IRAN WAR FROM A RUSSIAN POINT OF VIEW

32 comments

Posted on 18th September 2012 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , , ,

How sad is it that I actually have more faith in the impartiality of an article from Pravda than I do from the NYT or Wall Street Journal? Anyone who thinks attacking Iran will be a cakewalk and not have huge unintended consequences, is smoking dope. The Chinese and Russians do not want the U.S. and Israel in control of Iran and their oil. The potential for World War III has not been higher since the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962.

Iran to kick off World War Three

10.01.2012 17:00

Iran to kick off World War Three. 46337.jpeg

The world is perhaps standing on the brink of another major war, which may kick off in Iran. Sources close to special services of different countries even come up with dates when the war may begin. The Southern Caucasus borders on Iran. Russia’s borders are near the country too. GeorgiaTimes and a scientist of politics of the Tbilisi State University (Georgia) tried to predict what consequences the armed conflict may lead to for separate countries of the region.

The war may begin when Israel strikes “nuclear” objects in Iran. The United States will support the attack. If it happens, the new large-scale war will become inevitable. Iran is not Libya, and not even Iraq.  In addition, anti-Iranian enemies have failed to build the “axis of hatred” around Iran. Therefore, many countries in the region will support Iran either directly or by implication. In particular, it goes about China. Chinese President Hu Jintao stated that if the USA or any other country attacked Iran, China would take responsive measures immediately. As for Moscow, sources at Russia’s Defense Ministry said that the forces in the region had already been mobilized in case of a possible war.

Many Iranians come to Armenia, a republic of the former Soviet Union, for weekends. Women feel more liberated there, whereas men can drink cognac freely. The times, when Iran was separated from the Caucasus with the iron curtain of the Soviet Union, have become a thing of the past. Nowadays, for many residents of Armenia and Azerbaijan, Iran is not an exotic state at all.

Armenia and Azerbaijan only border on Iran; the countries can only careless about the problems of their neighbor. However, it only seems so. The war with Iran, if it ever happens, is not going to be a regional conflict.

Georgian scientist of politics, Solomon Lebanoidze, is pessimistic about the future of the region. As he said in an interview with GeorgiaTimes, the war in Iran is very likely to happen. “It may happen that this war may grow into World War III. No one is going to stay aside. There are many nuances here that will not give any country of the Caucasus an opportunity to remain a serene harbor,” the expert said.

Russia will obviously stand up against the war with Iran. It will not be possible for Russia not to be involved in the conflict. Russia may come into a military alliance with China in case of the conflict. The alliance may gradually develop into the anti-Western coalition of forces against Israel and the USA, if they get involved in the war too.

“If the war begins, the Russian army base in Armenia will find itself isolated. If it happens, Russia may try to take measures to make a corridor via Georgia, the expert believes. “Georgia and Iran have pragmatic and friendly relations. I believe that Georgia will try to play a passive role in the process,” the scientist of politics said.

According to the Nezavisimaya Gazeta newspaper, Russia is already concerned about the security of its army base in Armenia. Servicemen’s families have left the base, whereas the personnel have moved to another area, closer to the borders with Turkey.

The isolation of the Russian base in Armenia may push Azerbaijan towards another war for Nagorny Karabakh. “Azerbaijan may use Russia’s weakening position in Armenia and launch the war for the liberation of Karabakh. The way how the war develops depends on larger participants, such as the United States and Turkey. I do not think that the States will be passive in this situation,” the scientist of politics said.

For the Southern Caucasus, the war with Iran may resemble the time in the beginning of the 1990s, when the region was “depressurized” from its common condition. Many conflicts and wars sparked because of them, and many of them are still unsolved.

Anton Krivenyuk

GeorgiaTimes

Read the original in Russian 

PRAVDA – THE VOICE OF LIBERTY

23 comments

Posted on 8th December 2010 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , ,

How very sad. Boy the tables have turned in 20 years. Pravda speaks the truth, while the US mainstream corporate owned, state controlled media spews out lies and disinformation. Do you think the next election will save us? Do you think the two interchangeable power hungry political parties matter at all? All hail the state.

Explain the difference between Daniel Ellsberg releasing the Pentagon Papers to stop an unjust war in Vietnam and Private Manning releasing documentation exposing unjust wars in the Middle East.

Ex-Intelligence Officers, Others See Plusses in WikiLeaks Disclosures

WASHINGTON – December 7 – The following statement was released today, signed by Daniel Ellsberg, Frank Grevil, Katharine Gun, David MacMichael, Ray McGovern, Craig Murray, Coleen Rowley and Larry Wilkerson; all are associated with Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence.

WikiLeaks has teased the genie of transparency out of a very opaque bottle, and powerful forces in America, who thrive on secrecy, are trying desperately to stuff the genie back in. The people listed below this release would be pleased to shed light on these exciting new developments.

