/analysts, including Mark Wauck, who banned me over a mild disagreement, without warning. Was I over the target? On quick research I discovered his *bil* sold state secrets to Russia. Wauck was 1st to notify the FBI of suspicions. Now Wauck comes out pro-Russia. Really?!?
Johnson has his own credibility problems. He is "good friends" with Stephen Bryen, a treasonous traitor who sold state secrets iirc to Israel & was "punished" by being fired & re-hired into a position with greater access to state secrets. And now is using substack to profit off the slaughter of innocents.
I no longer subscribe to Johnson, but do read his posts. I don't do podcasts so happily missed the derisive laughter. Who knows, maybe it was intended to misdirect if you were flying too close to the target. Or maybe he took it personally Johnson was initially seriously pro-Israel, spouting the party line. His readers, myself included, pushed back hard with piles of verified facts. He was forced to change his tune to maintain believability.
Just do your thing, Julian. Don't waste precious time over them. There will be differences of opinion.
I have characterized Johnson as part of the MSAM (Main Stream Alt Media) to which a lot of people are flocking as a result of the inadequacy of the MSM. I have noticed occasionally errors and what seems to me to be sloppy analysis--but also some very good stuff. I sense that Johnson doesn't have time to really research. He relies on old friends, who may or may not know what they are talking about, but circulating the gossip that passes for information in
governmental agency. Or, he quotes Simplicius who also has some good stuff but produces deluges of gossip culled from Twitter and Telegram that can be misleading. Johnson doesn't have time because most of what he does his chatter with his buds --the Judge, MacGregor, etc. As an analyst he is not in the same league as Hudson, or Alastair Crooke or Cooke or Alex & Piquet at Black Mountain or Schryver or the guys at the Grayzone even the ever irascible, of the shrill Andrei M. He is still worth following, however.
... Meanwhile in the East-European front... (Get your Focus back !!)
The Breakthrough in the (Mainly South- as yet) Donbass-front is accelerating.
When Siversk has fallen, as it wil soon, Slavyansk and finally Kramatorsk will follow.
Kursk is now a meat grinding Trap for Kiev-NAZI's & NATO-'Volunteers' and when it collapses, Russia will go for a bufferzone towards Sumi.
South & Centre are now advancing towards Zaporizhia, like i said they will in stead of going to Kiev, crossing the water reservoir that is dry and will freeze in Winter.
In Rammstein the NATO-plan is to allow long-range Missiles shooting deep into Russia.
So they need many many of those missiles. On safe places.
The location where NATO is bringing those is South of Kherson: Odessa and the Black Sea coast.
The Target will be Crimea and controle of the sea and the Aerospace above it.
So Russia is already sinking Bulk carrier shipping of those missiles towards Rumania, from where they are loaded on trains that go to Moldova, where they cross the border into Ukraine, West of Odessa.
Russia is recently Iskandring + Kinzhalling Odessa and other Black Sea port locations and ofc railways and Stations.
Shortly Russia patrols with Stealthy SU57 and long range MIG31 over Crimea, from where they shoot down F16s in the area of Odessa.
The supply line through Poland towards Kiev is not used except for personnel.
The Russian ground offensive westward will be:
1. Zaporizhia and maybe Dnipro, where they will cross the Dnieper and create bridges.
2a. Crossing Dnieper South, near Kherson going to Mikolaiv and North-East to Zaporizhia to protect the ZNPP.
2b. After success on 1, and 2a, a fast march will go to Transnistria to connect with the force that landed South of Odessa (3.) It will disconnect the main part left of Ukraine from its main supply-line and the sea, so it will be land-bound.
3. Possible a sea and air-landing South of Odessa to connect to Transnistria and completely cut off Odessa and the NATO-Supply-line.
And meanwhile the Russian Navy and Aero-force will block the bulk supply over sea including use of submarines.
If that scenario is played many factors and "surprises" can occur: Will Moldova allow NATO armies to enter ? France will probably NOT want to do that any more.
Will Romania allow F16s to fly over Ukraine to attack Russian army ? etc.
Strategic:
When Russia has taken Odessa (or even surrounded it): Aerospace and the whole Black Sea are Russian controlled. Supplying a force in Ukraine will have to be done through EU (Too slow and difficult) or the Baltics, what could start a local tactical Nuke war. The Arctic is in Russia's control.
Europe wil not accept long range missiles that can reach Russia. it will cause revolutions.
