I’ll repeat again: There is no democracy in the USA. Choosing between Tweedledum from the far-right and Tweedledee from the other far-right is not a choice.
With permission from
By THE SAKER
March 21, 2017
In all the political drama taking place in the US as a result of the attempted color revolution against Trump, the bigger picture sometimes gets forgotten. And yet, this bigger picture is quite amazing, because if we look at it we will see irrefutable signs that the Empire in engaged in some bizarre slow motion version of seppuku; and the only mystery left is who, or what, will serve as the Empire’s kaishakunin.
SEPPUKU: Japanese ritual suicide by disembowelment; harakiri. KAISHAKUNIN: The executioner; the mercy killer who finishes off the suicide victim in his final agonies by chopping off his head with a sword. [LD]
I would even argue that the Empire is pursuing a full-spectrum policy of self-destruction on several distinct levels, with each level contributing the overall sum total suicide. And when I refer to self-destructive behavior I don’t mean long-term issues such as the non-sustainability of the capitalist economic model or the social consequences of a society which not only is unable to differentiate right from wrong, but which now decrees that deviant behavior is healthy and normal. These are what I call “long term walls” into which we will, inevitably, crash, but which are comparatively further away than some “immediate walls”. Let me list a few of these:
Political suicide: the Neocons’ refusal to accept the election of Donald Trump has resulted in a massive campaign to de-legitimize him. What the Neocons clearly fail to see, or don’t care about, is that by de-legitimizing Trump they are also de-legitimizing the entire political process which brought Trump to power and upon which the United States is built as a society.
As a direct result of this campaign, not only are millions of Americans becoming disgusted with the political system they were indoctrinated to believe in, but internationally the notion of “American democracy” is becoming a sad joke.
And just to make things worse, the US corporate media is finally revealing its true face and has now unapologetically shown the entire world that not only is it not in any way “fair” or “objective”, but that it is a 100% prostituted propaganda machine which faithfully serves the interests of the US “deep state”.
A key element of the quasi-constant brainwashing of the average American has always been the regular holding of elections. Never mind that, at least until now, the outcome of these elections made very little difference inside the US and none at all outside, the goal was never to consult the people – the goal has always been to give the illusion of democracy and people-power.
Now that the Democrats say that the Russians rigged the elections and the Republicans say that it was the Democrats and their millions of dead voters who tried stealing it, it become rather obvious that these elections were always a joke, a pseudo-democratic “liturgy”, a brainwashing ritual – you name it – but never about anything real.
The emergence of the concept of the 1% can be “credited” to the Obama Administration, since it was during Obama that the entire “Occupy Wall Street” movement took off, but the ultimate unmasking of the viciously evil true face of that 1% must be credited to Hillary with her truly historical confession in which she openly declared that those who oppose her were a “basket of deplorables”. We already knew, thanks to Victoria Nuland, what the AngloZionist leaders thought of the people of Europe, now we know what they think of the people of the USA: exactly the same thing.
The bottom line is this: I don’t think that the moral authority and political credibility of the US have ever been lower than today. Decades of propaganda by Hollywood and the official US media machine have now collapsed and nobody buys that counter-factual nonsense anymore.
Let’s see what options there are to choose from. The Neocons want a war with Russia which the Trump people don’t. The Trump people, however, want, well maybe not a war, although that option is very much on the table, but at least a very serious confrontation with China, North Korea or Iran, and about half of them would also like some kind of confrontation with Russia. There is absolutely nobody, at least at the top, who would dare to suggest that a confrontation or, even worse, a war with China, Iran, North Korea or Russia would be a disaster, a calamity for the USA. In fact, serious people with impressive credentials and a lot of gravitas are discussing these possibilities as if they were real, as it the US could in some sense prevail. This is laughable. Well, no, it is not. But it would be if it wasn’t so frightening and depressing. The truth is very, very different.
While it is probably not impossible for the United States to prevail, in purely military terms, against the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea in a war, the potential risks are nothing short of immense. And I don’t mean the risk posed by the North Korean nukes which, apparently, is also quite real. I mean the risk of starting a war against a country which has Seoul within conventional artillery range, an active duty army of well over one million people and 180,000 special forces. Let us assume for a second that North Korea has no air force and no navy and an army composed of only 1M+ soldiers, 21k+ artillery pieces and 180k special forces. How do you propose to deal with that threat? If you have an easy, obvious solution, you have watched too many Hollywood movies. You probably also don’t understand the terrain.
North Korean armed forces would rapidly collapse under a sustained attack by the US and South Korea. I did not say that I believe that this would happen, only that I don’t exclude it. Should that happen, the US might well prevail relatively rapidly, at least in purely military terms. However, please keep in mind that any military operation has to serve a political goal and, in that sense, I cannot imagine any scenario under which the US would walk away from a war against North Korea with anything remotely resembling a real “victory”. There is a paraphrase of something Ho Chi Minh allegedly told to the French in the 1940s which I really like. It goes like this:” we kill some of you, you kill a lot of us, and then we win”.
That is how a war with North Korea would probably play out.
I call this the “American curse”: Americans are very good at killing people, but they are not good at winning wars. Still, in the case of North Korea there is at least a possibility of a military victory, even if at a potentially huge cost. With Iran, Russia or China there is no such possibility at all: a war with any of them would be a guaranteed disaster (I wrote about a war in Iran here and about a war with Russia too many times to count). So why is it that even though out of the four possible wars, one is a potential disaster and the three others are a guaranteed disaster, why is it that these are discussed as if they were potential options?!
The reason for that can be found in the unique mix of crass ignorance and political cowardice of the entire US political class. First, a lot (most?) of US politicians believe in their own silly propaganda about the US armed forces being “the best” in “the world” (no evidence needed!). But even those who are smart enough to realize that this is a load of baloney which nobody outside the US still takes seriously, they know that saying that publicly is political suicide. So they pretend, go along, and keep on repetitively spewing the patriotic mantra about “rah, rah, USA, USA, ‘Merica number one, we are the best” etc. Some figure that since the US spends more on aggression than the rest of the planet combined, that must mean that the US armed forces must be “better” (whatever that means). To the birthplace of “bigger is better” the answer is self-evident. It is also completely wrong.
Eventually, something crazy inevitably happens. Like in Syria were the State Department had one policy, the Pentagon another and the CIA yet another one. The resulting cognitive dissonance is removed by engaging in classical doublethink: “yes, we screwed up over and over, but we are still the best”. Ironically, that kind of mindset is at the core of the American inability to learn from past mistakes. If the choice is between an honest evaluation of past operations and political expediency, the latter always prevails (at least amongst civilians, US servicemen are often far more capable of self-critical evaluation, especially in ranks up to Colonel and below, the problem here is that civilians and generals rarely listen to them).
The result is total chaos: the US foreign policy is wholly dependent on the US ability to threaten the use of military force, but the harsh reality is that every country out there which dared to defy Uncle Sam did that only after coming to the conclusion that the US did not have the means to crush it militarily.
In other words, only the weak, which are already de-facto US colonies, fear the USA. Or, put differently, the only countries who dare to defy Uncle Sam are the strong ones.
And just to make it worse, there is no real US foreign policy. What there is is only the sum vector of the different foreign policies desired by various more or less covert “deep state” actors, agencies and individuals. That resulting “sum vector” is inevitably short-term, focuses on a quick fix approach, and unable to take into account any complexity.
As for the US “diplomacy” it simply doesn’t exist. You don’t need diplomats to deliver demands, bribes, ultimatums and threats. You don’t need educated people. Nor do you need people with any understanding of the “other”. All you need is one arrogant self-enamored bully and one interpreter.
We saw the most compelling evidence of the total rigor mortis of the US diplomatic corps when 51 US “diplomats” demanded that Obama bomb Syria. The rest of the world could just observe in amazement, sadness, bewilderment and total disgust.
The bottom line is this: there is no “US diplomacy”.
The US have simply let that entire field atrophy to the point were it ceased to exist. When so many baffled observers try to understand what the US policy in the Ukraine or Syria is, they are making a mistaken assumption – that there is a US foreign policy to being with. I would argue that the US diplomacy slowly and quietly passed away, sometime after James Baker.
The US military was never a very impressive one, certainly not when compared to the British, Russian or German ones. But it did have a couple of very strong points including the ability to produce a lot of technical innovations which made it possible to produce new, sometimes quite revolutionary, weapons. And if the US track record on ground operations was rather modest, the US did prove to be a most capable adversary in naval and aerial warfare. I don’t think that it can be denied that for most of the years following WWII the US had the most powerful and sophisticated navy and airforce in the world. Then, gradually, things started getting worse and worse as the costs of the very expensive ships and aircraft shot through the roof while the quality of the produced systems appeared to be gradually degrading.
Weapons systems which looked nothing short of awesome in the lab and test grounds proved to be almost useless once they were delivered to their end user on the battlefield. What happened? How did a country which produced the UH-1 Huey or the F-16 suddenly start producing Apaches and F-35s?! The explanation is painfully simple: corruption.
Not only did the US military industrial complex bloat beyond any reasonable size, it also cloaked itself in so many layers of secrecy that massive corruption became inevitable. And when I speak of “massive corruption” I am not talking about millions but billions or even trillions.