How far down the U.S. has slid can be seen, ironically enough, in a recent commentary in Pravda (that’s right, Russia’s Pravda): “What WikiLeaks has done is make people understand why so many Americans are politically apathetic … After all, the evils committed by those in power can be suffocating, and the sense of powerlessness that erupts can be paralyzing, especially when … government evildoers almost always get away with their crimes. …”

So shame on Barack Obama, Eric Holder, and all those who spew platitudes about integrity, justice and accountability while allowing war criminals and torturers to walk freely upon the earth. … the American people should be outraged that their government has transformed a nation with a reputation for freedom, justice, tolerance and respect for human rights into a backwater that revels in its criminality, cover-ups, injustices and hypocrisies.

Odd, isn’t it, that it takes a Pravda commentator to drive home the point that the Obama administration is on the wrong side of history. Most of our own media are demanding that WikiLeaks leader Julian Assange be hunted down — with some of the more bloodthirsty politicians calling for his murder. The corporate-and-government dominated media are apprehensive over the challenge that WikiLeaks presents. Perhaps deep down they know, as Dickens put it, “There is nothing so strong … as the simple truth.”

As part of their attempt to blacken WikiLeaks and Assange, pundit commentary over the weekend has tried to portray Assange’s exposure of classified materials as very different from — and far less laudable than — what Daniel Ellsberg did in releasing the Pentagon Papers in 1971. Ellsberg strongly rejects the mantra “Pentagon Papers good; WikiLeaks material bad.” He continues: “That’s just a cover for people who don’t want to admit that they oppose any and all exposure of even the most misguided, secretive foreign policy. The truth is that EVERY attack now made on WikiLeaks and Julian Assange was made against me and the release of the Pentagon Papers at the time.”

Motivation? WikiLeaks’ reported source, Army Pvt. Bradley Manning, having watched Iraqi police abuses, and having read of similar and worse incidents in official messages, reportedly concluded, “I was actively involved in something that I was completely against.” Rather than simply go with the flow, Manning wrote: “I want people to see the truth … because without information you cannot make informed decisions as a public,” adding that he hoped to provoke worldwide discussion, debates, and reform.

There is nothing to suggest that WikiLeaks/Assange’s motives were any different. Granted, mothers are not the most impartial observers. Yet, given what we have seen of Assange’s behavior, there was the ring of truth in Assange’s mother’s recent remarks in an interview with an Australian newspaper. She put it this way: “Living by what you believe in and standing up for something is a good thing. … He sees what he is doing as a good thing in the world, fighting baddies, if you like.”

That may sound a bit quixotic, but Assange and his associates appear the opposite of benighted. Still, with the Pentagon PR man Geoff Morrell and even Attorney General Eric Holder making thinly disguised threats of extrajudicial steps, Assange may be in personal danger.

The media: again, the media is key. No one has said it better than Monseñor Romero of El Salvador, who just before he was assassinated 25 years ago warned, “The corruption of the press is part of our sad reality, and it reveals the complicity of the oligarchy.” Sadly, that is also true of the media situation in America today.

The big question is not whether Americans can “handle the truth.” We believe they can. The challenge is to make the truth available to them in a straightforward way so they can draw their own conclusions — an uphill battle given the dominance of the mainstream media, most of which have mounted a hateful campaign to discredit Assange and WikiLeaks.

So far, the question of whether Americans can “handle the truth” has been an academic rather than an experience-based one, because Americans have had very little access to the truth. Now, however, with the WikiLeaks disclosures, they do. Indeed, the classified messages from the Army and the State Department released by WikiLeaks are, quite literally, “ground truth.”

How to inform American citizens? As a step in that direction, on October 23 we “Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence” (see below) presented our annual award for integrity to Julian Assange. He accepted the honor “on behalf of our sources, without which WikiLeaks’ contributions are of no significance.” In presenting the award, we noted that many around the world are deeply indebted to truth-tellers like WikiLeaks and its sources.

Here is a brief footnote: Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence (SAAII) is a group of former CIA colleagues and other admirers of former intelligence analyst Sam Adams, who hold up his example as a model for those who would aspire to the courage to speak truth to power. (For more, please see here.)

Sam did speak truth to power on Vietnam, and in honoring his memory, SAAII confers an award each year to a truth-teller exemplifying Sam Adams’ courage, persistence, and devotion to truth — no matter the consequences. Previous recipients include:

-Coleen Rowley of the FBI
-Katharine Gun of British Intelligence
-Sibel Edmonds of the FBI
-Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan
-Sam Provance, former Sgt., US Army
-Frank Grevil, Maj., Danish Army Intelligence
-Larry Wilkerson, Col., US Army (ret.)
-Julian Assange, WikiLeaks