Category Archives: World War 2

“Russia’s Western Frontier Has Become a Desert”

Another great piece from the Saker. He has an excellent point. It’s time to give up on the Ukies. They are determined to marry into the West and become the West’s newest colony. It will ruin them economically, but they don’t care. Ukraine no longer has any connection with Russia. There are no more two brother peoples. That’s all over. Time to let them go. They’re Nazis anyway. Let the Europeans have them!

He makes some excellent points about Western Ukraine. As you can see, every time Russia was invaded, the invaders came through the Western Ukraine. Since 1600, Western Ukraine was chopped off Russia by various Catholic Western powers to be used a foothold inside Russia and a base for attacking Russia.

This started around 1600 when it was conquered by the Polish-Ukrainian Commonwealth. Around this time, the Ukrainian branch of the Russian Orthodox Church split off and joined the Eastern Catholic rite, aligning themselves with Rome, the West and as we shall see, the perennial enemies and invaders of Russia. The Russians have never forgiven the Ukrainians for what they see as the heresy and treason of this schism.

Later Western, Catholic Napoleon moved into Russia via the Ukraine. Then the Austro-Hungarian Empire carved off the Western Ukraine and made it a part of that Western Catholic Empire. During WW1, the Ukrainians rounded up tens of thousands of Russians in their land and sent them to a concentration camp in Romania where many of them died.

This region and especially the Rusyn region to the south, has been the scene of many Russianizer-Russiaphobe battles since the last half of the 1800’s. One part of the population wanted to Russianize and maintain a close relationship with, or even annex themselves to, Russia and the other group saw themselves as Ukrainians and wanted to become an independent state.They spent a good part of the time from 1850-1921 persecuting each other.

In World War 2, once again, the Western Catholic invaders, this time the Germans again in the form of the Nazis, moved into Russia via the Ukraine. Many Western Ukrainians greeted them with flowers and gleefully assisted in the Jew- and Commie-killing. Their leader was a man named Bandera, who allied himself closely with the Nazis.

During WW2, there was a short-lived pro-Nazi Vichy-like regime in Western Ukraine. Bandera’s group not only killed many Jews, but they also slaughtered many Poles. The reason for this is uncertain but perhaps it was a Ukraine for Ukrainians thing. Bandera is still the hero of the Western Ukrainians who are also voracious anti-Semites. Many Western Ukrainian militias openly use Nazi memorabilia. During Western Ukrainian protests, Nazi graffiti often appears on the nearby buildings. Swastikas in particular are favored.

And with the birth of the Maidan, as we can see, once again the anti-Orthodox West has once again captured the Ukraine, installed another fanatical anti-Russian government, and had plans to use the Western Ukraine once again as a base to attack Holy Mother Russia. So you can see why Russians are alarmed, to put it mildly.

Russia’s Western Frontier Has Become a Desert

Warning: the following is not an analysis, it is a “cri du coeur” !

Looking at the photo of the three stooges oh so proud of having “prevailed” over that evil Russia I have very mixed feelings. On one that, I have a sense of immense disgust. No, not for the the Eurobureaucrats or for Poroshenko – they are true to character.

No, my disgust is directed at that sorry pseudo-ethnicity called “the Ukrainians” and which now has fractured into two mutually exclusive groups: the real “Ukrainians” – the Russians from “core Russia” (which is the real meaning of the expressions “Malorossia” or “Small Russia”) who live on Russia’s western frontier (the real meaning of the word “u-krainy“) and the pseudo-Ukrainian ex-homo sovieticus (I call them Ukies) who mutated into pseudo-Europeans and who now fancy themselves as “Europeans” just because they volunteered to become the next Anglo-Zionist colony.

These are the folks who traded a 1000-year old history for the (imaginary) prize which the capitalists have been dangling in front of their collective noses like a carrot before a donkey. Two things characterize these folks: they are phenomenally ignorant of pretty much everything, but especially of their own history, and their credulity is quite literally infinite. In other words – they are terminally stupid. As for their spiritual or cultural values, they don’t extend beyond what is shown on a typical commercial on TV.

It is at this point my thinking that I move from disgust to relief. Relief that modern Russia will not have to deal with such a morally degenerate and spiritually corrupt population.

I am Russian. My family roots go far back into the Russian middle-ages and for me each phase in Russian history – whether good or bad – has its own spiritual significance.

From the birth of Russia at the baptism of Saint Vladimir, to the heroic resistance of Saint Alexander Nevsky, to the gradual formation of a new Russia under Ivan III, to the tragic period of Ivan IV, the Stoglav, the tragic Old Rite Schism, the spiritual desert of the reign of Peter I, to the rebirth of Russia through the times of Alexander II and Alexander III and to the martyrdom and final transition form an earthly empire to a spiritual reality under the Czar-Martyr Nicholas II – each of these moments in history can only be understood through spiritual eyes and not by means of materialistic categories.

And even though modern Russia is still spiritually sick, very sick, I clearly perceive the signs of a spiritual revival, or a gradual shedding of the materialistic delusions which had been imposed upon the Russian people during the 20th century.

What some (correctly) call a “clash of civilizations” between Russia and the West is a reality. Likewise, when the Ukrainian propaganda speaks of a “civilizational choice” it is inadvertently expressing a profound spiritual truth. Russia is barely standing up, still shaking and in many ways confused, but already it is resisting the capitalist rot which is corroding the western civilization and Russia is already (correctly) perceived as a threat by the western plutocracy. If this is what a weak and still confused Russia is capable of, just imagine what it could do if it fully recovered its true spiritual and cultural identity and strength!

So this for me is a crucial question: does the slowly healing Russia really need to live under the same cultural/civilizational roof with the kind of folks which brought Iatseniuk or Poroshenko to power? I say let Europe deal with them! In fact, the Ukies and the EU richly *deserve* each other.

Yes, I know, Kiev is the cradle of the entire Russian civilization, but did Christ Himself not say:

And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

(Matt. 5:29).