How? Simple – the Pentagon claimed did not have the accounting tools needed to properly account for the missing money and that the money was therefore not really “missing”.
Another trick – no bid contracts. Or contracts which cover all the private contractor’s costs, no matter how high or ridiculous. Desert Storm was a bonanza for the Military Industrial complex, just as was 9/11 and the Global War on Terrorism. Billions of dollars got printed out of thin air, distributed (mostly under the cover of national security), hidden (secrecy) and stolen (by everybody in this entire food chain). The feeding frenzy was so extreme that one of my teachers as SAIS admitted, off the record of course, that he had never seen a weapons system he did not like or which he did not want to purchase. This man, whom I shall not name, was a former director of the US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. Yes, you read that right. He was in charge of DIS-armament. You can imagine what the folks in charge of armament (no “dis) were thinking…
With the stratospheric rise of corruption, the kind of US general which had to be promoted went from fighting men who remembered Vietnam (where they often lost family members, relatives and friends) to “ass-kissing little chickenshits” like David Petraeus. In less than half a century US generals went from combat men, to managers, to politicians. And it is against this lackluster background that a rather unimpressive personality like General James Mattis can appear, at least to some, like a good candidate for Secretary of Defense.
Bottom line: the US armed forces are fantastically expensive and yet not particularly well-trained, well-equipped or well-commanded. And while they still are much more capable than the many European militaries (which are a joke), they are most definitely not the kind of armed forces needed to impose and maintain a world hegemony. The good news for the US is that the US armed forces are more than adequate to defend the US against any hypothetical attack. But as the backbone of the Empire – they are close to useless.
I could list many more types of suicides including an economic suicide, a social suicide, an educational suicide, a cultural suicide and, of course, a moral suicide. But others have already done that elsewhere, and much better than I could ever do myself. So all I will add here is one form of suicide which I believe the AngloZionist Empire has in common with the EU: a “Suicide by reality denial”: this is the mother and father of all the other forms of suicide – the stubborn refusal to look at reality and accept the fact that “the party is over”.
When I see the grim determination of US politicians (very much including the people supporting Trump) to continue to pretend as if the US hegemony was here to stay forever, when I see how they see themselves as the leaders of the world and how they sincerely believe that they need to get involved in every conflict on the planet, I can only come to the conclusion that the inevitable collapse will be painful. To be fair, Trump himself clearly has moments of lucidity about this, for example when he recently declared to Congress
Free nations are the best vehicle for expressing the will of the people — and America respects the right of all nations to chart their own path. My job is not to represent the world. My job is to represent the United States of America. But we know that America is better off, when there is less conflict — not more.
These are remarkable words for which Trump truly deserves a standing ovation as they are the closest thing to a formal admission that the United States have given up on the dream of being the World Hegemon and that from now on the US President will no longer represent the interest of trans-national plutocracies but he will represent the interests of the American people. This sort of languge is nothing short of revolutionary, whether Trump truly delivers on that or not. Unlike everybody else, Trump does not appear to suffer from “suicide by reality denial” syndrome, but when I look at the people around him (nevermind the prostitutes in Congress) I wonder if he will ever get to act on his personal instincts.
Trump is clearly the best man in the Trump administration, he seems to have his heart in the right place and, unlike Hillary, he is clearly aware of the fact that the US armed forces are in a terrible shape. But a good heart and common sense are not enough to deal with the Neocons and the US deep state. You also need an iron will and a total determination to crush the opposition.
Alas, so far Trump has failed to show either quality.
Instead, Trump is trying to show how “tough” a guy he is by declaring that he will wipe out Daesh and by giving the Pentagon 30 days to come up with a plan to do this. Alas (for Trump), there is no way to crush Daesh without working with those who already have boots on the ground: the Iranians, the Russians and the Syrians. It is really that simple. And every American general knows that. Yet everybody is merrily plowing ahead is if there was some kind of possibility for the US to crush Daesh without establishing a partnership with Russia, Iran and Syria first (Erdogan tried that. It did him no good. Now he is working with Russia and Iran). Will the good folks at the Pentagon find the courage to tell Trump that “no, Mr President, we cannot do that alone, we need the Russians, the Iranians and the Syrians”? I very much doubt it. So, yet again, we are probably going to see a case of reality denial, maybe not a suicidal one, but a significant one nonetheless. Not good.
Alexander Solzhenitsyn used to say that all states can be placed on a continuum which ranges from states whose authority is based on their power to states whose power is based on their authority. I think that we can agree that the authority of the US is pretty close to zero. As for their power, it is still very substantial, but not sufficient to maintain the Empire. It is, however, more than adequate to protect the interests of the United States as a country provided the United States accept that they simply don’t have the means to remain a world hegemon.
If the Neocons succeed in their attempt to overthrow or, failing that, at paralysing Trump, then the Empire will have the choice between an endless horror or a horrible end. Since the Neocons don’t really need a war with North Korea, which they don’t like, but which does not elicit the kind of blind hatred Iran does, my guess is that Iran will be their number one target. Should the AngloZionists succeed in triggering a war between Iran and the Empire, then Iran will end up being the Empire’s kaishakunin.
If the crazies fail in their manic attempts at triggering a major war, then the Empire will probably collapse under the pressure of the internal contradictions of the US society.
Finally, if Trump and the American patriots who do not want to sacrifice their country for the sake of the Empire succeed in “draining the DC swamp” and finally crack-down hard on the Neocons, then a gradual transition from Empire to major power is still possible.
But the clock is running out fast . . .
“The elites’ myopic response to the looming collapse of the natural world and the civilization is to make subservient populations work harder for less, squander capital in grandiose projects such as pyramids, palaces, border walls and fracking, and wage war. President Trump’s decision to increase military spending by $54 billion and take the needed funds out of the flesh of domestic programs typifies the behavior of terminally ill civilizations.”
The ruling corporate elites no longer seek to build. They seek to destroy. They are agents of death. They crave the unimpeded power to cannibalize the country and pollute and degrade the ecosystem to feed an insatiable lust for wealth, power and hedonism. Wars and military “virtues” are celebrated. Intelligence, empathy and the common good are banished. Culture is degraded to patriotic kitsch. Education is designed only to instill technical proficiency to serve the poisonous engine of corporate capitalism. Historical amnesia shuts us off from the past, the present and the future. Those branded as unproductive or redundant are discarded and left to struggle in poverty or locked away in cages. State repression is indiscriminant and brutal. And, presiding over the tawdry Grand Guignol is a deranged ringmaster tweeting absurdities from the White House.
The graveyard of world empires—Sumerian, Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Mayan, Khmer, Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian—followed the same trajectory of moral and physical collapse. Those who rule at the end of empire are psychopaths, imbeciles, narcissists and deviants, the equivalents of the depraved Roman emperors Caligula, Nero, Tiberius and Commodus. The ecosystem that sustains the empire is degraded and exhausted. Economic growth, concentrated in the hands of corrupt elites, is dependent on a crippling debt peonage imposed on the population. The bloated ruling class of oligarchs, priests, courtiers, mandarins, eunuchs, professional warriors, financial speculators and corporate managers sucks the marrow out of society.
The elites’ myopic response to the looming collapse of the natural world and the civilization is to make subservient populations work harder for less, squander capital in grandiose projects such as pyramids, palaces, border walls and fracking, and wage war. President Trump’s decision to increase military spending by $54 billion and take the needed funds out of the flesh of domestic programs typifies the behavior of terminally ill civilizations. When the Roman Empire fell, it was trying to sustain an army of half a million soldiers that had become a parasitic drain on state resources.
“The death instinct, called Thanatos by post-Freudians, is driven by fear, hatred and violence.”
The complex bureaucratic mechanisms that are created by all civilizations ultimately doom them. The difference now, as Joseph Tainter points out in “The Collapse of Complex Societies,” is that “collapse, if and when it comes again, will this time be global. No longer can any individual nation collapse. World civilization will disintegrate as a whole.”
Civilizations in decline, despite the palpable signs of decay around them, remain fixated on restoring their “greatness.” Their illusions condemn them. They cannot see that the forces that gave rise to modern civilization, namely technology, industrial violence and fossil fuels, are the same forces that are extinguishing it. Their leaders are trained only to serve the system, slavishly worshipping the old gods long after these gods begin to demand millions of sacrificial victims.
“Hope drives us to invent new fixes for old messes, which in turn create even more dangerous messes,” Ronald Wright writes in “A Short History of Progress.” “Hope elects the politician with the biggest empty promise; and as any stockbroker or lottery seller knows, most of us will take a slim hope over prudent and predictable frugality. Hope, like greed, fuels the engine of capitalism.”
The Trump appointees—Steve Bannon, Jeff Sessions, Rex Tillerson, Steve Mnuchin, Betsy DeVos, Wilbur Ross, Rick Perry, Alex Acosta and others—do not advocate innovation or reform. They are Pavlovian dogs that salivate before piles of money. They are hard-wired to steal from the poor and loot federal budgets. Their single-minded obsession with personal enrichment drives them to dismantle any institution or abolish any law or regulation that gets in the way of their greed. Capitalism, Karl Marx wrote, is “a machine for demolishing limits.” There is no internal sense of proportion or scale. Once all external impediments are lifted, global capitalism ruthlessly commodifies human beings and the natural world to extract profit until exhaustion or collapse. And when the last moments of a civilization arrive, the degenerate edifices of power appear to crumble overnight.
