Showing posts with label Nazism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nazism. Show all posts

2 March 2022

Three ways for Russia to punish the West

Due to the ongoing operation to eliminate radical anti-Russian nationalists in Ukraine, Russia is under pressure unseen since the Axis powers attacked its territory in the Second World War. The following are three decisive methods the Russian government could consider, to severely punish the NATO countries.

1. Proxy war in Ukraine

Americans have already taken the lead in making a European proxy war possible, suggesting the supply of armaments to rebels and foreign volunteers who are expected to arrive in Ukraine. They want to copy the success of foreign fighters in Afghanistan during the 1980s, believing only the Russians will suffer from this policy, but Europe could be more at risk itself. After all, this "Afghanistan" would be in Europe, and Ukraine already has a problem with armed neo-Nazis.

In fact, NATO has more reason to fear this scenario of a failed state in Ukraine than Russia.

Unlike Afghanistan, Russians are natives of this area, with large populations and families supporting Russia in parts of Ukraine. They will not be withdrawing like the Soviet Army. Returned to Russian protection, they could contribute to a strong buffer zone of sympathetic forces to help secure Russia's Ukrainian frontier. There is already the Donetsk People's Republic, DPR, and Lugansk People's Republic, LPR, able to provide Russia with mutual security against Western nationalist proxies in Ukraine. Russia could be restrictive about travel from Ukraine to Russia, but the European Union would never be so strict, having opened its doors to Ukrainian exiles and aided their travels. If Ukraine becomes a ruined failed state, filled with protracted warfare and resentment, home to many shadowy groups including local Russian proxies, Russia would be able to use Ukraine to threaten Europe, while enjoying security itself. The inevitable blockback of weapons and radical ideas into Europe from a European repeat of Afghanistan could be uncontrollable, and may result in armed insurgents seizing cities across Europe and spreading civil war and chaos. We must remember that the foreign fighters of the Afghan jihad set about trying to topple the local regimes after they returned home, for example in Algeria, being convinced of their just cause. Foreign fighters who are radicalised in Ukraine would be returning to places like Berlin and Paris.

2. Impounding ships

Russia encompasses a huge amount of land with a vast coastline, meaning potential dominance at key shipping routes, especially those icy seas along its north. It possesses a powerful navy and air forces, more than enough to interdict shipping. In retaliation for sanctions, Russia could impound all cargo ships and tankers it encounters if they belong to the countries carrying out sanctions on Russia, taking their cargo as compensation. The US already did this to Iran, and France even was bold enough to do this to Russia itself. The occasional disappearance of a tanker could produce negative economic effects and denying them passage could be just as disruptive.

With the French declaring "total economic and financial war on Russia", Russia has no reason to let any French cargo ship pass if it can intercept it. An even more aggressive option is for Russian navy vessels to actively hunt, intercept and board all vulnerable ships of the European Union and throw their cargo overboard, destroying the goods (unless they contain things that are extra valuable, such as gold!)

European countries could retaliate in a number of ways, but they would likely be too costly. Freight shipping is a notoriously cost-averse business, maintaining ageing ships often of dubious quality and crews on fairly minimal salaries, so it seems unlikely that warshups will be used for this task or assigned for protection in peacetime.

3. Turning off the gas to Europe

Russia can simply turn off the gas to Germany and instead supply its gas to China and other Asian countries. If done in combination with delaying, diverting or seizing US LNG shipments bound for Europe, this could be catastrophic to European economies, forcing them to shut down industry and even fail to keep their citizens warm.

Owing to its size and resources, Russia has proved to be invulnerable in many ways as a country, and numerous alliances have shattered when trying to take this country on.

- ClubOfInfo

Read More »

14 June 2016

Raqqa compared with Battle for Berlin

The Blog


The "capital" of ISIS in Syria is being approached rapidly by the opposing forces of the Russian-led and US-led led coalitions in the country.


With both sides eager to be the first to claim total victory over the bloodthirsty terrorists and executioners, the developing battle has been compared with the Battle for Berlin in 1945.