I don’t want Russia to perish for the Ukraine, much less for for the pseudo-Ukraine I call “Banderastan”.

The Pope’s Crusaders came from the West. Napoleon’s Masons came from the West. The German and Austro-Hungarian imperialists came from the West. Then the Nazis came from the West. Now the Anglo-Zionists are coming from the West. In the past, each time the “outer-Russians” (the correct translation of “Grand Russians”) came and saved the Ukraine from these invaders and they did that a a huge cost for Russia.

But at least in the past the real Ukrainians never confused the occupier and the liberator. Nowadays this has changed. In fact, the modern “Ukrainians” think that they are feeling a deep kinship with the invader, they even identify with him. I think that Russia should stop pretending that this is not happening and that these two are “brother” nations. Okay, maybe they were brothers in the past, but now all they share is the brotherhood of Cain and Abel.

There is no continuity between Saint Vladimir and Poroshenko and what we are observing in Kiev today is what the Scripture call the “the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place“. And the Ukies like it that way. They have no use for holiness. I say let them have it!

Yes, of course, there is Novorussia which Russia cannot and will not abandon. And Crimea will forever remain part of Russia. And there are still real Russians in Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, Mariupol, Nikolaev, Odessa and even in Kiev. But these Russians either cannot or don’t want to fight to free their land from the current western occupier and they need to live with the consequences of this choice.

As for the rest of Russia, I hope to see it turn to the North and the East were its real future lies. Let the EU deal with Banderastan, let Banderastan deal with the EU and let them jointly enjoy their role as faithful servants of the plutocratic elite which administers the European Anglo-Zionist protectorate on behalf of the USA. Let the Ukies, the Balts and the East-Europeans all race each other to see who will get the title of “employee of the month” from Uncle Sam. Let them bask in their new-found pride to have finally become full members of the civilization of Walmart and McDonald’s.

And let them keep on digging a deep trench all along the Russian-Ukrainian border. While it is, of course, militarily useless (what in the world are the Ukie generals thinking?!) is a a fantastic symbol of what the ex-Ukraine now “EU-associated Banderastan has become”. Russian kids should be bussed in from their schools and shown this trench while their teachers explain to them what kind of people dug this trench and why.

Russia’s western frontier has become a desert. It is high time for Russia to accept this reality and act on it.

12 Comments

Filed under Catholicism, Christian, Christianity, Eurasia, Europe, European, Fascism, History, National Socialism, Nazism, Orthodox, Political Science, Regional, Religion, Russia, Ukraine, War, World War 1, World War 2, Zionism

Tightening the U.S. Grip on Western Europe: Washington’s Iron Curtain in Ukraine

From CounterPunch, June 6-8, 2014. This article has everything you need to know about what is going on in the Ukraine right now. If you read it, you will see that the story she is telling is completely the opposite of what the US media is telling you. That is because the media is lying to you. As far as I can tell, everything Johnstone writes here is 100% true. It’s really pitiful how many Americans are brainwashed by the media. It is only rarely that you meet an American who tells you that the US media is a propaganda system and lays out exactly how and why that is so. Even most US liberals are unbelievably brainwashed, nearly hopelessly so, by a rightwing corporate media. It is quite sad if you think about it.

Tightening the U.S. Grip on Western Europe: Washington’s Iron Curtain in Ukraine

by Diana Johnstone

NATO leaders are currently acting out a deliberate charade in Europe, designed to reconstruct an Iron Curtain between Russia and the West.

With astonishing unanimity, NATO leaders feign surprise at events they planned months in advance. Events that they deliberately triggered are being misrepresented as sudden, astonishing, unjustified “Russian aggression”. The United States and the European Union undertook an aggressive provocation in Ukraine that they knew would force Russia to react defensively, one way or another.

They could not be sure exactly how Russian president Vladimir Putin would react when he saw that the United States was manipulating political conflict in Ukraine to install a pro-Western government intent on joining NATO. This was not a mere matter of a “sphere of influence” in Russia’s “near abroad”, but a matter of life and death to the Russian Navy, as well as a grave national security threat on Russia’s border.

A trap was thereby set for Putin. He was damned if he did, and damned if he didn’t. He could under-react, and betray Russia’s basic national interests, allowing NATO to advance its hostile forces to an ideal attack position.

Or he could over-react, by sending Russian forces to invade Ukraine. The West was ready for this, prepared to scream that Putin was “the new Hitler”, poised to overrun poor, helpless Europe, which could only be saved (again) by the generous Americans.

In reality, the Russian defensive move was a very reasonable middle course. Thanks to the fact that the overwhelming majority of Crimeans felt Russian, having been Russian citizens until Khrushchev frivolously bestowed the territory on Ukraine in 1954, a peaceful democratic solution was found. Crimeans voted for their return to Russia in a referendum which was perfectly legal according to international law, although in violation of the Ukrainian constitution, which was by then in tatters having just been violated by the overthrow of the country’s duly elected president, Victor Yanukovych, facilitated by violent militias. The change of status of Crimea was achieved without bloodshed, by the ballot box.

Nevertheless, the cries of indignation from the West were every bit as hysterically hostile as if Putin had overreacted and subjected Ukraine to a U.S.-style bombing campaign, or invaded the country outright – which they may have expected him to do.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry led the chorus of self-righteous indignation, accusing Russia of the sort of thing his own government is in the habit of doing. “You just don’t invade another country on phony pretext in order to assert your interests. This is an act of aggression that is completely trumped up in terms of its pretext”, Kerry pontificated. “It’s really 19th century behavior in the 21st century”. Instead of laughing at this hypocrisy, U.S. media, politicians and punditry zealously took up the theme of Putin’s unacceptable expansionist aggression. The Europeans followed with a weak, obedient echo.

It Was All Planned at Yalta

In September 2013, one of Ukraine’s richest oligarchs, Viktor Pinchuk, paid for an elite strategic conference on Ukraine’s future that was held in the same Palace in Yalta, Crimea, where Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill met to decide the future of Europe in 1945.