Sigmund Freud wrote that societies, along with individuals, are driven by two primary instincts. One is the instinct for life, Eros, the quest to love, nurture, protect and preserve. The second is the death instinct. The death instinct, called Thanatos by post-Freudians, is driven by fear, hatred and violence. It seeks the dissolution of all living things, including our own beings. One of these two forces, Freud wrote, is always ascendant. Societies in decline enthusiastically embrace the death instinct, as Freud observed in “Civilization and Its Discontents,” written on the eve of the rise of European fascism and World War II.
“It is in sadism, where the death instinct twists the erotic aim in its own sense and yet at the same time fully satisfies the erotic urge, that we succeed in obtaining the clearest insight into its nature and its relation to Eros,” Freud wrote. “But even where it emerges without any sexual purpose, in the blindest fury of destructiveness, we cannot fail to recognize that the satisfaction of the instinct is accompanied by an extraordinary high degree of narcissistic enjoyment, owing to its presenting the ego with a fulfillment of the latter’s old wishes for omnipotence.”
The lust for death, as Freud understood, is not, at first, morbid. It is exciting and seductive. I saw this in the wars I covered. A god-like power and adrenaline-driven fury, even euphoria, sweep over armed units and ethnic or religious groups given the license to destroy anything and anyone around them. Ernst Juenger captured this “monstrous desire for annihilation” in his World War I memoir, “Storm of Steel.”
A population alienated and beset by despair and hopelessness finds empowerment and pleasure in an orgy of annihilation that soon morphs into self-annihilation. It has no interest in nurturing a world that has betrayed it and thwarted its dreams. It seeks to eradicate this world and replace it with a mythical landscape. It turns against institutions, as well as ethnic and religious groups, that are scapegoated for its misery. It plunders diminishing natural resources with abandon. It is seduced by the fantastic promises of demagogues and the magical solutions characteristic of the Christian right or what anthropologists call “crisis cults.”
Norman Cohn, in “The Pursuit of the Millennium: Revolutionary Messianism in Medieval and Reformation Europe and Its Bearing on Modern Totalitarian Movements,” draws a link between that turbulent period and our own. Millennial movements are a peculiar, collective psychological response to profound societal despair. They recur throughout human history. We are not immune.
“These movements have varied in tone from the most violent aggressiveness to the mildest pacifism and in aim from the most ethereal spirituality to the most earth-bound materialism; there is no counting the possible ways of imagining the Millennium and the route to it,” Cohen wrote. “But similarities can present themselves as well as differences; and the more carefully one compares the outbreaks of militant social chiliasm during the later Middle Ages with modern totalitarian movements the more remarkable the similarities appear. The old symbols and the old slogans have indeed disappeared, to be replaced by new ones; but the structure of the basic phantasies seems to have changed scarcely at all.”
These movements, Cohen wrote, offered “a coherent social myth which was capable of taking entire possession of those who believed in it. It explained their suffering, it promised them recompense, it held their anxieties at bay, it gave them an illusion of security—even while it drove them, held together by a common enthusiasm, on a quest which was always vain and often suicidal.
“So it came about that multitudes of people acted out with fierce energy a shared phantasy which though delusional yet brought them such intense emotional relief that they could live only through it and were perfectly willing to die for it. It is a phenomenon which was to recur many times between the eleventh century and the sixteenth century, now in one area, now in another, and which, despite the obvious differences in cultural context and in scale, is not irrelevant to the growth of totalitarian movements, with their messianic leaders, their millennial mirages and their demon-scapegoats, in the present century.”
The severance of a society from reality, as ours has been severed from collective recognition of the severity of climate change and the fatal consequences of empire and deindustrialization, leaves it without the intellectual and institutional mechanisms to confront its impending mortality. It exists in a state of self-induced hypnosis and self-delusion. It seeks momentary euphoria and meaning in tawdry entertainment and acts of violence and destruction, including against people who are demonized and blamed for society’s demise. It hastens its self-immolation while holding up the supposed inevitability of a glorious national resurgence. Idiots and charlatans, the handmaidens of death, lure us into the abyss.
Source: Event Horizon Chronicle
With permission from
Macrh 12, 2017
Permit me to set the scene. This has all been set up by the Deep State, over a period of many years, in fact.
To begin with, Donald Trump is not an outsider, he’s an insider, and has been for a long time. He’s a New York City multi-billionaire with numerous business and personal contacts in industry, high finance and government at all levels. That has been true for decades, even before he ran for political office.
The Trump brand was conspicuously pre-positioned before the public’s eyes for decades. It’s called product placement and in this case the product being sold is Trump. It’s a familiar advertising technique. Very few people have their own network TV program. I don’t have a network TV program and neither do you, because we’re not in on the game, yet Trump had his own program for years on end. He was the boss. He ruled the roost. You did things the Trump way or you were out of there; he summarily fired people who didn’t measure up to his standards.
As I said, it was a TV program, i.e., it was used to program the public mass mind, to familiarize the viewing public with the Trump brand, to present him as the man in charge. These things don’t happen by accident. Television is a brain washing technology par excellence and has been used for mass advertising, social change and political propaganda since its inception. TV was used to program Donald Trump’s rise to national power and influence. It doesn’t matter in the slightest whether you like him or not, whether you support him or not, whether you approve of his policies and policy proposals or not, or whether you voted for him or not, that is what has happened. He is a product of the system, placed before the public by the system.
The system prepares a whole roster of these people, feeds them into the pipeline and then trots them out for so-called public “service” as it deems necessary.
The Trump supporters think that they “elected” Donald Trump to the presidency. But nothing could be further from the truth. It’s all rigged, you see.
Here’s how it works. Using the mass advertising techniques of Edward Bernays, based on principles rooted in Freudian depth psychology and Pavlovian operant-conditioning methods of behavioral modification and control, the large segment of the politically disaffected public that were not amenable to the mainstream political narrative in the USSA were provided an “option” that they enthusiastically accepted: Donald Trump.
In reality, they didn’t choose him; rather he was presented to them as the alternative to the unacceptable (to them) Hillary Clinton. (Stay with me, this rabbit hole goes very deep, and in a direction you probably do not anticipate.)
Remember, methods of mass advertising and propaganda as perfected by Edward Bernays during the 20th century, have been employed on a wide scale, over a period of decades, in order to pre-position the product — Donald Trump — firmly in the mass mind. Successful product placement was half the battle. The other half was to persuade millions of people that their decision to consume that product was their personal decision, when nothing could be further from the truth.
Remember that mass advertising and propaganda experts like Edward Bernays, and the legions of similarly minded experts who have followed in his footsteps, have refined to a sophisticated art the technology of social and political influence and control, the better to induce the human herd, yes, herd! — in its teeming millions — to perform in a desired, deviously pre-planned way; notwithstanding that each individual member of the herd is carefully led to imagine that he or she is acting in a self-determined, self-actualizing way, arrived at after careful personal consideration of all of the relevant factors at his or her disposal, never imagining, with rare exceptions, that said “relevant factors” have been fiendishly pre-selected and pre-fed to the human herd, the better to artificially construct, and lead the herd through, a carefully designed decision tree calculated to produce a desired and approved of outcome, in this case: Donald Trump.
Those who work with cattle understand this dynamic very well. If you have a herd of cows and you desire to pen them into a certain paddock and lock the gate behind them, all you have to do is open the gate to the desired paddock, and drive them or lead them down the fence line. Owing to their herd psychology, they rush down the fence line and as soon as they encounter the opening to the paddock, they all instinctively break for the opening — which in reality is not an “opening” at all, but a pen — and once they are all inside the cowboys have but to lock the gate behind them, and their goose is cooked. They are penned, ready to be shipped to slaughter — notwithstanding that in their confused herd mind, they thought they were making a bold break for freedom!
The ranch manager and the cowboys were two steps ahead of them, you see, cleverly strategizing the secondary and tertiary consequences of their blind, false belief.
The herding of humans is not much different.
Enter the Pied Piper
The centuries-old tale of the Pied Piper of Hamelin is directly applicable here. It was the Middle Ages in the German town of Hamelin, when the Pied Piper came to town. His magical flute music was so beguiling that all the children of the town fell under the spell of his enthralling tunes and willy-nilly fell into line behind him. They followed him out of town en masse and went away to their doom, never to be seen again.
I am not suggesting to you that Donald Trump is a latter day Pied Piper — on the contrary, it is the Deep State itself who has put forward Donald Trump as the Pied Piper!
Consider the front cover of the Rothschild-linked Economist magazine from two years ago. Click the hyper-link, take a look:
There is a great deal of symbolism in this cover illustration, far more than can be discussed in this short commentary, so we will restrict ourselves to simply notice the Pied Piper character on the left-hand side, playing his flute, directly to the knuckles of Vladimir Putin’s right hand.
