The Backstory to the Russia-Ukraine Confrontation: The U.S. and NATO Encirclement of Russia

very deep desire to EXTERMINATE every single living russian

reply to post by tencap77


Russians used to be commies but not anymore..............so what is the reason for that destructive desire still?

Why does the West hate the Russians so much?

victor7

very deep desire to EXTERMINATE every single living russian

reply to post by tencap77

 

Russians used to be commies but not anymore..............so what is the reason for that destructive desire still?

Why does the West hate the Russians so much?

Brainwashing for decades, no matter what, they are still seen as commies.
I have also noted a lot of frustrations from the West in relation to events in Ukraina and Crimea.
They would like to make a move and show who the boss is, but recent events and determination from Russia have taken them by surprise. First Syria and now Ukraina. I think this is a beginning of cold war all over again. And I do not mind it to be honest.
Balance is always a good thing.

victor7

very deep desire to EXTERMINATE every single living russian

reply to post by tencap77

 

Russians used to be commies but not anymore..............so what is the reason for that destructive desire still?

Why does the West hate the Russians so much?

The west doesn't hate the Russians, but rather the bankers hate countries whos banks they don't control. Thus they crank up the propaganda, foment some regime change and try to get the war machine to fix their problem.

Ordinary civillians have no problems with Russians. We actually like them and admire them for overcoming many hardships. Then there is the fact that all of their women look like supermodels, but that's another story.

SevenThunders

victor7

very deep desire to EXTERMINATE every single living russian

reply to post by tencap77

 

Russians used to be commies but not anymore..............so what is the reason for that destructive desire still?

Why does the West hate the Russians so much?

The west doesn't hate the Russians, but rather the bankers hate countries whos banks they don't control. Thus they crank up the propaganda, foment some regime change and try to get the war machine to fix their problem.

Ordinary civillians have no problems with Russians. We actually like them and admire them for overcoming many hardships. Then there is the fact that all of their women look like supermodels, but that's another story.

The bankers, by definition of advanced capitalism itself, are not geopolitical strategists. They merely seek profit where profit can be exploited.

Modern geopolitics is all about the accumulation of resources. This includes control over the production and distribution of scarce resources. Of the top world powers, Russia is the only "have" country in regards to having enough resources to fulfill its own needs while exporting the rest to various "have-not" countries (one exception may be Canada). Under Putin's control, and as per his policies that he has been planning since the time he wrote his doctorate thesis on state economic control of domestic mineral resources, Russia's economy has vastly recovered since the collapse of the USSR and has, quite frankly, scared the crap out of western strategists who just spent the last decade fighting arbitrary wars in the Middle East.

So, you just have to look at who is really pulling the strings. Finance capital plays a part but there is so much more to it than that.

reply to post by Nairda


It has got to be very difficult to play chess and pocket pool at the same time, but really Putin hatched up the entire scenario, all the way down to infiltration of the Ukrainian government and staging everything as puppet master creating a worse of two evil's Hegelian dialectic solution.
What was gained? of course instead of renting the naval base, now they own it as Crimea is now Russian territory so cost is reduced and with that great chess move, it makes it much more difficult for outsiders to come into Crimea now.

Corrupt Ukraine government = proxy corrupt Russia, one in the same but the people actually had to vote on which one to choose and actually celebrate? WOW.

phinubian
reply to post by Nairda

 

It has got to be very difficult to play chess and pocket pool at the same time, but really Putin hatched up the entire scenario, all the way down to infiltration of the Ukrainian government and staging everything as puppet master creating a worse of two evil's Hegelian dialectic solution.
What was gained? of course instead of renting the naval base, now they own it as Crimea is now Russian territory so cost is reduced and with that great chess move, it makes it much more difficult for outsiders to come into Crimea now.

Corrupt Ukraine government = proxy corrupt Russia, one in the same but the people actually had to vote on which one to choose and actually celebrate? WOW.

Do you have any sources for those "russia set the whole thing up"? Because so far, otherwise has been proven...

reply to post by Yusomad


Of course these things will not be proven immediately, but what you are saying is not true either, this likely theory has not been disproven, be patient and watch and see what happens, common sense and occams razor will always reveal things as they truly are, it is all a scheme hatched up by Putin quite simple to see straight through it.

Great Article on Forbes

reply to post by Vovin


Well this is a conspiracy theory forum, and the bankers I am referring to are not the ordinary administrators of capital lending, but rather members of powerful families and factions who are very interested in geopolitics indeed. Control is part of their religion, which is essentially satanism, though possibly dressed up to look nice with some occult or new age veneer.

These are the sort of people who might attend or oversee a function like this:

itccs.org... huis-faces-new-attacks/

We know that these elites were in on the planning of regime changes throughout the Middle East and no doubt in the Ukraine as well, since there were insiders who announced some of these plans well in advance (see for example Lindsey Williams).

Their motives, besides base ones of disaster capitalism or the control of resources are still somewhat opaque, since they appear to be driving the world into global destruction. I suppose they believe or are deluded into thinking they can avoid the calamity they are creating.

I wonder if Putin is actively opposing them or is actually following a pre-planned script.

reply to post by Willtell


I hope what you say is not true, but if it is, so be it. I will die protecting me and my own and that is it. you say ww3. I’ve been in war since my feet touched ground haven't we all? Is it not time to abandon the old way for a new prosperous efficient co existence? I fear we will just be a race that lived thrived and destroyed one self’s because of exclusion! the proverbial line in the sand, us and them. Polarity dose not exist! just immature peoples, with technology that far outweighs our sociological and psychological maturity as a race.

reply to post by SevenThunders


Perhaps if you had some real evidence to back that up then I may believe you. But for now, I do not see bankers controlling militaries or directing such high-profile conflicts as Syria or Ukraine.