The Economist, one of the elite media reporting on what it called a “display of fierce diplomacy”, stated that: “The future of Ukraine, a country of 48m people, and of Europe was being decided in real time.” The participants included Bill and Hillary Clinton, former CIA head General David Petraeus, former U.S. Treasury secretary Lawrence Summers, former World Bank head Robert Zoellick, Swedish foreign minister Carl Bildt, Shimon Peres, Tony Blair, Gerhard Schröder, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Mario Monti, Lithuanian president Dalia Grybauskaite, and Poland’s influential foreign minister Radek Sikorski.

Both President Viktor Yanukovych, deposed five months later, and his recently elected successor Petro Poroshenko were present. Former U.S. energy secretary Bill Richardson was there to talk about the shale-gas revolution which the United States hopes to use to weaken Russia by substituting fracking for Russia’s natural gas reserves. The center of discussion was the “Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement” (DCFTA) between Ukraine and the European Union, and the prospect of Ukraine’s integration with the West. The general tone was euphoria over the prospect of breaking Ukraine’s ties with Russia in favor of the West.

Conspiracy against Russia? Not at all. Unlike Bilderberg, the proceedings were not secret. Facing a dozen or so American VIPs and a large sampling of the European political elite was a Putin adviser named Sergei Glazyev, who made Russia’s position perfectly clear.

Glazyev injected a note of political and economic realism into the conference. Forbes reported at the time on the “stark difference” between the Russian and Western views “not over the advisability of Ukraine’s integration with the EU but over its likely impact.” In contrast to Western euphoria, the Russian view was based on “very specific and pointed economic criticisms” about the Trade Agreement’s impact on Ukraine’s economy, noting that Ukraine was running an enormous foreign accounts deficit, funded with foreign borrowing, and that the resulting substantial increase in Western imports could only swell the deficit. Ukraine “will either default on its debts or require a sizable bailout”.

The Forbes reporter concluded that “the Russian position is far closer to the truth than the happy talk coming from Brussels and Kiev.”

As for the political impact, Glazyev pointed out that the Russian-speaking minority in Eastern Ukraine might move to split the country in protest against cutting ties with Russia, and that Russia would be legally entitled to support them, according to The Times of London.

In short, while planning to incorporate Ukraine into the Western sphere, Western leaders were perfectly aware that this move would entail serious problems with Russian-speaking Ukrainians, and with Russia itself. Rather than seeking to work out a compromise, Western leaders decided to forge ahead and to blame Russia for whatever would go wrong. What went wrong first was that Yanukovych got cold feet faced with the economic collapse implied by the Trade Agreement with the European Union. He postponed signing, hoping for a better deal. Since none of this was explained clearly to the Ukrainian public, outraged protests ensued, which were rapidly exploited by the United States… against Russia.

Ukraine as Bridge…Or Achilles Heel

Ukraine, a term meaning borderland, is a country without clearly fixed historical borders that has been stretched too far to the East and too far to the West. The Soviet Union was responsible for this, but the Soviet Union no longer exists, and the result is a country without a unified identity and which emerges as a problem for itself and for its neighbors.

It was extended too far East, incorporating territory that might as well have been Russian, as part of a general policy to distinguish the USSR from the Tsarist empire, enlarging Ukraine at the expense of its Russian component and demonstrating that the Soviet Union was really a union among equal socialist republics. So long as the whole Soviet Union was run by the Communist leadership, these borders didn’t matter too much.

It was extended too far West at the end of World War II. The victorious Soviet Union extended Ukraine’s border to include Western regions, dominated by the city variously named Lviv, Lwow, Lemberg or Lvov, depending on whether it belonged to Lithuania, Poland, the Hapsburg Empire or the USSR, a region which was a hotbed of anti-Russian sentiments. This was no doubt conceived as a defensive move, to neutralize hostile elements, but it created the fundamentally divided nation that today constitutes the perfect troubled waters for hostile fishing.

The Forbes report cited above pointed out that: “For most of the past five years, Ukraine was basically playing a double game, telling the EU that it was interested in signing the DCFTA while telling the Russians that it was interested in joining the customs union.” Either Yanukovych could not make up his mind, or was trying to squeeze the best deal out of both sides, or was seeking the highest bidder. In any case, he was never “Moscow’s man”, and his downfall owes a lot no doubt to his own role in playing both ends against the middle. His was a dangerous game of pitting greater powers against each other.

It is safe to say that what was needed was something that so far seems totally lacking in Ukraine: a leadership that recognizes the divided nature of the country and works diplomatically to find a solution that satisfies both the local populations and their historic ties with the Catholic West and with Russia. In short, Ukraine could be a bridge between East and West – and this, incidentally, has been precisely the Russian position.

The Russian position has not been to split Ukraine, much less to conquer it, but to facilitate the country’s role as bridge. This would involve a degree of federalism, of local government, which so far is entirely lacking in the country, with local governors selected not by election but by the central government in Kiev. A federal Ukraine could both develop relations with the EU and maintain its vital (and profitable) economic relations with Russia.

But this arrangement calls for Western readiness to cooperate with Russia. The United States has plainly vetoed this possibility, preferring to exploit the crisis to brand Russia “the enemy”.

Plan A and Plan B

U.S. policy, already evident at the September 2013 Yalta meeting, was carried out on the ground by Victoria Nuland, former adviser to Dick Cheney, deputy ambassador to NATO, spokeswoman for Hillary Clinton, wife of neocon theorist Robert Kagan. Her leading role in the Ukraine events proves that the neo-con influence in the State Department, established under Bush II, was retained by Obama, whose only visible contribution to foreign policy change has been the presence of a man of African descent in the presidency, calculated to impress the world with U.S. multicultural virtue. Like most other recent presidents, Obama is there as a temporary salesman for policies made and executed by others.