The Economist is a prominent publication of the Rothschild-linked international banking consortium. The content of its cover therefore is not merely random noise, but has significance within the context of that powerful, global faction’s Machiavellian political machinations.
The cover is thus signalling the appearance of a Pied Piper on the world political scene, whose “tune” will knuckle under to, or be made to appear to knuckle under to Valdimir Putin.
Enter Donald Trump onto the world stage, his election and young presidency said to be under the alleged influence and sway of none other than the Russians and Vladimir Putin himself.
Who would have thought? And by the way, before leaving this Economist cover discussion, notice on the other side of the cover that there is a nuclear or atomic mushroom cloud billowing up into the sky beneath a stylized representation of the globe, with two faces representing East and West, with a very angry looking East.
Many themes are presented on this cover from two years ago, the theme of the Pied Piper and of a nuclear or atomic blast among them.
Fast forward a few months to April 2015 and the theme of the Pied Piper arises again in the context of the Deep State’s Machiavellian political machinations.
There Are No Accidents in Politics
Have you read the DNC/Clinton/Podesta e-mails that were released by Wikileaks? I have and there are some real nuggets in there.
I want to provide a highly salient and germane example that strikes to the very heart of the theme of this commentary, but before I do, please bear in mind that Joseph Kennedy, the father of President John Kennedy and Senator Robert Kennedy, both of whom were publicly assassinated by the Deep State, remarked to a reporter in 1960 that: “There are no accidents in politics.”
Now then, on 7 April 2015 an e-mail circulated at the highest level of the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign that concerned an upcoming Strategy Call. One of the items to be discussed on the “Strategy Call” was the “DNC Plan” detailed in an attached memo.
The e-mail is found here:
Click on the hyper-link to the e-mail and then click on the “Attachments” tab at the top of the e-mail. Open the .pdf file that appears, entitled “Strategy on GOP”.
The memo outlines the “Goals and Strategy” of the planned Clinton Campaign, against the projected field of GOP candidates.
Under the subsection entitled “Operationalizing the Strategy” appears the following choice extract:
Pied Piper Candidates
… use the field as a whole to inflict damage on itself similar to what happened to Mitt Romney in 2012. The variety of candidates is a positive here, and many of the lesser known can serve as a cudgel to move the more established candidates further to the right.
In this scenario, we don’t want to marginalize the more extreme candidates, but make them more “Pied Piper” candidates who actually represent the mainstream of the Republican Party. Pied Piper candidates include but aren’t limited to
• Ted Cruz
• Donald Trump
• Ben Carson
We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to them seriously.
Well, Well, Well …
The plot does thicken. No less than Donald Trump himself was on a very short list of preferred Pied Piper candidates that the Hillary Clinton campaign brain trust explicitly plotted to advance as “leaders of the pack”. Ted Cruz and Ben Carson self-destructed, leaving Donald Trump as the Pied Piper, leading the pack — as intended.
Remember what Joseph Kennedy said in 1960: “There are no accidents in politics.”
At what level is the game rigged? My sense is that it is certainly rigged at a level above the level at which a Hillary Clinton and a Donald Trump operate, plausibly at the Rothschild mega-banking level or above. Presidential candidates and elected national presidents are puppets, marionettes who serve at the behest of influential others who largely remain in the shadows, i.e., the Shadow government, the Deep State.
One might be forgiven for advancing the idea that, in reality, Donald Trump was the one that the Deep State wanted all along, and that at a certain level a calculated decision was made well in advance to feed Hillary Clinton to the dogs, all the while having her to believe (falsely) that the Pied Piper gambit would redound to her advantage.
It doesn’t even matter if Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump agree with the plan; they are but puppets of darker forces at levels well above their respective heads. The plan appears to have been hatched at a higher level of the political MATRIX and percolated down to the Hillary Clinton campaign the year before the primary elections. Donald Trump very ably and willingly fell into the role — it perfectly suits his pompous, narcissistic, bloviating, tweeting, arrogant, multi-billionaire, New York City fat cat, playboy persona.
What was it Shakespeare said?
All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts ….
(As You Like It, Act II, Scene VII)
It’s political theatre. It’s a show. It’s a Deep State political puppet show, and Donald Trump is the anointed puppet du jour.
But, but …! — you remonstrate, and I rejoin: just so!
All this talk of Trump being an “outsider” is but so much nonsense. He’s not a man of the people, and never has been. In fact, he is a consummate insider. A multi-billionaire, who is on speaking terms with influential government officials at every level, local, state and federal. A man who can walk into the largest banks and successfully negotiate deals for hundreds of millions of dollars. A network TV reality show star for years on end. A builder and owner, past or present, of a whole chain of skyscrapers, hotels, casinos, golf courses, resorts and more. Owner of multiple, private jet aircraft and helicopters.
Let’s take the casino issue alone: you cannot be a player in the casino business and not do business with the mob, and not launder very large sums of dirty money. That’s what casinos are: they’re dirty money laundromats.
So Trump has laundered unknown hundreds of millions and probably billions of dollars for someone, or something. Now who needs to move around and launder vast sums of cash?
Why, the Deep State of course. The CIA, the Pentagon, the Big Banks, the DEA, the FBI, and sundry affiliated billionaires and mob bosses.
It’s a real swamp.
Donald Trump hasn’t been sent to Washington to “Drain the Swamp.
On the contrary, he’s very ably “Swamping the Drain!”
The government he’s appointed can be thus described: Zionists, Neocons, Goldman Sachs and multi-billionaires. In a word, thoroughly establishment.
There’s nothing “outsider” about it.
Only weeks into his presidency, Trump fired his National Security Advisor, in a “fit of stupidity”, as Paul Craig Roberts put it. And incredibly, Trump has retained James Comey as FBI Director, a transparently corrupt man who did the dirty work of the Clintons and Loretta Lynch and who just this week was publicly braying about remaining in his position for another six years, with nary a contrary word from Trump.
Only two weeks ago Trump was loudly complaining that his Trump Tower in New York City had been bugged by the Obama regime. And then last week, Wikileaks dumped a massive internal CIA data trove to the Internet that revealed that, indeed, there is a massive, illegal, unconstitutional, ongoing spy campaign against everyone, by the CIA. It is an operation so exhaustive in scope that it certainly includes the Trump Tower, and everyone and everything else. The extent of the illegal, totalitarian operation is mind boggling.
Wikileaks resoundingly ratified Trump’s allegations. He certainly was, and is, being spied on — by no less than the CIA.
So what was Trump’s response? He trotted out his press secretary to say that people should be “outraged” — not at the CIA’s massive subversion and violation of the law, the Constitution, and civil and human liberties, no, not at the totalitarian, illegal, unconstitutional behavior of the CIA, but rather at Wikileaks, because: “This is the kind of disclosure that undermines our country, our security and our well-being.”
As if the foregoing were not bad enough, Trump sent an absolute BB-brain of a nitwit, Nikki Haley, ex-governor of South Carolina, to be his United Nations Ambassador in New York. And far from seeking rapprochement with Russia, and calming tensions with China, since coming to power Trump has ratcheted tensions up with the Russians, and brought the simmering dispute with China in the South China Sea to an even tenser level.
Last week he sent nuclear-capable heavy bombers into South Korea, as a threat to North Korea and, also in recent days, the Pentagon announced plans to increase the troop level in Syria, in what amounts to an illegal military invasion of a sovereign state, in flagrant contravention of international law.
Translation of all of the above: unless he radically changes course, and very soon, Trump is revealing himself to be a plaything of the FBI, the CIA and the Pentagon, a dutiful Deep State political puppet, as it were.
Paul Craig Roberts has asked: Is Trump Already Finished?
To which I would sarcastically reply: oh, heavens no, he’s only getting started!
In fact, if Trump and his cabinet appointees continue with the rhetoric, policy statements and maneuvers that they have been making so far, Trump may have the USSA at war with Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, Syria and God only knows who else, even faster than Hillary Clinton would have.
Interestingly, some of Trump’s staunchest supporters have been fundamentalist Christians, who, in some kind of misguided religious zeal, have conflated Donald Trump with their Christian savior beliefs, making him out to be some kind of Great Man, a Big Daddy, who will somehow “Save America” (whatever that means) and “Make America Great Again!” (whatever that means).
Notwithstanding that Jesus Christ himself is recorded in the Christian Bible as saying: “My Kingdom is not of this world!” — so many of his supposed followers, the Christian fundamentalists, go running after a slick, brash-talking, multi-billionaire, New York City real estate tycoon, forgetting that their professed Lord and savior also remarked: “Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.”
And yet, in their millions, these hordes of alleged “Christians” eagerly run after the Rich Man from New York City. There are even YouTube videos circulating on the Internet alleging that Donald Trump has been sent by God to “Save America” (whatever that means). The Deep State’s YouTube fundamentalist “Christian” propaganda division must be working overtime.
Of course, reliance on this external savior myth is nothing more than an abdication of personal responsibility, an infantile psychological projection on a bigger than life political figure to swoop in and make everything that is perceived to have gone wrong, right again.
This is nothing but personal weakness.
