Have done a commentary of the first 10 minutes of this interview with Starkey on GBN. Pretty much disagreed with the whole thing so far.
RUBIS obviously failed with the US ignoring the UN and illegally invading Iraq. After that no one needed international authority for war and Russia is just following the US's lead from 2003. Why Starkey thinks Russia has anything to do with anything is going to be a problem I reckon.
Wow he's wrong about the "blocks". Russia has always wanted to co-operate with the West. It was the US that created the Cold-War not Russia. It was the US that created the Nuclear Arms and Space Races. Russia's problem with the West is never-the-less Imperialism which it won't back down on. Divide-And-Conquer is where you divide the world into blocks and then use the big ones to destroy the small ones. The "blocks" are fake, but encouraged by the Imperial West for the purpose of global domination. Good example is the Ottomans. They actually wanted to fight with the Allies in WW1. Britain did not allow them, cos Britain wanted them to be in the enemy "block" that it was aiming to overthrow. Com'on Starkey you know history...
But a partition is how the West destroys a country. The last 80 years is the history of partitions. What you should see Starkey is the original partition was in Germany in 1945 and now you are talking about Ukraine. Look at the direction of travel!
Hmm stripped by our closest ally... more like the UK became taken over by American stooges. Churchill was half American, and no one actually wanted War expect him. I have no proof yet, but all fingers point to the US creating WW2 in order to end the British Empire. Revenge for our wars against it, and simple Imperialism. And us mugs were told it was about Germany and completely missed the real invasion from the West. US hostility against us is long, but the US press massively down plays it. It was the US for example that put all our oil reserves up for sale (via that mug Thatcher) and now we have to import all fuel. Meanwhile the US has carefully not exploited its reserves waiting or higher oil prices, which is another reason why no one is going net-zero with the US around.
Totally agree with the bit on US being scum. Which is why we need to be in league with Russia who is and always has been a much better ally. It was Russia for example that won WW2 and had we had joined the Red Army we could have saved the day from the Americans. Ultimately we need to get Asia, South America, Africa, Canada and Australasia to attack the US. Will Starkey go here?
The reason that Putin is Hitler is Napoleon is because we want to attack him. Is this not obvious?
for real??? What was moralistic about the British Empire? Or the bombing of Gaza? or indeed any mass bombing of civilians which has been the MO of the European Elites since the invention of the aeroplane? Bomb first, write a moral justification afterwards that was the pattern set up by Churchill.
@7.45
His description of US Hegemony and Russia demonisation is obviously just the US narrative. Go anywhere else in the world and its not like this. Most obviously in Russia. Go anywhere in the Middle East and the US is demonised I would have thought. So Starkey living in a little bubble of US hegemony.
he's on GBN he knows he can turn that around and call it brainwashing? Or perhaps GBN is conservative and wants these boundaries?
its the just the same mistakes again and again. "We" didn't call it the Cold War the US called it the Cold War. There never was a "Cold War" outside the plans of the Pentagon to destroy the USSR.
@8.46
and the obvious mistake he makes there of "Communism Defeated" is just US propaganda. You can't defeat Communism because it is the path of History. Everything you do is just contributing to the path of History and so getting you a step closer to Communism. Capitalism is one such step towards Communism. You need Capitalism before you can become Communist. This is why the US then tried to End History with Post-Modernism. This is the only way to stop the overthrow of the elites, freeze time and keep the structures as they are.
so he (unless in a minute he says he's just reporting the hegemony) actually believes the US propaganda.
okay awesome he mention Fukuyama @9.11 (interesting time ?)
wow okay he's wading into something I studied at length. The Whitehouse was publishing all this in the build up to Iraq. Their argument was that after Berlin Wall the West was expecting the world to just fall in line with Liberal Democratic Capitalism and everything to be happy. But then Tiger economies collapsed and Balkans War happened and it didn't seem to work. Clinton read a book on Globalisation (need find which one) which argues that perhaps LDC only works in the West. So he withdrew US intervention. Lot of stuff on horrors of Balkans. So the Project for New American Century was arguing this is bullshit. The bad guys just need a whipping and we get things back on track. So we have 9/11 and Iraq and Afghanistan. Only vaguely moralistic Starkey. Driven by Imperial Hegemony.
Starkey realises he's just telling us what the NEWS told us right? Afghanistan was waged from the 1980s started with US training the extremist Mujahideen to fight the Russians. Russia withdrew and left the country to the Mujahideen who then carried on training people to create Al-Qaeda (US insists they did not LOL), did 9/11 (apparently altho it was all Saudis) and then US says they tried to get rid of Mujahideen who are still there. This is the 4th Afghan War, the West has been fighting over this region for 200 years. Starkey knows all this why is he suggesting it was "getting the bad guys"?? It is just propaganda right?? He knows this???
No comments:
Post a Comment