As Victoria Nuland boasted in Washington, since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States has spent five billion dollars to gain political influence in Ukraine (this is called “promoting democracy”). This investment is not “for oil”, or for any immediate economic advantage. The primary motives are geopolitical, because Ukraine is Russia’s Achilles’ heel, the territory with the greatest potential for causing trouble to Russia.

What called public attention to Victoria Nuland’s role in the Ukrainian crisis was her use of a naughty word, when she told the U.S. ambassador, “Fuck the EU”. But the fuss over her bad language veiled her bad intentions. The issue was who should take power away from the elected president Viktor Yanukovych. German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s party been promoting former boxer Vitaly Klitschko as its candidate.

Nuland’s rude rebuff signified that the United States, not Germany or the EU, was to choose the next leader, and that was not Klitschko but “Yats”. And indeed it was Yats, Arseniy Yatsenyuk , a second-string US-sponsored technocrat known for his enthusiasm for IMF austerity policies and NATO membership, who got the job. This put a U.S. sponsored government, enforced in the streets by fascist militia with little electoral clout but plenty of armed meanness, in a position to manage the May 25 elections, from which the Russophone East was largely excluded.

Plan A for the Victoria Nuland putsch was probably to install, rapidly, a government in Kiev that would join NATO, thus formally setting the stage for the United States to take possession of Russia’s indispensable Black Sea naval base at Sebastopol in Crimea. Reincorporating Crimea into Russia was Putin’s necessary defensive move to prevent this.

But the Nuland gambit was in fact a win-win ploy. If Russia failed to defend itself, it risked losing its entire southern fleet – a total national disaster. On the other hand, if Russia reacted, as was most likely, the US thereby won a political victory that was perhaps its main objective. Putin’s totally defensive move is portrayed by the Western mainstream media, echoing political leaders, as unprovoked “Russian expansionism”, which the propaganda machine compares to Hitler grabbing Czechoslovakia and Poland.

Thus a blatant Western provocation, using Ukrainian political confusion against a fundamentally defensive Russia, has astonishingly succeeded in producing a total change in the artificial Zeitgeist produced by Western mass media. Suddenly, we are told that the “freedom-loving West” is faced with the threat of “aggressive Russian expansionism”.

Some forty years ago, Soviet leaders gave away the store under the illusion that peaceful renunciation on their part could lead to a friendly partnership with the West, and especially with the United States. But those in the United States who never wanted to end the Cold War are having their revenge. Never mind “communism”; if, instead of advocating the dictatorship of the proletariat, Russia’s current leader is simply old-fashioned in certain ways, Western media can fabricate a monster out of that. The United States needs an enemy to save the world from.

The Protection Racket Returns

But first of all, the United States needs Russia as an enemy in order to “save Europe”, which is another way to say, in order to continue to dominate Europe. Washington policy-makers seemed to be worried that Obama’s swing to Asia and neglect of Europe might weaken U.S. control of its NATO allies. The May 25 European Parliament elections revealed a large measure of disaffection with the European Union. This disaffection, notably in France, is linked to a growing realization that the EU, far from being a potential alternative to the United States, is in reality a mechanism that locks European countries into U.S.-defined globalization, economic decline and U.S. foreign policy, wars and all.

Ukraine is not the only entity that has been overextended. So has the EU. With 28 members of diverse language, culture, history and mentality, the EU is unable to agree on any foreign policy other than the one Washington imposes.

The extension of the EU to former Eastern European satellites has totally broken whatever deep consensus might have been possible among the countries of the original Economic Community: France, Germany, Italy and the Benelux states. Poland and the Baltic States see EU membership as useful, but their hearts are in America – where many of their most influential leaders have been educated and trained. Washington is able to exploit the anti-communist, anti-Russian and even pro-Nazi nostalgia of northeastern Europe to raise the false cry of “the Russians are coming!” in order to obstruct the growing economic partnership between the old EU, notably Germany, and Russia.

Russia is no threat. But to vociferous Russophobes in the Baltic States, Western Ukraine and Poland, the very existence of Russia is a threat. Encouraged by the United States and NATO, this endemic hostility is the political basis for the new “iron curtain” meant to achieve the aim spelled out in 1997 by Zbigniew Brzezinski in The Grand Chessboard: keeping the Eurasian continent divided in order to perpetuate U.S. world hegemony. The old Cold War served that purpose, cementing U.S. military presence and political influence in Western Europe. A new Cold War can prevent U.S. influence from being diluted by good relations between Western Europe and Russia.

Obama has come to Europe ostentatiously promising to “protect” Europe by basing more troops in regions as close as possible to Russia, while at the same time ordering Russia to withdraw its own troops, on its own territory, still farther away from troubled Ukraine. This appears designed to humiliate Putin and deprive him of political support at home, at a time when protests are rising in Eastern Ukraine against the Russian leader for abandoning them to killers sent from Kiev.

To tighten the U.S. grip on Europe, the United States is using the artificial crisis to demand that its indebted allies spend more on “defense”, notably by purchasing U.S. weapons systems. Although the U.S. is still far from being able to meet Europe’s energy needs from the new U.S. fracking boom, this prospect is being hailed as a substitute for Russia’s natural gas sales – stigmatized as a “way of exercising political pressure”, something of which hypothetical U.S. energy sales are presumed to be innocent. Pressure is being brought against Bulgaria and even Serbia to block construction of the South Stream pipeline that would bring Russian gas into the Balkans and southern Europe.

From D-Day to Dooms Day

Today, June 6, the seventieth anniversary of the D-Day landing is being played in Normandy as a gigantic celebration of American domination, with Obama heading an all-star cast of European leaders. The last of the aged surviving soldiers and aviators present are like the ghosts of a more innocent age when the United States was only at the start of its new career as world master.

They were real, but the rest is a charade. French television is awash with the tears of young villagers in Normandy who have been taught that the United States is some sort of Guardian Angel, which sent its boys to die on the shores of Normandy out of pure love for France. This idealized image of the past is implicitly projected on the future. In seventy years, the Cold War, a dominant propaganda narrative and above all Hollywood have convinced the French, and most of the West, that D-Day was the turning point that won World War II and saved Europe from Nazi Germany.