Here’s the reality: Trump is a weak, indecisive, confused, not very well informed, corrupt, vacillating, pompous, self-enriching, narcissistic, sociopathic, bloviating, lying, not-ready-for-prime-time, suck ass buffoon. (By contrast with Hillary Clinton, who is merely a satanic, psychopathic, endlessly criminally devious, pathological lying, serial murdering, war mongering demon from the pits of hell.) \sarcasm\
The public mind f*ck is beyond belief. The Trumpies and everyone else need to pull themselves together and see that they are all being massively played. Courtesy of Wikileaks, Trump now has all the evidence he needs that the CIA itself is tapping his phones and computers and TVs and probably also his egg timer, waffle maker and God knows what all else. If Trump doesn’t immediately use the Wikileaks CIA data dump to go Medieval on the CIA’s ass and ruthlessly clean house at Langley, from top to bottom, and also arrange some sort of pardon or clemency or immunity from prosecution for Julian Assange, then he is obviously in on the rigged game of Them versus Us and must henceforth be treated as one of Them, and not one of Us.
What I am telling you is: Trump is a complete pussy. He already revealed himself to be a weak leader when he fired Michael Flynn mere weeks after he appointed him National Security Advisor — and over almost nothing!
And he has permitted a known, corrupt FBI Director to remain in power, without protest whatsoever, at the same time that he unleashes the Neocons in the Pentagon to ratchet up tensions with Syria, Russia, China, North Korea and Iran almost to the point of outright war.
If it walks like a Deep State political puppet, talks like a Deep State political puppet and acts as a Deep State political puppet, then I submit to you that what you are looking at is a Deep State political puppet.
It’s Ruthless Business
See, the so-called “government” is really a corporation and its job is to f*ck you in the *ss, all the while telling you that it is your patriotic duty to love every second and ask for more.
That is Trump’s job. He’s been brought in as the “fixer”. Bad things are getting ready to happen, well, I mean, bad things are already happening, really bad things, but the human “herd” has not quite caught on en masse to the grim reality yet.
First of all, notwithstanding Trump’s rhetoric about bringing jobs back to the USSA, the reality is that due to mechanization, robotics, automation, digital technology and the like, hundreds of millions of jobs are being eliminated from the global economy right now. Many of the jobs being eliminated are in the USSA. In recent decades and years the USSA economy has lost millions of jobs that will never be coming back. The world has changed and many “workers” are now obsolete. What happens to millions of “obsolete” people who are no longer needed and have become superfluous?
Could it be that that’s why a Pied Piper is called in to take charge of the situation? He plays his magic flute, all the children fall in line behind him and off they go — never to be seen again! There are several tens of millions of workers in the USSA economy who are unemployed or under employed. Trump is simply lying; he will not be putting them all back to work at a decent, living wage. Just will not.
Secondly, the situation at Fukushima continues to go from very bad to much worse. The Pacific Ocean is dying right now as a direct consequence of all the radioactivity flowing into it from the catastrophically ruined nuclear power reactors at Fukushima, Japan. The Pacific Ocean won’t ever be back. It’s done. It’s finished. The whales, dolphins, tuna, crabs, scallops, oysters, all of it. It’s all dying off as the radioactivity progressively accumulates in the marine food chain. The radioactivity from Fukushima is also progressively poisoning North America. Every weather system that moves across the Pacific Ocean from Japan to North America brings with it a load of radioactivity that it dumps on fields, forests, streams, playgrounds and — well, you get the picture. It’s building up and up in the food chain, in the soil, in the lakes, and it will not stop coming. The future will be more and more radioactive; unfortunately rising rates of radioactivity are not compatible with good human health and so the end result is baked in the cake. Can you recall Donald Trump saying even one word about this situation? Ever? I can’t. Indeed, there is no evidence that the matter is even on his mental horizon.
Third, all around us the planet is swiftly dying. Please click the hyper-link and read the article.
Almost two-thirds of the wildlife on the Earth has died in the last 50 years.
The final third will go much faster than the previous two-thirds, due to the law of exponents, so realistically we are looking at a 15 or 10 year period of rapid biosphere collapse. We are already into the rapid collapse and it will accelerate from here. The last few years will go very quickly.
No major political figure is saying anything about this. Certainly not Donald Trump.
Trump is tremendously ignorant in substantive, planet-wide policy areas that greatly matter, like the impending death of the global biosphere.
The jobs will not be coming back to the USSA, not in the tens of millions. Trump is simply lying about that. And Fukushima is a radioactive, planet-killing event that Trump doesn’t even mention. All around us, the planet is rapidly dying and there is no evidence that this species ending event is even remotely on Trump’s mental horizon.
I say again: the people of the USSA are being played like a fiddle. And they are reacting in predictable, programmable and programmed ways.
Remember: he who pays the piper calls the tune! The paymasters would appear to be preeminently Goldman Sachs, seeing as Donald Trump has loaded up his government with Goldman Sachs executives, and behind them the Rothschild global faction. The music is being orchestrated by very practiced, global, social engineers. They have it down to a very dark science.
How Deep Does the Rabbit Hole Go?
It looks like we are talking about a political meta-script that is meticulously choreographed and directed from off stage, such that even many of the main actors (Trump, Clinton, etc.) heavily buy into the dramatic fiction that they are called upon to role play.
Are Shakespeare’s poetic musings the literal truth? “All the world’s a stage and all the men and women merely players …” He was closely connected to influential people in his day. Was he clued in to how the world really works? Has it always been like that? Is it really a massive, scripted theatrical production and the joke’s on us and always has been?
Take a look at the Economist magazine’s cover for January of this year.
What do you know, another nuclear mushroom cloud with the Grim Reaper on horseback and the word death.
Also, we see Donald Trump sitting in judgement astride the world with the United States underfoot, as well as a tower (perhaps the Trump tower?) being split asunder by a lightning bolt, with Christian and communist hordes massed on opposite sides. Knowing the Rothschilds’ modus operandi the symbolism could plausibly be interpreted as a Rothschild recipe for false flag attacks, dictatorship and war, possibly nuclear war, in some, or all of which, Donald Trump appears slated to play a role.
In other words, we are now just about at the point where really big events start to kick in, and with a fiendish vengeance.
Death of the Earth’s ecosystems and biosphere. Global radioactive poisoning. Obsolescence of hundreds of millions of disposable workers in the coming years. Add it all up and it’s not a pretty picture.
I am reminded again of the Deagel.com numbers for national populations around the world, in the year 2025, just eight years away. Deagel.com clearly has connections to the global, military-security complex, and so presumably has access to data sources that the average person does not. Take a look:
2025 country forecast
The projection is for the USSA to lose 80% of its populace in the next eight years. Now what could cause that? There are many possibilities: economic collapse, nuclear war, biological warfare, famine, failure of the agricutural system, an EMP attack, collapse of the ecology, etc.
Look through the data. Deagel.com is also projecting extremely sharp population losses in Canada, Australia, Japan, Israel and much of Europe.
Huge, life, planet and species altering events are already in motion. They will run their course, and the movers and shakers behind the scenes, the so-called Powers That Be, know that perfectly well. Humanity is being lulled into a false sense of complacency, owing to normalcy bias, the better to be controlled, exploited, managed and maybe even slaughtered by the hundreds of millions or even billions.
The Deagel.com population numbers for the year 2025 are just that grim.
In the final analysis Donald Trump is where he is because he is an establishment player.
He may say this and that, he may do this and that, but if he does not abolish the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, Federal Reserve, the IRS as we now know it, and more, the corrupt game simply continues on as it is, with variations to distract the peasantry into thinking that more is going on than simple presidential chair shuffling on a sinking Titanic.
I am highly skeptical.
The whole game is insidiously rigged.
The political theatre of personalities is for the gullible plebes’ consumption and confusion. What the hidden guiding hands desire is a certain outcome.
As of now, we drift steadily towards war, albeit that Hillary Clinton will not be the one to start it. It appears that the Pied Piper will do the honors instead, and all of his myriad followers will heartily agree that it is a good thing that it is he that is doing it, and not Hillary Clinton, because — oh, the horror!
If you are financially able to relocate to South America and would like to move to, buy real estate in or make an exploratory visit to Ecuador while there is still time to get out of the USSA and NATO countries before the chaos and societal upheaval worsens, write to me and I will put you in touch with professional people who help expats relocate, move in, get visas and rent or buy property. The climate is wonderful in Ecuador and the papayas are plentiful!
With permission from
As Zero Hedge noted previously, Binney is the NSA executive who created the agency’s mass surveillance program for digital information, who served as the senior technical director within the agency, who managed six thousand NSA employees, the 36-year NSA veteran widely regarded as a “legend” within the agency and the NSA’s best-ever analyst and code-breaker, who mapped out the Soviet command-and-control structure before anyone else knew how, and so predicted Soviet invasions before they happened (“in the 1970s, he decrypted the Soviet Union’s command system, which provided the US and its allies with real-time surveillance of all Soviet troop movements and Russian atomic weapons”). Binney is the real McCoy.
Binney resigned from NSA shortly after the U.S. approach to intelligence changed following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. He “became a whistleblower after discovering that elements of a data-monitoring program he had helped develop — nicknamed ThinThread — were being used to spy on Americans,” PBS reported.