Trade using Sea will be stopped. The railways in Poland en Ukraine have different track widths, so goods have to be unloaded and loaded again. But Russia produces enough food to provide BRICS countries with it.
OK.
Back to work.
Sander.
For Paul Warmington (and others):
"X"->https://x.com/OccupySchagen/status/1844963692674191505
With link to Alexander Mercouris 12 minutes on above subject.
Sander
"From my point of view, the US government is factionalized. Not so much “disorganized” as factional.
You have a collapsing state - the US— prey to its own delusions and irrationality. Schizophrenic. "
Sums up the reality nicely. TY
I like Doctorow, he's logical, has integrity, is honest and self-reflective. Not a raging ego like Larry and so many others found everywhere today - MSM and alt media pundits. The Paranoid Schizophrenia extends far beyond the "deep state" and the war criminal psychopaths in Israel and Ukraine.
I think both sides in this argument are right to a degree. Doctorow took the heat for being the first to expose the quite obvious fact that the US actively supports the genocide. Many critics in the US would really like to believe US support is accidental, a symptom of political incoherence rather than by active design. It's more palatable to believe that an external force - the Zionists - are driving the agenda as it means there is a solution. It's harder to face that your own country, own government actively seeks to exterminate a people and start a nuclear war. Wilkerson recognised the underlying logic and put it in clearer terms - a fanatical section of the government (maybe even a majority) are actively pushing for more war even while another faction (ineffectively) calls for peace. The US government is mad, totally insane and delusional despite some "good eggs". The war will only end when those warmongers are turned to radioactive ash.
Norman Finkelstein calls Israel a "stationary aircraft carrier for the US in the Middle East". I guess it aligns with Doctorow
My late 2 cents (soon to become a nickel):
I think the AIPAC donations are designed to appear as Israeli advocacy and our political recipients believe this to a degree. But these donations have a hidden side in that Israel does the bidding of those funding AIPAC or else.
Biden spoke a semi-truth about Israel thirty years ago, "If Israel did not exist, we would have to create it." We do sustain Israel and that sustenance has a price.
I suspect that the truth of the matter is that there has long been an alliance between the Deep States within Israel & the US. Israel was created by the UK & US (with the help of the Nazis, acting on their behalf) as a “Jewish Ulster” to protect their strategic interests (especially the Mosul-Haifa pipeline), Bibi is financed by the US while there are those in Mossad who claim it is merely a branch of the CIA. The power and money of the Zionist lobby can be partly explained by this. The US Military Industrial Complex and the Oil Lobby benefit from the Israel instigated wars, which have been ongoing for decades (e.g. the Iraq War of 2003). As was demonstrated during the Covid lockdowns and mass jabbing: Israelis & Jews can be readily sacrificed if it suits the Deep State. The same applies to the wars against the Palestinians. Israeli blood is cheap and can be readily shed…
Blacklisted on the Alternative Media seems so contrary to what one expects !
Humanity is what it is.
Don’t take it to heart.
Is Israel to blame for all Americas woes???
Really!
I wasn't blacklisted on the Alt Media. I was blacklisted here in Japan for writing for the Alt Media.
Regarding the Doctorow kerfuffle—he may be right. At the core is: does the US do evil because it has been captured by the evil Zionists, or does it do evil because it is America; that is, because its systemic structure dictates it do evil. Well of course all those flag waving commentators are going to be upset by the later accusation. It is interesting that Nasrallah stated over and over that the mainspring of action is the US, not Israel. He has point blank stated this again and again. Not that the US is simply the one with the power, but that the US is the one with the plan--the one who calls the shots. It is not manipulated by Israel, it uses Israel for its purposes. His formulation was--US oil, the MIC and Christian Zionists call the shots. I basically agree with him, except the Evangelicals are not decision makers but simply side show clowns. Yes, the US power structure has is fractured, but the very top, the banks and major corporations--Wall Street, Energy, big Ag and the MIC-- the actual shot callers are not. They do what protects their interest and makes money. In the end, it's not hatred, or race--it's just business. What The Empire cannot defeat, it destroys. DPRK, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq. Huge embarrassing losses for the US right? No they were left smoking ruins--and the US marched on. That's how Empire works. The prime directive is divide and rule--or destroy. So what happens if there is a general war in the Middle East? Iran and Israel are both destroyed. Who cares? Israel is expendable-- like Ukraine, like Vietnam, like any other patsy proxy. A prime member of the China, Russia, Iran axis is set back a half century. The world's oil supplies are disrupted--the #1 customer being China. (No Russia can't simply pick up the slack) The US is self sufficient in oil and food. So who suffers and who benefits? Who makes money? We're talking about capitalism, after all. The Anglo-American Empire has ruled the world for centuries. This is another episode in that rule. It's nothing particularly surprising or extraordinary. They've done this many times before--just not on TV. I hope their game is finally up. I hope the correlation of forces, with the rise of China, is finally such that they are overpowered by history and economics. But what's happening for the actual decision makers is not crazy, or insane--it's just business.