Vladimir Putin came to the celebration, and has been elaborately shunned by Obama, self-appointed arbiter of Virtue. The Russians are paying tribute to the D-Day operation which liberated France from Nazi occupation, but they – and historians – know what most of the West has forgotten: that the Wehrmacht was decisively defeated not by the Normandy landing, but by the Red Army. If the vast bulk of German forces had not been pinned down fighting a losing war on the Eastern front, nobody would celebrate D-Day as it is being celebrated today.

Putin is widely credited as being “the best chess player”, who won the first round of the Ukrainian crisis. He has no doubt done the best he could, faced with the crisis foisted on him. But the U.S. has whole ranks of pawns which Putin does not have. And this is not only a chess game, but chess combined with poker combined with Russian roulette. The United States is ready to take risks that the more prudent Russian leaders prefer to avoid… as long as possible.

Perhaps the most extraordinary aspect of the current charade is the servility of the “old” Europeans. Apparently abandoning all Europe’s accumulated wisdom, drawn from its wars and tragedies, and even oblivious to their own best interests, today’s European leaders seem ready to follow their American protectors to another D-Day … D for Doom.

Can the presence of a peace-seeking Russian leader in Normandy make a difference? All it would take would be for mass media to tell the truth, and for Europe to produce reasonably wise and courageous leaders, for the whole fake war machine to lose its luster, and for truth to begin to dawn. A peaceful Europe is still possible, but for how long?

Diana Johnstone is the author of Fools’ Crusade: Yugoslavia, NATO, and Western Delusions.

Leave a comment

Filed under Cold War, Democrats, Economics, Eurasia, Europe, European, Geopolitics, History, Left, Marxism, Modern, Obama, Politics, Regional, Russia, Socialism, Ukraine, US Politics, USA, USSR, War, World War 2

A Trotskyite Gets It Right for Once

The Trots are split on the Ukraine question. Quite a few of them are supporting US imperialism and backing the neo-Nazis in the Ukrainian government. Others urge support for Russia and the eastern separatists. Yet more seem to be saying that neither side should be supported. This last is similar to their line in WW2 – Trotsky held that WW2 was simply a battle of one group of capitalists (the Allies) against another group of capitalists (the Axis). He also also continued to advocate the overthrow of the USSR regime even when it was clearly under threat from the Axis. Thankfully, one of Stalin’s secret agents killed this traitor in Mexico City. Never was an icepick put to better use!

Every now and again, a Trot gets it right:

Imperialism is not just a rude word for US foreign policy.

But he follows it with typical Trot nuttiness:

It is a global system of which Moscow is as much a part as Washington.

Um, nope. Russia is not an imperialist country, and it is not part of the US imperial project.

Then he revisits it with a reprise of Trotsky’s fence-sitting in the early days of the war:

Or should we have taken sides in the Valentine’s Day massacre and supported the North Side gang against Al Capone in the name of a multi-centric underworld?

But this line was a stroke of genius. I will bold it below just to highlight how important it is to realize this:

Imperialism is not just a rude word for US foreign policy.

Oh yeah! Nail, meet hammer.

6 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Economics, Eurasia, Europe, European, Geopolitics, History, Imperialism, Left, Marxism, Modern, Political Science, Regional, Russia, Trotskidiots, Ukraine, USA, USSR, War, World War 2

A New Nation Is Born

The official page of the new country is here.

Today, on May 11, 2014, a new nation has been formed in Europe – People’s Republic of Donetsk. The results of a referendum on whether or not the Donetsk region should be part of the Ukraine or should secede from the Ukraine are now in. 89% of voters voted to declare independence from the Ukraine and 10% voted to remain a part of the Ukraine. 1% spoiled their ballots. Turnout was high at 75%. The results lined up very well with an opinion poll taken by several US news organizations the day before which showed that 96% of those planning to vote supported independence.

Ukrainian media said that they capture several “terrorists” in a truck in the region. The Ukrainian forces said that they found 1 million ballots premarked “yes.” Pro-independence forces denounced this as a false flag operation. Ukrainian media also said that they had tapped a phone call between one of the independence leaders and the head of a Russian neo-Nazi organization in which they independence leaders said that he planned to falsify the results in favor of independence and that he had talked to Putin about this. Pro-independence forces said that the phone call never occurred and was made up by Ukrainian media.

Ukrainian media and government has run a very large number of lies during this whole series of events and at any rate, the results line up well with opinion polls.

Soon after the results were announced, the new government said that they would set up their own military and would proceed with what they called an amicable divorce from the Ukrainian state. They also said that they were switching currency from the Ukrainian hryvna to the Russian ruble. The region is heavily industrial and has deep economic ties with Russia. Much of Russia’s raw iron and sheet metal is produced in plants in this region. There are also large coal mines in the Donbass area.

The West condemned the new elections as phony and said that no government would recognized them. It remains to be seen how Russia will react to the declaration of independence. Hopefully they will recognize the new country!

Elections were also ongoing in Lugansk while this post was being written. Turnout is high, but no results are in yet.

The Kharkiv region postponed their independence referendum scheduled for the same day as they said they were not ready to hold the elections yet.

Donetsk is definitely now an independent country in the eyes of its leaders. Whether they will remain an independent nation or ask to be annexed to Russia in the future is not known.

Three other regions of the former USSR are in the same boat. South Ossetia and Abkhazia have declared independence from Georgia after violent rebellions. Russian troops are now placed in both new countries. Both South Ossetia and Abkhazia have offered suggestions that they may wish to annex themselves to Russia in the future.

Eastern Ukraine has never really been a part of anything called the Ukraine. It has always been a part of Russia, called Novorussiya, ever since Russia conquered the region in 1750. It remained a part of Russia after the Bolshevik revolution and was only attached to the Western Ukraine (the Ukrainian SSR) in 1924. It is really just a part of Russia and it has no business being in the Ukraine.