On Monday he came to the defense of the president, whose allegations on social media over the weekend that outgoing President Barack Obama tapped his phones during the 2016 campaign have rankled Washington.
“‘I think the president is absolutely right. His phone calls, everything he did electronically, was being monitored,’ Bill Binney, a 36-year veteran of the National Security Agency who resigned in protest from the organization in 2001, told Fox Business on Monday.
“Everyone’s conversations are being monitored and stored, Binney said.”
Binney also told Sean Hannity’s radio show earlier Monday, “I think the FISA court’s basically totally irrelevant.” The judges on the FISA court are “not even concerned, nor are they involved in any way with the Executive Order 12333 collection,” Binney said during the radio interview. “That’s all done outside of the courts. And outside of the Congress.”
Binney also told Fox the laws that fall under the FISA court’s jurisdiction are “simply out there for show” and “trying to show that the government is following the law, and being looked at and overseen by the Senate and House intelligence committees and the courts.”
“That’s not the main collection program for NSA,” Binney said.
What Binney did not delve into, however, was if Obama directed surveillance on Trump for political purposes during the campaign, a core accusation of Trump’s. But Binney did say events such as publication of details of private calls between President Trump and the Australian prime minister, as well as with the Mexican president, are evidence the intelligence community is playing hardball with the White House.
“I think that’s what happened here,” Binney told Fox. “The evidence of the conversation of the president of the U.S., President Trump, and the [Prime Minister] of Australia and the President of Mexico. Releasing those conversations. Those are conversations that are picked up by the FAIRVIEW program, primarily, by NSA.”
Since Binney designed the NSA’s electronic surveillance system, he would know.
Pathetic mind control freaks:
“So, if anyone hasn’t got the message, the song remains the same. WikiLeaks + Snowden + Russia + Trump = the bad guys. CIA deploying its own NSA around the world = the good guys.”
Nothing so trivial as the technical proof we’re all being spied upon can be allowed to threaten or add nuance to established narrative
The massive WikiLeaks Vault 7 release is an extremely important public service. It’s hard to find anyone not concerned by a secret CIA hacking program targeting virtually the whole planet – using malware capable of bypassing encryption protection on any device from iOS to Android, and from Windows to Samsung TVs.
In a series of tweets, Edward Snowden confirmed the CIA program and said code names in the documents are real; that they could only be known by a “cleared insider;” the FBI and CIA knew all about the digital loopholes, but kept them open to spy; and that the leaks provided the “first public evidence” that the US government secretly paid to keep US software unsafe.
If that’s not serious enough, WikiLeaks alleges that “the CIA has lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal;” several hundred million lines of code — more than what is used to run Facebook.
Someone among the former US government hackers and contractors ended up leaking portions of the CIA archive (Snowden II?). WikiLeaks also stressed how the CIA had created, in effect, its “own NSA” – maximum unaccountability included.
Even though millions already knew – without the technical details – that they were being spied upon by their iPhone or their 4K Samsung, the Vault 7 revelations are far more relevant – and practical – to the average citizen than the 24/7 hysteria fingering President Trump as a Putin puppet. Intel sources are volunteering the – still unexplored – Vault 7 treasure trove is more crucial than what Snowden himself revealed.
And still, vast corporate media sectors embedded with the neocon/neoliberal galaxy are spinning that Vault 7 benefits Trump by changing the subject from alleged Russian hacking interference in the US elections and possible Obama administration-ordered hacks of Team Trump’s communications.
So, if anyone hasn’t got the message, the song remains the same. WikiLeaks + Snowden + Russia + Trump = the bad guys. CIA deploying its own NSA around the world = the good guys. After all, CIA spokesman Jonathan Liu duly issued a non-denial denial. Loony mainstream factions are even advancing that “the Russians” leaked the CIA info to WikiLeaks, thus fueling more suspicion that Russia will interfere in upcoming French and German elections.
May I have an Orwellian iPhone, please?
As we’re mired deep in an Orwellian total screen environment, already conceptualized by Baudrillard in the go-go 1980s, nothing so trivial as the technical proof we’re all being spied upon could alter the (im)balance. The US is already ravaged by a vicious sociopolitical war – and no “threat” to established narratives allows for nuance.
The implication is that, as it stands, there won’t be a US-Russia reset anytime soon – despite hosting invitations from Iceland, Finland or Slovenia; the neocon/neoliberal galaxy nestled in powerful deep state factions will do their best to deny it.
It hardly matters that Trump absolutely does not want war: his entire domestic US economy remix could not possibly allow it. The Pentagon now is essentially an extended special ops unit: it cannot possibly fight a land war (Iran? North Korea? Ukraine?)
Russia, on the other hand, would be ready for war if needs be. The S-500 missile defense system is being deployed: some analysts (not the Ministry of Defense) are sure it’s already protecting the whole Russian landmass. China, by 2021, will have more than 1,000 very mobile warheads, or hidden in those submarines lounging in Hainan. By that time, both Iran and Pakistan will be deep into a strategic defense network with Russia-China, via the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, shielded with their own S-400 and S-500 systems.
Putin is not playing chess. He’s playing Go — and if we look at the board, reality is indeed painful.
Moscow is all but deciding the practical future of Syria, in Astana. Russia virtually wrote the Minsk II agreements, routinely broken by Kiev. Crimea as part of Russia is a fait accompli. Novorossiya for all practical purposes is already a totally autonomous region, with the economy working in rubles. Erdogan owes his imminent regime change in reverse – a presidential sultanate? – to Putin, as Russia warned him about the military coup hours in advance, according to several Russian media sources. Moscow protected Iran’s energy industry during the hardcore OPEC negotiations. Putin all but designed the Russia-China strategic partnership.
Beijing has managed to convince Moscow that One Belt, One Road and the Eurasia Economic Union should be connected, merged and tackled as a win-win Eurasia integration process. If Russia eventually loses economic preeminence across the Central Asian “stans,” it maintains its paramount military/security status.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov never ceases to stress that “our relations with China are at their best level ever in our two countries’ history.”
Add to it a geo-economic gambit; hints of key factions of European business elites getting ready to hitch themselves to China’s growing – slowly but surely – monetary/financial clout, linked to Beijing’s imperative of preventing a collapse of global supply chains. Xi Jinping’s “inclusive globalization,” announced in Davos, sounds more and more like a reality in the making.
In contrast to reality, where China-Russia expand their strategies without exceptionalist illusions, 24/7 neocon/neoliberal hysteria offers a constant barrage of childish, pathetic eruptions. As the self-delusion school of foreign policy refuses to admit Moscow will not sell out China and Iran for a deal with Washington, the last refuge of the scoundrels is cognitive dissonance; fear of Russia incited to cold war 2.0 heights.
So, relax, global citizen; the CIA is benign and benevolent, even when they’re watching you. You have nothing to fear but fear itself – and its name is Russia.
With permission from
This interview took place at the University of Arizona, before a public audience, on February 2, 2017. I thank Marvin Waterstone for arranging the event, and Professor Chomsky, who approved this transcript for publication. The interview is presented in full, with only very slight editing for style. This interview originally appeared in the journal Class, Race, and Corporate Power. – D. Gibbs
David Gibbs: The main issue on everyone’s minds is the inauguration of Donald Trump as president. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has emphasized the extreme danger that Trump poses, due to the augmented risk of nuclear war and uncontrolled climate change. After inauguration, the Bulletin’s metaphoric clock has been repositioned at two and a half minutes to midnight, with “midnight” signifying catastrophe. Do you agree with the Bulletin regarding the alleged dangers posed by the Trump presidency?
Noam Chomsky: One of the dangers is unquestionable. Of the two existential threats – the threats to the termination of the species basically and most other species – one of them, climate change, on that I think there’s no basis for discussion. Trump has been very inconsistent on many things; on Twitter he’s been all over the place, but some of it is very consistent. That is: Do nothing about climate change except make it worse. And he’s not just speaking for himself, but for the whole Republican Party, the whole leadership. It’s already had impact, it will have worse impact. We’ll talk about this next week, but if there are ways out of this, it’s going to be not easy.
With regard to nuclear weapons, it’s kind of hard to say. He’s said lots of things. As you mentioned, the national security experts are terrified. But they’re more terrified by his personality than by his statements. So if you read people like say Bruce Blair1 one of the leading, most sober, knowledgeable specialists, he says, look, his statements are all over the map, but his personality is frightening, he’s a complete megalomaniac. You never know how he’s going to react. When he learned for example that he’d lost the election by about three million votes, his instant reaction was insanity; you know, three to five million illegal immigrants somehow were organized in some incredible fashion to vote. On any little issue – Miss Universe, or whatever it may be – he’s completely unpredictable, he’ll go off into outer space. His guru Steve Bannon is worse, he’s much scarier. He probably knows what he’s doing.
Over the years, there’s been case after case when there were very narrow decisions that had to be made about whether to launch nuclear weapons in serious cases. What is this guy going to do if his vaunted negotiating skills fail, if somebody doesn’t do what he says? Is he going to say, “Okay we’ll nuke them? We’re done?” Remember that in any major nuclear war, the first strike destroys the country that attacks; it’s been known for years. The first strike of a major power is very likely to cause what’s called nuclear winter, leads to global famine for years and everything’s basically gone. Some survivors straggling around. Could he do it? Who knows.