In the closing days of World War 2 in Europe, forces aligned with the United States and Soviet Union approached the Nazi German capital of Berlin from west and east, respectively. The ultimate victory finally went to the Soviet Union, who proved far more determined to take the German capital even despite great sacrifices of men and materiel.

One analysis posted to Fort Russ on 11 June notes that while US-backed Kurdish Peshmerga forces have held positions close to the ISIS terror capital for a longer period than the Russian-backed Syrian Army, recent gains by the latter have been astonishingly rapid.

US-aligned forces have been almost constantly positioned about 40 kilometers from Raqqa. On the other side, al-Masdar News reports that in a mere two weeks the Syrians and their Russian allies pushed a fresh 80 kilometers towards the city and obtained a similarly proximate position, threatening to take it first.

As explained by the Fort Russ report, the capture of Raqqa would be a devastating defeat to ISIS. "A successful storm of the city would show that the “Caliphate” can’t even keep what it has proclaimed to be its own home", the blog noted.

Emphasizing the comparison between the Battle for Raqqa and the race towards Berlin in 1945, the Fort Russ blog stated, "In both cases, the position of Moscow was more altruistic and constructive, while Washington’s was cynical".

This latter point in the post may be a reference to the US's belief that fascists and terrorists are worth supporting and consorting with if they will interfere in the progress of Russia and its allies. Such behavior has been spotted in US and western policy supporting not only terrorists in Syria but also nationalists in Ukraine.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

29 March 2016

Islamophobic ideology gets countered

The Blog


While others take to the internet to express their idea that all Muslims are suicide bombers, Beliefnet contributor Hesham Hassaballa points out the lack of understanding ISIS terrorists actually have about Islam in a recent post.


Citing The Nation and other sources, the blogger noted that many people are obsessed saying ISIS followers are Muslims, as if this is important. They refer to Islam as the reason for ISIS atrocities such as the recent attack in Brussels. These obsessives use such facts to support their claims that Muslims are inherently violent and Islam is a problematic, uncivilized belief.

However, as Hassaballa points out to us, we must remember the reality of the relationship between ISIS and Islam:

  • ISIS does not care if its followers know nothing about Islam
  • They do not know or care what Sharia law, violent jihad or the "caliphate" are
  • Most suicide bombers are politically motivated and have often been non-religious (e.g. the LTTE)
  • They have actually been found buying Islam for Dummies even as they joined the group

The Islamophobia being countered by Hassaballa - which is gaining apparent support among conservative politicians and voters in the United States and Europe - is actually on par with claiming that the source of Nazism or the Ku Klux Klan is being white or Christian.

Proponents of the "Muslims are violent" hypothesis find their connection between Islam and terrorism to be logical, and fail to understand any argument presented against it. If faced with the above argument, they will just assume they are being called a racist or that you really are saying all white people are evil.


One way of looking at this would be to consider, why is "Islamic" important in labeling terrorists in media and political rhetoric? Why not point out if they are a Jew, Christian or Hindu? Why only connect Islam with murder? We also never see victims of terror labelled as Islamic. Only terrorists are ever labelled as Islamic.

While the belief among some westerners that Muslims are violent is disturbing in itself, there are even more ignorant views being carried through social media. Some of them portray the problems of terrorism in the Middle East itself as coming from "Muslims" and proving how dangerous Muslims are, despite the fact that Muslims typically make up 100% of the victims and have inhabited the area peacefully for hundreds of years.

In other words, these bigots only use the word "Muslim" for anyone who commits murder, and fail to use it for the 1.3 million people murdered by US forces in the Middle East during the "war on terror" or the vast majority of victims of terrorism every day.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

5 February 2016

Topple: deport all bigots, not refugees

The Blog


Op-ed writer Steve Topple has appealed to Europeans to learn their history lessons again before calling for Nazi-like collective measures against refugees fleeing conflict zones such as Syria.


Topple does not hesitate to point out the west is to blame for the war in Syria. The west must make space for refugees, as it must face the consequences of its actions and atone for what it has done.