The true Ukrainian state is Western Ukraine from Kiev to the West,  especially Galicia, Volhynia, and Bukovina. Bukovina used to be a part of Romania and Galicia and Volhynia were first a part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and then a part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. During WW2, the pro-Nazi Banderist Ukrainian nationalists ethnically cleansed most of the Poles out of the region, murdering 100,000 of them in the process.

However, the region of Transcarpathia where the Rusyns live has never really been a part of the real Ukraine and they want no part of this new state. This region recently declared their independence from the Ukraine. Transcarpathia is home to Rusyns, a separate people who speak a language closely related to but separate from Ukrainian. Other groups of Rusyns live in Slovakia and Poland. The ones in Poland are called Lemkos.

All hail the People’s Republic of Donetsk!

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

6 Comments

Filed under Abkhazia, Eurasia, Europe, European, Europeans, Georgia, History, Modern, Near East, Poles, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Russia, South Ossetia, Ukraine, War, World War 2

Girls of the Red Army!

From here.

Whoa! A lot of those chicks are pretty fuckable, no?

It is amazing how many Soviet women served on the front lines, either piloting combat aircraft of as ground troops, often snipers. Was there a general call-up of women, or did they all just volunteer?

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

4 Comments

Filed under Babes, European, History, Modern, USSR, War, Women, World War 2

May 8, 1945 – May 8, 2014

Warning: NSFW! Contains gruesome and disturbing footage from the final days of WW2.

On May 8, 1945, the Soviet flag was hoisted above the burning city of Berlin. The war with Germany was over.

One of the most famous photos of WW2. Simply breathtaking. Of course, here in the US, we scarcely know of it as the similar Iwo Jima photo has supplanted it.

One of the most famous photos of WW2. Simply breathtaking. Of course, here in the US, we scarcely know of it as the similar Iwo Jima photo has supplanted it.

But not long before, one of the worst battles of the 20th Century was in full swing.

Incredible photo. Soviet soldiers race down a Berlin street in flames.

Incredible photo. Soviet soldiers, apparently under fire, race down a Berlin street in flames.

And soon after:

Truly amazing photo, purportedly of a dead Hitler. This photo was found many times in recently opened Soviet archives, suggesting it was Soviet propaganda and may not even be real.

Truly amazing photo, purportedly of a dead Hitler. This photo was found many times in recently opened Soviet archives, suggesting it was Soviet propaganda and may not even be real.

Surreal scenes:

A German couple strolls past a burning building. Bizarre scenes like this were common at this time and place.

A German couple strolls past a burning building. Bizarre scenes like this were common at this time and place.

The wounded and the dead of the vanquished.

The wounded:

Vast throngs of wounded German soldiers crowd the streets as nurses attend to them.

Vast throngs of wounded German soldiers crowd the streets as nurses attend to them.

And the dead:

There were many suicides in the period right after the fall. Many of them were German women. They were terrified of the soldiers and the possibility that they might be homeless for the first time in their lives.

There were many German suicides in the period right after the fall. Many of them were German women. They were terrified of the soldiers and the possibility that they might be homeless for the first time in their lives.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

28 Comments

Filed under Europe, European, Germany, History, Modern, Regional, USSR, War, World War 2

Elena Vaenga, “The Sacred War”

Elena Vaenga is a very famous Russian singer. She often performs in full Red Army uniform and sings patriotic songs. Her performances are packed. There are Russian soldiers in uniform in the background. And yes, Russian uniforms still have the red star on them. Look at the expressions in that crowd. These Ukrainian fascist idiots have no idea what they have gotten themselves into. Don’t mess with the Red Army!

Obviously this song is about WW2, or as it is known in Russia, The Great Patriotic War.

The huge country is rising
Is rising for the deathly battle
Against the dark fascist force
Against their cursed hordes

Refrain:
Let our noble wrath
Seethe like waves
The national war is going
The Sacred War

Will resist the oppressors
Of right notions (ideas)
Rapists, bandits
People’s tormentors

Refrain:
Let our noble wrath
Seethe like waves
The national war is going
The Sacred War

Don’t their black wings dare
Fly over our Motherland
Don’t the ennemy dare tread
Our immense fields

Refrain:
Let our noble wrath
Seethe like waves
The national war is going
The Sacred War

Let us put a bullet into the brow
Of the rotten fascist vermin
Let us make a strong coffin
For such breed

Refrain:
Let our noble wrath
Seethe like waves
The national war is going
The Sacred War

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

7 Comments

Filed under Eurasia, Music, Regional, Russia, War, World War 2

Great Moments in History

Citizens and Citizenesses of the Soviet Union! Today, at four o’clock in the morning, without addressing any grievances to the Soviet Union, without declaration of war, German forces fell on our country, attacked our frontiers in many places and bombed our cities…an act of treachery unprecedented in the history of civilized nations…The Red Army and the whole nation will wage a victorious Patriotic War for our beloved country, for honour, for liberty…Our cause is just. The enemy will be beaten. Victory will be ours.

– Molotov, 22 June 1941 at the outset of Operation Barbarossa

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

3 Comments

Filed under European, History, USSR, War, World War 2

The Sad Story of the Ukrainians and the Jews

The Ukrainian people have a deep and profound hatred of Jews stemming at least back to 1932 and possibly to centuries of conflict in the Pale. Although things were good for Ukrainian Jews in the USSR, after 1990, things started getting ugly again.

Aside from the hatred possibly stemming from centuries of ethnic conflict in the Pale, modern Ukrainian anti-Semitism seems to stem from 1932. In that year, there was a fake “terror famine” called the Holodomor. In truth, the Holodomor never even happened. Instead of a terror famine, there was just a famine. In one year the harvest simply collapsed.

Part of the reason for the famine was caused by Ukrainians and other kulaks who killed half of the livestock in the USSR. They also destroyed most of the wheat crop in the Ukraine by setting it on fire and piling it in the fields until rain spoiled the crops.

