Top NSA Whistleblower Claims "Russiagate" Concocted To Start Another Cold War

a reply to: DJW001

Abandon Syria and Iran that they not get involved.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: DJW001

Abandon Syria and Iran that they not get involved.

Russia will eventually ditch Iran be cause they are competing for influence in Central Asia. As for Syria, they will take a lesson from the United States and loan Syria money to hire Russian contractors to rebuild.

a reply to: DJW001

AND when the assassination of Assad happens?
What if SAUDI tweaks on Iran?
Apparently they are in cahoots with Israel.

a reply to: JBurns

What is it with the Russia hate? With Russia, we can combat terrorism around the world and keep a growing NK threat at bay.

Except, from the russian perspective, Us is a global terror organization.

From the uS perspective, Russia is impeding the process of Western global domination.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: JBurns

What is it with the Russia hate? With Russia, we can combat terrorism around the world and keep a growing NK threat at bay.

Except, from the russian perspective, Us is a global terror organization.

From the uS perspective, Russia is impeding the process of Western global domination.

More precisely,Russia sees the United States as preventing it from reaching its "natural borders" on the Baltic and Black Seas. The United States sees Russia as a revanchist power posing an immediate threat to its neighbors. This is why anyone who tells you the Cold War is "over" does not know what they are talking about.

a reply to: DJW001


I don't care if my opinion coincides with the "Kremlin's" POV. I heard the leaked phone call between Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt, so I know for a fact they staged an illegal coup against the legit Ukrainian government. Whether you like that government or not, they weren't a threat to the U.S. and the Obama Admin had no business interfering with internal issues. Needless to say a chunk of their population wasn't pleased. It is helpful to note that Crimea is majority ethnically Russian (and Russian speaking), and that Crimea (and Donetsk + the other one) are historically Russian territories.

As far as Crimea goes, their citizenry voted like 90-something percent to leave Ukraine and join Russia. I support popular sovereignty, and believe any group of people have the right to self-determination. That includes leaving one country to join another, even if it does thwart plans from shady characters like Nuland.

They no doubt are seeking more influence, which is also OK. They are a world-class power, able to project force anywhere in the world. You can't blame them for pursuing their strategic interests anymore than you can blame us for pursuing our national interest.

a reply to: DJW001


Any invasion of a NATO ally would result in immediate and total nuclear war. Article V specifically deals with an attack on a NATO ally, and would not be tolerated by the United States/NATO alliance.

Anyone who thinks Putin is going to bring about the ruin of Russia over a few hundred square miles of coastal territory is mistaken.

BTW: I've been proudly "towing the Kremlin's line" since ~2013. Russia has made an effort to join NATO and cooperate on the global stage, and U.S. establishment politicians have done nothing but slap them in the face, time and time again. There are plenty of people in today's climate who would love to see Russia become the boogeyman again, and fuel a multi-trillion dollar arms race.

I for one would rather see this money invested rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure and fixing our broken healthcare system. That's just me though. Maybe making any enemy of Russia is a better use for all of that money, but I don't see it. Sounds like McCarthy-esque hysteria and fear mongering to me.

Including all of this Russia-election nonsense. After seeing release after release of leaked CIA tools/documents (from cyber capabilities to false flag plans), I have concluded that any evidence would be far too easy to fake for it to be reliable. I don't personally trust professional liars and drug dealers (yes, they sell drugs to fund black projects).

a reply to: JBurns

In other words, you proudly believe the Russian propaganda. You are welcome to do that. Just remember, governments justify their actions by claiming to be responding to external threats.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: JBurns

In other words, you proudly believe the Russian propaganda. You are welcome to do that. Just remember, governments justify their actions by claiming to be responding to external threats.

Is that it only 2 choices, it's either Russian or American propaganda nothing else, nothing inbetween...

How convenient to just think in black and white.

a reply to: DJW001


No.

I believe (or disbelieve) claims after independently investigating and coming to my own conclusion. I search millions of leaked documents for specific text in order to gather as much information as possible. The information they publish (Russia, USA, EU, etc) is utterly unreliable. Unless the source is something "they" didn't want you to see, you can bet it is spun or otherwise fabricated.

You should read up on how much the US spends on information warfare. The information battlefield is entirely saturated with BS, in a vain attempt to drown out the good, high confidence information that exists in the public information sphere. "News" and Hollywood has been used for more than a century to push a specific narrative, speculative "evidence" (aka opinions) and distractions.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: DJW001


Any invasion of a NATO ally would result in immediate and total nuclear war. Article V specifically deals with an attack on a NATO ally, and would not be tolerated by the United States/NATO alliance.

Anyone who thinks Putin is going to bring about the ruin of Russia over a few hundred square miles of coastal territory is mistaken.

Exactly! That is why it is a Cold War, being waged by propaganda. Russia will circulate stories impugning pro-Western politicians, "leak" supposed plans on the part of NATO, circulate outrageous stories that biological weapons are turning Russian speaking Ukrainians into zombies, etc. The American election was not their first-- or last-- rodeo.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed


This^

I don't trust or rely on either government to provide truthful information. This is mainly because they never do. If they can lie, they do. If they can forge something, they do. If they can spin information to their advantage, they will.

Independent sources only. Leaks are the best, however. Which is where ~90% of my opinion is formed.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed


In case you haven't noticed, I do not "think in black and white." I understand and can articulate the goals and strategies of all the players. Neither side are "the good guys." No cooperation will be possible until Russia gets what it needs. Not "wants," needs. The United States is committed to preventing this based on a diplomatic strategy with its roots in the events of the last World War. The situation is intractable, but Russia will probably win the long game.

a reply to: JBurns

Your "leaks" are government propaganda. Leaks don't "just happen."

a reply to: DJW001


Agreed

They devalue the truthful information by saturating the medium with noise. It is quite challenging to sort through the various levels of deception such practices employ, and derive potentially useful information. A lot of the information can be fact checked, but of course there is always some degree of misinformation present.

It is nowhere near as prevalent are they standard MSM information outlets though. I guess just a much wider audience, but I agree it is present everywhere (including the leaks).

a reply to: DJW001

Neither side are "the good guys."

I agree. I just don't think we should be wasting money on these non-issues. No reason to antagonize or alienate Russia, no reason to pay special attention to them either. If we can cooperate in certain areas, great. If not, that is OK too. But precious public funds should be spent on bettering our country, not building ridiculous numbers of WMDs or engaging in an arms race.

a reply to: JBurns

I agree that we do not need to be investing in missiles and bombs. The war is not being fought on the Earth's physical surface. It is being fought in the noosphere, in the human mind. Putin understands this, which is why he will prevail.

a reply to: DJW001


Agreed

I am unsure why the United States and NATO are having such a difficult time grasping this simple concept.

It is no different than the people who argued that cyber space (or even space, circa ~1980s) wasn't a "true" dimension of warfare. Now we have people trying to argue that information/the human mind aren't real "spaces of battle."