The post accuses Western societies of ignoring their own hand in creating a crisis for themselves, which they now try to shirk responsibility for by wanting to turn refugees away:
The anti-refugee rhetoric appeared to be systematically ratcheted up in nearly every country across the continent, without the smallest whiff of hypocrisy that the West’s agenda had largely contributed to this man-made crisis.
Elaborating on this responsibility, Topple writes that "Western foreign policy is partly to blame for the situation in the Middle East, which is rapidly spiralling out of control. Decade after decade we have geopolitically been led by our unquenchable thirst for oil and gas, regardless of the consequences." Amidst the hysteria spreading through Europe at the inevitable globalization of displacement and misery caused by western military aggression, many have called for all refugees (with particular emphasis on Muslims) to be deported.

Topple has an alternative suggestion of who deport:
Expatriate all the loathsome, lobotomised right-wing bigots and replace them with refugees. 
Because I, for one, would rather we have a diverse, socially-rich, colourful society where the quality of life for everyone was far greater, than an insular, closeted, angry and scared country where the opinions of loathsome, vile bigots whose views belong in a 1970’s sitcom were the norm.
Tackling the specific hysteria of many right wing groups and commentators, Topple strikes back at their assertions:
Oh – and the individuals screaming “Rapefugees!” and “Women and girls aren’t safe!” when discussing refugees after we have just observed Holocaust Memorial Day, may wish to Google “Collective Responsibility” – although I doubt their myopic brains would be able to cope with the resonance.
Although many right-wing figures in the west are obsessed with World War II and the idea of supporting the Israeli apartheid regime to atone for the Holocaust, they are just as interested in committing a new genocide against Muslims. The additional inability to condemn Israeli expansion and ethnic cleansing and to support it, no matter how untenable, shows nothing was really learned from the Holocaust.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

20 November 2015

Russia to carpet-bomb ISIL out of Syria?

The Blog


What will the Russian Federation's new deployment of strategic bombers to the battlefields of Syria mean for the war?


Russia's fighter jets have already been rolling back territorial gains by terrorist groups including the so-called Islamic State (ISIL, ISIS). But these inflict only piecemeal losses on the militants, compared with the area-bombing capabilities of aircraft like the Tupolev Tu-95 and Tu-160. Such strategic bombers are capable of leveling entire towns and destroying whole armies single-handedly.

The efficiency of all airstrikes against ISIL has been suspect. The US-led coalition has been striking ISIL positions for over a year with almost no effect. In fact, the terrorist group has actually gained more territory throughout the US-led air campaign in Syria, as is demonstrated by maps of the conflict so far. The Russian-led airstrikes have been somewhat more effective, clearing key highways and fortifications for the advancing Syrian Army - a force the US refuses to acknowledge or work with, in the belief that it is not "legitimate".


However, the course of the war is still slow, and thousands continue to face torture, genocide and persecution at the hands of the many sectarian militias supported by the West to take control of the country. Russia has compared ISIL with Nazi Germany, with no illusions about how the group should be dealt with and the kind of firepower that might be necessary to defeat it.

In an analysis for the Beliefnet website all the way back in June, it is advocated that strategic bombers are used instead of mere fighter jets (although in that case it was supposing the US would be doing all the bombing). The bombers should be used with the aim of wiping entire ISIL-controlled towns off the map and making it clear that this so-called "state" will be destroyed at all costs by the most powerful weapons available.

The analysis noted that the goal of such bombing is to put the enemy on the run, making them reactive rather than active, which will enable them to be fought on better terms. They will be drastically weaker on the battlefield, as they will be unable to hold any base or position for long.

ISIL has made no secret of the fact that it is in a state of war with Russia, the US and other major powers. It's recent attacks on Paris, and on a Russian airliner over Sinai, have been described as acts of war. France and Russia now not only say ISIL is intolerable and must be destroyed at all costs, but that they will do it themselves if the US is not capable.