The Ukrainians armed themselves to the teeth and formed contra armies that ranged across the Ukraine. At the height of conflict, there were 40+ armed contra attacks a day taking place in the Ukraine. They attacked and assassinated government officials and they assaulted the new collective farms. When they attacked the farms, they killed all the livestock and destroyed any harvested or growing crops, usually by setting them on fire. They burned down buildings on the collective farms. Of the workers on the collective farms, the males were typically lined up and executed and the female workers were raped.

Stalin responded by sending in a heavily armed secret police force to deal with the contras. The conflict was very ugly. In the course of the anti-kulak campaign, 390,000 Ukrainians were killed. How they were killed is not known. Some may have been killed in warfare, but many others may have been lined up and shot. Many Ukrainians were deported to Siberia, but for whatever reason, there was not enough food on the trains and many died en route. There were huge gangs of murderers on both sides and it was a vicious time.

Since the Ukrainians had been killing so many livestock and destroying so many crops, the secret police invaded Ukraine to prevent the destruction of more animals and crops. No chances were taken with letting the Ukrainians destroy crops and the wheat crop was simply confiscated as soon as it was harvested.

In 1932, at some point in this horrible mess, the wheat harvest simply collapsed. There was a famine harvest; the harvest was only 50% of normal. There was famine all over the USSR. Some died of hunger, but most died of disease when they were weakened by hunger. Many Ukrainians died of hunger-related conditions. However, the famine was not intentional or a “murder famine” – instead, there was simply not enough food.

People died of hunger related illnesses all over the USSR. In the Volga next to the Ukraine, the death rate was the same as it was in the Ukraine. These people were ethnic Russians who loved Stalin, and they died at the same rate as the Ukrainians. This proves that there was no terror famine targeting the Ukrainians. 1 million died in Siberia. Were these people part of the terror famine too? If so, why were they targeted? It makes no sense. People died in the cities, and quite a few died in Moscow. Did the terror famine target residents of Moscow also? The death rate was high in the Ukraine and in the Lower Volga because that was where the crop failure was worst.

Because the Ukrainians were setting their crops on fire and leaving them out in the rain to spoil and killing livestock, Stalin sent his secret police in to the area to secure it. The crop was confiscated and then provisions were sent back to the area from Moscow. The argument is that the Soviets stole the crop and then would not give the Ukrainians any. However, this argument does not hold up as the requisitioning of the crop from Moscow was the same as in the previous year. The Ukrainians level quite a few charges at the Secret Police which if true are quite damning. Many of the Secret Police in the USSR during this period were Jewish – in fact, perhaps up to 38% of them were in 1934.

The Ukrainians, like others suffering from famine, were trying to flee to areas of the USSR less hard hit by famine. However, the state put guards at the borders to keep people from leaving. This seems cruel as it seems that the state was forcing people back into a famine stricken area to starve.

However, the state could not allow these people to leave the area. This was the breadbasket of the USSR and if the farmers all left, there would be no one to grow and harvest next year’s crop. During this time, the state also inexplicably exported grain. However, some have argued that they were more or less forced to do that. But exporting grain in a famine looks pretty bad. The state may also have been afraid to admit that there was a famine going on, hence they did not call for much outside help. They did this to save face and avoid the humiliation of having to admit that they were suffering from a famine.

During famines and other natural disasters, states have to make many decisions. Some of the decisions are good ones and others are bad ones. This is simply the way it goes.

The way the Ukrainians see is that there was a terror famine. The crop was perfectly fine that year but in order to starve the Ukrainians into submission and punish them for protesting collectivization, Stalin simply starved millions of them to death deliberately in a “terror famine.” Because many of the Secret Police were Jewish, the Ukrainians say, “The Jews starved us. The Jews killed us.” This has been the Ukrainian nationalist line ever since, and many Ukrainian nationalists are vicious antisemites.

When the Nazis invaded and conquered the Ukraine during WW2, many Ukrainians gladly signed up for the Nazi militia to fight alongside the Nazis. Ukrainian nationalists have argued that the Banderists, as they were called, simply hated the Soviets more than they hated the Nazis, or that they hated the Soviets so much that they were willing to ally with anyone against them.

Nevertheless, the Banderists gleefully assisted in the slaughter of Communists, Jews and many others in the Ukraine. In fact, they participated in many anti-Jewish pogroms such that the Banderists can be said to have actively participated in the Holocaust. The Banderists saw themselves as getting revenge on the “Jews who killed them” in the Holodomor.

After WW2, things were pretty calm between Ukrainians and Jews in the Ukraine, but nationalist and ultranationalist elements came to the fore after 1990, and the new US – EU – Israel installed government in the Ukraine includes a large ultranationalist and even Nazi segment that plugs into this old rage between the Ukrainians and the Jews, mostly dating back to the Holodomor.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

1 Comment

Filed under Agricutlure, Anti-Semitism, Death, Ethnic Nationalism, Europeans, Fascism, Health, History, Illness, Jews, Modern, National Socialism, Nationalism, Nazism, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Ukrainians, Ultranationalism, USSR, War, World War 2

Answering an Estonian Anti-Communist

An Estonian anti-Communist (who was just banned) wrote the following, which I will answer below:

Ah, I see, evidently I was mistaken. I’d thought of more of a ”democratic socialist” type here but what we have here is in fact fully-blown good ol’ Stalinist here. Holodomor? ”Never occurred. Fascist fabrication-” Katyn massacre? ”Nazi crime” Winter War? ”Nay, Finns attacked the USSR themselves”.

The list can go on and on.

But consider this following questions. If communism is so good, then why do people vote commies out of office immediately when given the chance to (while logically they should do everything within their means to ensure the socialist ”paradise” endures – if it is really the paradise you claim it to be).

Why do people who have actually lived under communism – like me – mostly hate these regimes? I don’t know a SINGLE person in my country who’d claim life in the USSR was better than now. Why is that? Are we all fools why you in your comfortable California apartment know the truth about good communism?