Some of his comments can be interpreted as potentially reducing the threat of nuclear war. The major threat right now is right on the Russian border. Notice, not the Mexican border, the Russian border. And it’s serious. He has made various statements moving towards reducing the tensions, accommodating Russian concerns and so on. On the other hand, you have to balance that against expanding our nuclear forces, add to our so-called depleted military, which is already more powerful than the rest of the world combined; attack in Syria, send forces to Syria, start bombing. Who knows what could be next? Michael Flynn, national security advisor,2 [his reaction] to the Iranian missile test the other day was very frightening. Now the missile test is ill-advised, they shouldn’t have done it. But it’s not in violation of international law or international agreements. They shouldn’t have done it. His reaction suggested maybe we’re going to go to war in retaliation. Would they do it? If they did, you don’t know what’s going to happen next. Everything could blow up.
This crazy ban on the seven states, where we can’t accept immigrants, almost every analyst points out the obvious: It just increases the threat of terror. It lays the basis for terror. It’s just like the atrocities in Abu Ghraib and Bagram and Guantanamo. They’re the most fabulous recruiting techniques for Al Qaeda and ISIS. Everyone knows it. Now, you ban not the whole Muslim world. You ban seven states, seven states that have not been responsible for a single terrorist act. Those are the seven he banned. But, you leave the ones that really are responsible, like Saudi Arabia, which is the center for propaganda and funding and so on for radical Islamic Jihadism, well you can’t touch them because of business interests, also they have oil and so on and so forth. There’s actually an article in the Washington Post, I don’t know whether it’s tongue in cheek or not, which said the criterion for being on the list of banned states is that Trump doesn’t have business interests there. Maybe. But it’s this kind of wild unpredictability, megalomania, thin-skinned craziness that really has me worried, more than his statements. Now, on the climate change there’s just nothing to say, he’s perfectly straightforward.
Gibbs: Let us turn to the role of the media in reporting alleged Russian interference in the US electoral process. Mainstream journalists have called Trump a puppet of Russia, a modern version of the Manchurian Candidate. Others have criticized the media for accepting unsubstantiated claims about Russian influence, and reporting such claims as facts. Normon Soloman and Serge Halimi, for example, stated that press reporting on this issue amounts to a mass hysteria reminiscent of the McCarthy era, while Seymour Hersh called the media reporting on Russia “outrageous.”3 What is your view of this situation?
Chomsky: My guess is that most of the world is just collapsing in laughter. Suppose all the charges are true, I mean every single one, it is so amateurish by US standards that you can hardly even laugh. What the US does is the kind of thing I described in Italy in 1948. Case after case like that, not hacking or spreading rumors in the media; but saying look, we’re going to starve you to death or kill you or destroy you unless you vote the way we want. I mean that’s what we do.
Take the famous 9/11, let’s think about it for a minute. It was a pretty awful terrorist act. It could have been a lot worse. Now let’s suppose that instead of the plane being downed in Pennsylvania by passengers, suppose it had hit its target, which was probably the White House. Now suppose it had killed the president. Suppose that plans had been set for a military coup to take over the government. And right away, immediately 50,000 people were killed, 700,000 tortured. A bunch of economists were brought in from Afghanistan, let’s call them the “Kandahar Boys,” who very quickly destroyed the economy, and established a dictatorship which devastated the country. That would have been a lot worse than 9/11. It happened: the first 9/11, it happened on September 11, 1973, in Chile. We did it. Was that interfering or hacking a party? This record is all over the world, constantly overthrowing governments, invading, forcing people to follow what we call democracy, as in the cases I mentioned. As I say, if every charge is accurate, it’s a joke, and I’m sure half the world is collapsing in laughter about this, because people outside the United States know it. You don’t have to tell people in Chile about the first 9/11.
Gibbs: One of the surprises of the post-Cold War era is the persistence of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and other US-led alliances. These alliances were created during the Cold War mainly or exclusively for containing the claimed Soviet threat. In 1991, the USSR disappeared from the map, but the anti-Soviet alliance systems persisted and in fact expanded. How do we account for the persistence and expansion of NATO? What in your view is the purpose of NATO after the Cold War?
Chomsky: We have official answers to that. It’s a very interesting question, which I was planning to talk about but didn’t have time. So thanks. It’s a very interesting question. For fifty years, we heard NATO is necessary to save Western Europe from the Russian hordes, you know the slave state, stuff I was taking about. In 1990-91, no Russian hordes. Okay, what happens? Well there are actually visions of the future system that were presented. One was Gorbachev. He called for a Eurasian security system, with no military blocs. He called it a Common European Home. No military blocs, no Warsaw Pact, no NATO, with centers of power in Brussels, Moscow, Ankara, maybe Vladivostok, other places. Just an integrated security system with no conflicts.
That was one. Now the other vision was presented by George Bush, this is the “statesman,” Bush I and James Baker his secretary of state. There’s very good scholarship on this incidentally. We really know a lot about what happened, now that all the documents are out. Gorbachev said that he would agree to the unification of Germany, and even adherence of Germany to NATO, which was quite a concession, if NATO didn’t move to East Germany. And Bush and Baker promised verbally, that’s critical, verbally that NATO would not expand “one inch to the east,” which meant East Germany. Nobody was talking about anything farther at the time. They would not expand one inch to the east. Now that was a verbal promise. It was never written. NATO immediately expanded to East Germany. Gorbachev complained. He was told look, there’s nothing on paper. People didn’t actually say it but the implication was look, if you are dumb enough to take faith in a gentleman’s agreement with us, that’s your problem. NATO expanded to East Germany.
There’s very interesting work, if you want to look into it by a young scholar in Texas named Joshua Shifrinson, it appeared in International Security, which is one of the prestige journals, published by MIT.4 He goes through the documentary record very carefully and he makes a pretty convincing case that Bush and Baker were purposely deceiving Gorbachev. The scholarship has been divided on that, maybe they just weren’t clear or something. But if you read it, I think it’s quite a convincing case, that they were purposely setting it up to deceive Gorbachev.
Okay, NATO expanded to East Berlin and East Germany. Under Clinton NATO expanded further, to the former Russian satellites. In 2008 NATO formally made an offer to Ukraine to join NATO. That’s unbelievable. I mean, Ukraine is the geopolitical heartland of Russian concern, quite aside from historical connections, population and so on. Right at the beginning of all of this, serious senior statesmen, people like Kennan for example and others warned that the expansion of NATO to the east is going to cause a disaster.5 I mean, it’s like having the Warsaw Pact on the Mexican border. It’s inconceivable. And others, senior people warned about this, but policymakers didn’t care. Just go ahead.
Right now, where do we stand? Well right at the Russian border, both sides have been taking provocative actions, both sides are building up military forces. NATO forces are carrying out maneuvers hundreds of yards from the Russian border, the Russian jets are buzzing American jets. Anything could blow up in a minute. In a minute, you know. Any incident could instantly blow up. Both sides are modernizing and increasing their military systems, including nuclear systems.
So what’s the purpose of NATO? Well actually we have an official answer. It isn’t publicized much, but a couple of years ago, the secretary-general of NATO made a formal statement explaining the purpose of NATO in the post-Cold War world is to control global energy systems, pipelines, and sea lanes. That means it’s a global system and of course he didn’t say it, it’s an intervention force under US command, as we’ve seen in case after case. So that’s NATO. So what happened to the years of defending Europe from the Russian hordes? Well, you can go back to NSC-68,6 and see how serious that was. So that’s what we’re living with.
Right now the threat to our existence is Muslim terrorists from seven states, who have never had a single terrorist act. About half the population believes that. I mean you look back at American history and American culture, it’s pretty striking. I mean this has been the safest country in the world forever, and the most frightened country in the world. That’s a large part of the source of the gun culture. You have to have a gun when you go into Starbucks, because who knows what’s going to happen. It just doesn’t happen in other countries.
There’s something deeply rooted in American culture. You can pretty much identify what it was. You take a look at the history. Remember, the US is not a global power until pretty recently. It was internal conquest. You had to defend yourself against what the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, an enlightened figure, called the attacks of the “merciless Indian savages,” whose known way of warfare was torture and destruction. Jefferson wasn’t a fool. He knew that it was the merciless English savages who were carrying out these acts. That is in the Declaration of Independence, recited piously every July Ffourth, the merciless Indian savages with no reason at all were suddenly attacking us. I mean, you can imagine the reasons. That’s one. Also you had a slave population, you had to protect yourself against them. You needed guns. One consequence of that was in southern culture, possession of a gun became kind of a sign of manhood, not just because of slaves but other white men. If you had a gun, you’re not going to push me around. You know, I’m not one of those guys you can kick in the face.
There was another element, which was kind of interesting. In the mid to late nineteenth century, the gun manufacturers recognized that they had a limited market. Remember that this is a capitalist society, you’ve got to expand your market. They were selling guns to the military. That’s a pretty limited market. What about all the rest of the people? So what started was all kinds of fantastic stories about Wyatt Earp and the gunmen and the Wild West, how exciting it was to have these guys with guns defending themselves against all sorts of things.