The people carrying out geostrategy are high-level politicians, and regardless of their backgrounds they have to be a politician to directly carry out geostrategy. Politician can include elected officials, such as John McCane, or they can include appointed state officials. State officials are always at the forefront of any imperialist introjection into any country. For instance, the Iraq strategy was decided long before the invasion, and American state officials were assigned to just jump into post-Saddam Iraq in order to maintain social order in various sectors. They consequently failed because the neither knew anything about how things were done in Iraq and because they recieved minimal assistance from the military occupiers. In fact, there are many state official accounts of how they kept requesting help from nearby US troops to contain looting, but the soldiers ignored them on higher orders.

Another example is Afghanistan. Did you know that Canadian policy makers and military advisors were instrumental in creating the post-invasion constitution of that country? They made sure to put in several clauses that would expedite foreign exploitation of their domestic resources...

EDIT: And just to make it clear, the actual geopolitical strategists are in a league of their own. Brzezinski was not a banker, but a key presidential advisor. He was integral to the American deepstate. Just like how John McCane is now. He takes pride in photographing himself with as many "revolutionary" forces as he can find to conduct proxy war, including those in Libya, Syria and Ukraine.

reply to post by Willtell


A beautifully created spin. Spin is what it is.

So much has been omitted from this "thread" that could have been written in Moscow.LOL

First, most of the ex-soviet countries joined NATO as a protection from Russia, not as some grand plan to surround them. Nobody wants Russia, at least, not in the West. China's lust for Siberian resources is another matter...

Second, we offered the Ukraine Anti-Ballistic Missile defense in exchange for them giving up their nukes. We reneged on that deal after they gave up their nukes to "appease" Putin-another great move by Obama- which has resulted in the annexation/invasion of the Ukraine. It could never have happened if the Ukraine had kept their nukes. PERIOD.

We've pulled troops out of Germany, reduced our overseas military strength to a fraction of 20 years ago and we're trying to surround Russia??

"Force" them to act? Allowed them...encouraged them to act is more like it!

I wonder what JFK would have done? Reagan? Of course, with those leaders this would never have happened in the first place..

OK, now we have our "Chamberlain". His name is Obama. It's up to the ex-soviet countries to act, then NATO, if they do act, it "might" be appropriate, at that time, for U.S. involvement. Of course, by then, Estonia, at al, will also have fallen...

Then again, why would NATO or the ex-soviet nations rise to the occasion when there is zero backing from the U.S.??

Russia will not only get it's empire back, it'll expand it a bit-take all of Germany this time ( no nukes)....

Willtell
reply to post by rock427

 

What country did Russia invade where 1 million of its citizens are now dead?

And the stability of that country may be lost for years to come.

Where is the stability for Iraqi children?

You've obviously never heard of Afghanistan, have you?

TritonTaranis

tadaman
reply to post by Willtell

 

indeed....

Russia is bitching because the US set up a puppet government the way they wanted to. How inconsiderate of the US..

edit on 3 15 2014 by tadaman because: (no reason given)

While I agreed on other things we need to get this BS conspiracy that the US in anyway responsible for installing a puppet regime in Kiev

The majority of Ukraine supports closer ties to the EU, the current government was installed by the people and the exiled presidents government who run him out of town

You just can't buy or influence that amount of overwhelming support nor brainwash them, the people know they will be happier adopting western values and closer ties to the west and it's that simple

It's all just pathetic for the OP to come out with crap like this while Russia Denys invading a country for force it own rule over people

This is the best post I've read on this entire thread. The fact is, that as much as the CIA has intervened around the world, and been involved in coups, both successful and not, no foreign power can just go into a country and create a revolution from whole cloth, a portion of the population has to already support it. The fact is, even if the CIA, MI6, etc. hadn't been involved at all, the revolution in the Ukraine would have still occurred.

reply to post by Antonio1


Your post is absolute nonsense. The CIA has been pushing violent minorities into power in target countries for half a century. Do you think the School of the Americas pumped out popular revolutionaries or ultraviolent terrorists? The only people who claim these are popular uprisings are the same people who are well known as perpetual liars: the American government and its media.

It doesn't get anymore obvious when you have a top US state official saying "f*ck the EU" (a rival actor) and describing the individuals that they already have prepared for "democratic" government roles.

reply to post by Vovin


I refer to these oligarchs as bankers because they control a number of powerful banks. Indeed the financial industry is at the center of the spiderweb of control as this Swiss study proves.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I personally remember Lindsey Williams talking about planned unrest that would sweep across the Middle East resulting in the overthrow and destabilization of regimes there for the benefit of the elite, and perhaps the price of oil. I didn't believe him until it happened. Williams received inside information from an oil executive who was one of the globalist NWO, Bilderberger types.

He also called the takeover of nations by the Muslim brotherhood courtesy of the US taxpayer.
www.youtube.com...

There is plenty of other proof with regards to the action of elite crony capitalists. This is a conspiracy forum after all. Plenty of content is available right here. Of course this is a great site to hear from paid shills, paid skeptics, intelligence agencies and apologists for the elite as well, which is always entertaining.