World powers accept that ISIL is a significant military opponent. They want to eliminate  ISIL's capacity to wage war, which means they won't hesitate to use their most powerful weapons. Such weapons will be determined by the size and nature of military targets, as they were in the Second World War, and not by moral concerns about how such strikes may later be perceived.

The more civilians are killed by ISIL, the more the case for 'pinpoint' strikes against ISIL weakens and the stronger the case for indiscriminate area-bombing of ISIL becomes. Russia's movement of strategic bombers to the battlefields of Syria might mean they are moving to apply exactly this ruthless approach to warfare.


If used to its greatest extent, such a weapon will batter ISIL's already ruined territory into craters, and demolish any semblance of "state" in the "Islamic State". If Russia and its allies intend to treat ISIL like Nazi Germany, the geopolitical analysts comparing Russia's involvement with the Soviet War in Afghanistan are far off the mark in their historical comparisons.


The clubof.info Blog


Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

11 September 2015

Mont slams Ukrainian war criminals

The Blog


The worldwide Mont Order dissident club has declared the embattled regime in Ukraine, which has been created by so-called "democracies" in Europe and North America, to be illegitimate and deserving massive condemnation.


In a statement published on Sunday, 6 September, the members of the Mont Order Security Council unanimously expressed their condemnation of the illegally installed regime ruling from Kiev. Accusing the regime of "numerous war crimes inside Ukraine, including massacres of civilians in Odessa Oblast and Donetsk Oblast", the Order was overwhelming in its disgust at this "so-called state" and advised its members and global civil society to stand up to its terrorism.

From the Mont Order statement, which can be read in full at the Mont Order society's official blog:
The Mont Order considers that this is an illegitimate regime, and that it has not been sufficiently condemned in the international community and by civil society for its fascist associations and its crimes against humanity. As a civil society body, the Mont Order believes that an avalanche of criticism of this criminal regime using all the tools of the Internet is necessary. The Order considers that anyone who supports the current Ukrainian regime in or outside of the conflict zone should be given the treatment of a Nazi collaborator and any state providing funding or arms to Ukraine is a state sponsor of terrorism.
The Mont Order, which takes its name from a more mysterious group depicted in urban legend, sees itself as a latent civil society body. Led by its Security Council formed earlier in 2015, it has been gaining strength through the use of Mont dark web locations and Mont social media campaigns to expand its influence and capabilities as a pressure group. This has already resulted in numerous publications, journalists and movements being aligned with the Order.


The Blog


Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

8 September 2015

"Propped up" Ukrainian regime doomed

The Blog


The Ukrainian regime imposed by the 2014 Coup in Kiev is increasingly weak, fractured and being propped up by foreign powers.


Ukraine's debt has been steadily mounting as the broken, civil war-plagued puppet state has continued to beg its American owners for more money. Recent violence in the streets of Kiev has been sparked by the same extremists who led the Coup and have been involved in massive war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Donetsk, Luhansk and Odessa Oblasts.


Russia has been placed under sanctions by bellicose "democracies" such as the UK and US for its military maneuvers near the unstable state and its reintegration of the Crimean Peninsula with Russia, as well as its diplomatic protests against Ukraine's massacres of civilians. A recent analysis by Mark Chapman argued that sanctions against Russia have failed. They were founded upon a familiar "arrogant", colonial, condescending view of Russia (much like the view informing the campaign of failed sanctions against Iran). They were quickly circumvented by the Russian people, who feel no dependence on the arrogant powers and financial institutions and see a growing moral duty to not cooperate with discredited war criminals and murderers in Washington.

Russian officials have already challenged the US to place more sanctions on their country, saying that they refuse to obey the arrogant powers and will instead confront them if necessary.

The following embedded television debate covered many of the main points about the immorality, confusion and futility of the costly war being waged by the US-backed regime in Ukraine. Most significantly, the way that US regime leaders openly associated and posed with neo-Nazis in Kiev and are now trying to dismiss these same Nazis as "a few bad apples" is exposed by the speakers on the program.