Why do communist countries have to keep their citizens like prison inmates from not fleeing the socialist paradise? Why does Castro need to prevent his citizens from emigrating while no-one wants to immigrate to Cuba (according to your logic at least Latin Americans should). Why was Berlin Wall erected – in order to prevent poor West German workers from escaping from the capitalist hell into the East German paradise?

Why is capitalist South Korea a highly developed country with low crime rates while people in socialist North Korea eat grass and tree bark https://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/starving-north-koreans-forced-survive-diet-grass-and-tree-bark-2010-07-14? Why does the Korean peninsula at night look like that: Capitalist fabrication I guess? Why, why why?

Rejoinders:

I’d thought of more of a ”democratic socialist” type here but what we have here is in fact fully-blown good ol’ Stalinist here.

Not really, even the slightest hint of social democracy here in the US, and I could die happy, believe me.

Holodomor? ”Never occurred. Fascist fabrication-‘

Right, the “Holodomor” which means “terror famine” simply never even happened, and it is indeed a fascist fabrication, but the West also got in on it too, so it is a lie perpetrated by both the fascists and their buddies in the West like the Americans.

There was a famine, but there was no terror famine or deliberate famine. It was a famine that just happened not by anyone deliberately causing it. These things happened. In one year, the harvest simply collapsed by 50% and many people died of starvation related problems, mostly illness. But there was no intentional starvation, so the Holodomor is just a lie made up by the Estonians’ best friends, the Ukrainian Banderist Nazis.

Katyn massacre? ”Nazi crime” Winter War? ”Nay, Finns attacked the USSR themselves”.

No, Katyn was done by the Soviets and it was pretty bad – 45,000 Poles dead. But your Nazi heroes killed 10 million Poles, so you do the math.

In the Winter War, Stalin attacked Finland, yes. Pretty ugly.

WW2 was very ugly on all sides. Even we Americans behaved horrifically. But it hard for me to figure that Mr. Stalin acted so much worse than Mr. Hitler. It is simply not true. How easily Americans forget! Remember all those warm articles praising “Uncle Joe?” Stalin won the war for we Americans and saved countless American lives, but some people never learn I guess.

If communism is so good, then why do people vote commies out of office immediately when given the chance to.

No Communists in history have ever been voted out of power to my knowledge. Leftists frequently win elections. Many have won elections in Latin America recently. Hugo Chavez Bolivarians have won more elections than I can even count. The Sandinistas and FMLN recently won in Nicaragua and El Salvador. The Left has been winning in Ecuador for a long time now. Same with Bolivia – the Left keeps winning. The Left under the Kirchners has been winning in Argentina too for a long time. Lugo won in Paraguay until a US fascist coup threw him out. A Leftist won in Honduras until another US fascist coup threw him out. Leftist Aristide won 92% of the vote in Haiti.

Eurocommunists won in Italy forever. Eurocom types won for decades in Bengal and Kerala in India. A guy who is basically a Communist has been winning for 20 years in Belarus. Communists have been elected for decades in Moldova.

While logically they should do everything within their means to ensure the socialist ”paradise” endures – if it is really the paradise you claim it to be.

I never said Commie countries were paradises, socialist or otherwise. That classic Communist model has many problems, as should be obvious to anyone with eyes.

Why do people who have actually lived under communism – like me – mostly hate these regimes?

They don’t. Recent surveys in Eastern Europe found that majorities in most countries said that life was better under Communism than it is now.

I don’t know a SINGLE person in my country who’d claim life in the USSR was better than now. Why is that?

Different countries. The Baltic states hated Communism, however in the rest of Eastern Europe, majorities continue to say Communism was better than what replaced it.

Why do communist countries have to keep their citizens like prison inmates from not fleeing the socialist paradise?

Brain drain.

Why does Castro need to prevent his citizens from emigrating while no-one wants to immigrate to Cuba (according to your logic at least Latin Americans should).

Cubans are not prevented from leaving the country. There is an Orderly Departure Program for those who wish to leave. You have to go stand and in line, and oh yes, you do need to purchase that Visa thing. The idiots on boats drowning are fools who don’t want to wait in line, can’t afford a Visa or whatever. The Hell with them. I say they get what they deserve.

Cubans only come to the US. They never go to the Latin American capitalist paradises because most of them suck. They come to the US to make money and not for any other reason.

The Eastern half of Cuba is now full of Jamaican and Haitian immigrants who arrived in Cuba illegally. The Cubans are letting them stay there and almost all of them want to stay. If you go talk to them, 100% of them will tell you that Cuba is way better than Jamaica or Haiti.

Why was Berlin Wall erected – in order to prevent poor West German workers from escaping from the capitalist hell into the East German paradise?

Brain drain. They let them leave for a long time but the brain drain got to be too much. And in contrast to your views about no one immigrating to a Commie country, after 1945, a very large number of West German Leftists took off and moved to East Germany. A German friend told me that many of her relatives did just that.

Why is capitalist South Korea a highly developed country with low crime rates while people in socialist North Korea eat grass and tree bark.

Most people on the Left want nothing to do with North Korea, where the economy collapsed. Here is what happened. Overnight, the price of oil went up by 10X. So that would be like the gas you buy at the pump going from $3.90 to $39/gallon. What do you think the US economy would look like if gas went to $40/gallon overnight?

I do not mind the South Korean model, but I think they need a lot more socialism. The South Korean model of capitalism has not worked well in the rest of the world. Such models tend to fail in the 3rd World. Further, the state plays an extremely heavy role in South Korean capitalism (really more like “state capitalism”) that I am not really sure that that is laissez faire free market capitalism at all.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site. This is my only job.

26 Comments

Filed under Americas, Argentina, Asia, Capitalism, Caribbean, Central America, Cold War, Cuba, Economics, El Salvador, Europe, European, Fascism, Germany, Haiti, History, Honduras, India, Italy, Latin America, Left, Marxism, NE Asia, Nicaragua, North Korea, Paraguay, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Socialism, South America, South Asia, South Korea, USSR, War, World War 2