"That's how Empire works. The prime directive is divide and rule--or destroy. So what happens if there is a general war in the Middle East? Iran and Israel are both destroyed. Who cares? Israel is expendable-- like Ukraine, like Vietnam, like any other patsy proxy. A prime member of the China, Russia, Iran axis is set back a half century. The world's oil supplies are disrupted--the #1 customer being China. (No Russia can't simply pick up the slack)" YUP!
May I ask a bit of a loaded question? Does a broader war in Europe hurt or help the Global American Empire? Zooming out very big picture. US supremacy in the 20th Century was based on two world wars in Europe and one in East Asia that left much of the world a ruin, and USA was 'last man standing'. Some certain people have been planning for a 'new American Century'. Would additional wars in Europe or East Asia increase America's hegemonic power, or decrease it? I don't know, but it may be worth thinking about...
Good observation, for sure. Believe the US's goal has been to prevent the integration of Europe with Russia's energy and China's growing economy. Thus far they have been very successful. Believe that was a big reason, perhaps the primary reason, why they initiated the Ukraine war. War and fear-mongering are essential to achieving this goal. The Chinese market for European goods and cheap Russian energy are great temptations for Europe. The US has to keep the pot boiling. But it needs to keep the war contained to Europe. It would be great to get the whole world fighting while keeping the American heartland secure. As you point out, that's how the US achieved its dominance. The problem the US faces is how to do that without getting sucked in. Their actions in Europe and the Middle East are increasingly reckless.
Could you spell out Micimatt again for us, please? I know that it’s military-industrial complex, and then the Academy is in there somewhere, and maybe the media?
Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-Tank
Thank you!
Great article again !
Blacklisted... that hurts...
I get >100 new followers on Twitter (X) each week, but lose almost as much without me being able to find out who and why. One time i found a cluster of some 100's of people following @0ccupySchagen (notice the number zero in stead of the Capital O) One of my friends who doesn't use Twitter often, but who looks once in a while noticed that i didn't send Tweets any more, so he sent me an email to see whether i was still alive... He certainly did not alter his following me into that false account, so he was changed from me by SOMEONE to the false account, but after i noticed it to Twitter, that false account (it had ever sent 2 or 3 tweets...) disappeared. Secret powers...
OK.
Is the Zionist occupation force in Palestine a proxy of the United States ??
NO !
The Zionist Gang in Palestine is a Proxy. But not of the US of A.
The US of A, with The Neocons, the Senators and the Congress people is also a Proxy.
The Power is not in Countries any more.
There was a time that missiles shooting at the Moon or Mars could only be done by Countries (the BIG ones).
There are hidden structures among the "Western" elites which are more powerful than NATO.
They rule the DeepState(s) and they rule Netanyahu, the elite in the UK (both Conservatives and Labour) and in the EU.
They are THE Enemy of Humanity. They are EVIL Incarnate.
And we need to start fighting them, NOT each other. As BRICS is trying to do.
Just my cent.
Sander
"The Power is not in Countries any more." Something to really think about.
I have just 320 followers on X. Can't seem to get more than that.
Always follow someone back who reacts on your tweets, find accounts you want to follow.
Your timeline will start to speed up, make "lists" on subjects (Ukraine, West-Asia, BRICS, etc. regularly look at the important lists, which shows all current posts about that subject.
When you are scanning your X-sources don't forget to RT interesting posts.
Use the "X" search function to find interesting posts.
That's the way i got many Palestine followers after Oct 7...
And don't forget to use Pictures / Images...
Sander
PS. An account that harasses you or sounds like it is wanting to report you ? BLOCK !!
->https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GUz_dp-W4AAS0ZO?format=jpg
(Recent overview of my followers, spread over the world.)
Stop the infighting. I don't care. I am still going to read Gibert and Larry. If they didn't have different opinions i would only have to read one of them.
"If they didn't have different opinions i would only have to read one of them." Absolutely!