Mark Sleboda portrayed the Ukrainian regime as doomed and argued that it "would have collapsed many times over" if it was not being "drip fed" by the US regime and European puppet states which fear the collapse of the current oligarchy.



The regime ruling Ukraine has censored the media, killed and arrested thousands of civilians, assassinated journalists, assassinated and intimidated political opposition, banned opposition parties, and waged war against all dissenting elements of its own people since it came to power illegally in 2014. The US has refused to condemn the regime and has eagerly supplied it with training, weapons and funding to support its terrorism. There has also been a silence from alternate media and civil society bodies on the escalating and inconvenient war crimes of the dysfunctional and fake "democracy" supported by the US.


The Blog


Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

23 June 2015

UK and Ukraine neo-nazis connect

The Blog


UK-based Neo-Nazis have met with Ukrainian neo-Nazis, the Daily Agenda blog reported


Quoting a number of other media materials posted to the Internet to confirm this revelation, the blog's dissident writer Simon Tomlin stated that it "proves everything that I have alleged in the past about collusion between British neo-Nazis and their brethren in Ukraine".

The blog also made reference to possible links between the British regime and the neo-Nazi illegal fighters known to operate in Ukraine. British police forces also have a history of collusion with neo-Nazis and other far-right groups, much like the British regime's collusion with fascist sympathizers in Ukraine.

The blog argued that a meeting of neo-Nazi groups from Ukraine and Britain could not have taken place without regime approval:
Whatever the truth and extent of the ongoing collusion between British and Ukrainian neo-Nazis, particularly through the Misanthropic Division, there is now doubt at all that this collusion is happening with the full consent of the British Government and the ersatz media turns a blind eye in its conspiracy of silence.

The Blog


Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

22 May 2015

The NATO-neo-Nazi axis in Ukraine

The Blog


The Daily Agenda, a British dissident blog, has drawn attention to how NATO works to legitimize neo-Nazis in Europe to support anti-Russian sentiment.


The proliferation of violent neo-Nazi movements in Eastern Europe has accompanied every stage of NATO enlargement, the blog argued on May 17, quoting the Eurasion Observatory for Democracy and Elections (EODE) watchdog. The observations are not only from this watchdog, however. Many commentators have watched with caution as NATO was drawn into a public alliance with neo-Nazi thugs and illegal fighters in the ongoing Ukrainian Civil War.
The Nazification of the Ukrainian military, supported by NATO thugs and spies seeking to offend and provoke Russia, has become an established doctrine of the Ukrainian regime. Neo-Nazi criminals are offered influential positions, while pro-Russian "enemies of the state" are beaten and killed with NATO support and blessing. Bans are issued against old Soviet Union symbolism and celebrations of the Russian victory over Nazi Germany in World War 2, while Nazi collaborators are now given state recognition as heroes.

In a recent scandal, NATO was found to be directly involved in witch-hunts and assassinations of political figures in Ukraine's internal affairs. Such aggression is not unprecedented for the so-called alliance, which - since its disastrous war killed of 60,000 civilians in Libya - has constantly crept away from its mission of collective-defense and towards arbitrary involvement in foreign civil wars. Ignoring the priority of collective defense emphasized in the North Atlantic Treaty, the current "NATO" alliance no longer addresses member states' security and instead tries to persuade member states to fight in the civil wars of non-member states beyond the boundaries of the North Atlantic area.

Revision of history to exclude the Soviet Union's role in World War 2 and the role of Ukrainian Nazis in the Holocaust has become part of the regime's attempts to gain legitimacy. It has also been used to justify the continued murders of pro-Russian civilians in the country's east, which Russians regard as tantamount to a repeat of Nazi German atrocities.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko recently denounced the Minsk peace deal and demanded that the bloodshed must continue.

The Blog


Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

Featured

Mike Johnson Proves That No Man’s Life, Liberty or Property are Safe While the Legislature Isn’t in Session

On September 16, US Representative Mike Johnson (R-LA), acting in his role as Speaker of the House, sent that body’s members home until afte...

Follow Me on Twitter