I grew up in that, when I was a kid. My friends and I used to play cowboys and Indians. We were cowboys killing the Indians, following the Wild West stories. All of this combined into a very strange culture, which is frightened. You look at the polls today, I think half the population supports this ban on these dangerous immigrants who are going to come in and do something, who knows what. And meanwhile the countries that really have been involved in terrorism, they’re out. It’s kind of like I think it was Oklahoma banning Sharia law. Now there’s probably fifty Muslims in Oklahoma, and they have to ban Sharia law, you know. This terror which is all over the country is constantly incited. The Russians were part of NSC-68, is a dramatic case. And that case, like most propaganda wasn’t totally fabricated. The Russians were doing a lot of rotten things, you can point to them. But the idea that if you consider what Hans Morgenthau called “I called abuse ofe reality,” the picture of the world was almost the opposite of what they presented. But somehow this sells and is continually repeated, at least in this kind of situation.
Gibbs: During the Cold War, the political left generally opposed military intervention. After 1991, however, the anti-interventionist movement collapsed and in its place has emerged the idea of humanitarian interventionism, which celebrates intervention as a defense of human rights. Military actions in the Balkans, Iraq, Libya have all been presented as acts of humanitarianism, which aimed to liberate oppressed peoples, and these interventions were at least initially popular among political liberals. Proposals for augmented US intervention in Syria often invoke the humanitarian principle. What is your view of humanitarian intervention?
Chomsky: Well, I don’t quite see it like that. Now, if you look back to the anti-intervention movements, what were they? Let’s take the Vietnam War – the biggest crime since the Second World War. Those of you who are old enough will remember what happened. You couldn’t be opposed to the war for years. The mainstream liberal intellectuals were enthusiastically in support of the war. In Boston, a liberal city where I was, we literally couldn’t have a public demonstration without it being violently broken up, with the liberal press applauding, until late 1966. By that time there were hundreds of thousands of American troops rampaging in South Vietnam. South Vietnam had been practically destroyed. The leading, the most respected Vietnam historian, military historian Bernard Fall7 – he was a hawk incidentally, but he cared for the Vietnamese – he said it wasn’t clear to him whether Vietnam could survive as a historical and cultural entity under the most massive attack that any region that size had ever suffered. He was talking about South Vietnam, incidentally. By that time, we did begin to get some protests. But not from liberal intellectuals; they never opposed the war.
In fact, it’s pretty dramatic when you get to 1975, very revealing, the war ends. Everybody had to write something about the war, what it meant. And you also had polls of public opinion, and they’re dramatically different. So if you look at the writings of intellectuals, there are two kinds. One said, l“Look, if we fought harder we could have won.” You know, the stab in the back. But the others, who were way at the left, people like Anthony Lewis of the New York Times, way out in left stream, his view in 1975 was the Vietnam war began with blundering efforts to do good. But by 1969, it was clear that it was a disaster, that was too costly to us. We could not bring democracy to South Vietnam at a cost that we were willing to accept. So it was a disaster. That’ is the left extreme.
Take a look at public opinion. About 70 percent of the population, in the polls, said the war was fundamentally wrong and immoral, not a mistake. And that attitude lasted as long as polls were taken in the early ‘80s. The pollsters don’t ask reasons, they just give numbers. So why did the people think it was fundamentally wrong and immoral? The guys who ran the polls, John E. Rielly, a professor at the University of Chicago, a liberal professor, he said what that means is that people thought too many Americans had beenwere being killed. Maybe. Another possibility is they didn’t like the fact that we were carrying out the worst crime since the Second World War. But that’s so inconceivable that wasn’t even offered as a possible reason.
Now what happened in the following years? Well, I think that among the educated classes it stayed the same. You talk about humanitarian intervention, it’s like Vietnam was a humanitarian intervention. Among the public, it’s quite different. Take the Iraq War, , it’s the second worst crime after the Second World War. It’s the first time in history, in the history of imperialism, there were huge demonstrations, before the war was officially launched. Actually it was already under way. But before it was officially launched, there were huge demonstrations everywhere. I think it had an effect. The public still was split.
And [after Vietnam] the type of interventions that are carried out are designed so as not to elicit public reactions. In fact, it was stated early in the first Bush [presidency], Bush I, in one of their documents they pointed out in the future, US wars are going to be against much weaker enemies. And they have to be won quickly and decisively before a popular reaction develops. And Iif you take a look, that’s what’s done. Look at Panama, for instance, over a couple of days; and Kosovo, no American troops. You wrote a great book about it.8 But I’m not convinced that it’s different from what it was.
Gibbs: With the end of the Cold War, there has been a decline of activism in the US and elsewhere around the issue of nuclear disarmament. Once again, this state of affairs differs from the period of the Cold War, when there was a mass movement that opposed nuclear weapons – recall the Freeze movement from the 1980s — but this movement largely disappeared after 1991. The danger of nuclear war remains as high as ever, but there is little public engagement on this issue, it would seem. How would you explain the disappearance of the anti-nuclear movement?
Chomsky: Well that’s absolutely right. The peak of anti-nuclear popular activism was in the early ‘80s, when there was a huge movement. And the Reagan administration attempted decided to defuse it and partially succeeded, by presenting the illusion of Star Wars, SDI, that somehow we’re going to eliminate nuclear weapons. The Reagan administration picked up the rhetoric of the anti-nuclear movement; they said “Yyeah, you’re right.” We have to eliminate nuclear weapons. And the way we’re going to do it is by having SDI, TStar Wars, the Strategic Defense Initiative, which prevent nuclear weapons from impacting. Well, that did defuse the movement.
And whthen the Russians collapsed, and it looked like as if maybe we can reduce the nuclear tensions. And for a while they actually were reduced. There was a reduction of nuclear weaponsreally were reduced on both sides. Various steps were taken. Nowhere near enough, but some of them were taken.
On the other hand, it’s very important to understand the official position of the United States. You should read it. So in 1995, this is Clinton, a very important document came out, still classified, but large parts of it were declassified. It’s called “Essentials of Post-Cold War Deterrence.”9 What does post-Cold War deterrence mean? Deterrence means use of nuclear weapons. This was released by the Strategic Command, which was in charge of nuclear weapons planning and running nuclear weapons. I wrote about it when it came out and have been writing about it since. . Since then, I’ve never seen a reference to it. But it is an amazing document. Here’s what it says basically: It says we have to maintain the right of first strike, the right of the first use of nuclear weapons, even against nonnuclear powers. Nuclear weapons, they point out, are really constantly used, because they cast a shadow over other military actions. In other words, when people know we are ready to use nuclear weapons, they’re going to back off if we do something aggressive. So basically, nuclear weapons are always being used.
Now that’s a point that Dan Ellsberg has made for years. He said it’s kind of like if you and I go into a grocery store to rob it, and I have a gun. The guy may give you the money in the cash register. I’m using the gun even if I don’t shoot. Well that’s nuclear weapons — essential to post-war deterrence — they cast a shadow over everything. Then, it goes on to say that we must present a national persona of being irrational and vindictive, because that’s going to terrify people. And then, they’ll back off. And this is not Trump, this is Clinton. It’s not Nixon, you know. We have to be irrational and vindictive, because that’s going to frighten people. And we have to maintain this for years. And then we’ll be able to carry out the actions that we want to carry out.
That’s our nuclear weapons strategy, as of the early post-Cold War years. And I think this is a real failure of the intellectual community, including scholarship and the media. It’s not like you had headlines all over the place. And it’s not secret, the documents are there. And I think that’s probably the right picture. You know, people talk about Nixon’s “madman theory.” We don’t really know much about that. It was in memoirs, by somebody else.10 But this is real. This is the real mad man theory. We have to be irrational and vindictive, so people don’t know what we’re up to. This is not Trump and Bannon, it’s from the Clinton era.
Gibbs: I think we have time for one more question. In popular discussion, the phrase “national security” has come to mean security against military threats almost exclusively. This narrative downgrades the significance of nonmilitary threats, such as climate change, antibiotic resistant bacteria, or viral epidemics. It would seem that there is an imbalance between perceived military threats, which receive overwhelming governmental funding and press attention on the one hand, and nonmilitary threats, which receive relatively little on the other hand. How do we account for the apparent overemphasis on military threats?
Chomsky: Well [with] military threats, you can see them actually, you can imagine it. People don’t think about it enough. But Iif you think about it for a minute, you can see that a nuclear attack could be the end of everything. These other threats are kind of slow, maybe we won’t see them next year. Maybe the science is uncertain, maybe we don’t have to worry about it. Climate change is the worst, but there’s others.
Take pandemics. There could easily be a severe pandemic. A lot of that comes from something we don’t pay much attention to: Eating meat. The meat production industry, the industrial production of meat, uses an immense amount of antibiotics. I don’t remember the exact figure, it’s probably like half the antibiotics. Well antibiotics have an effect: They lead to mutations that make them ineffective. We’re now running out of antibiotics that deal with the threat of rapidly mutating bacteria. A lot of that just comes from the meat production industry. Well, do we worry about it? Well, we ought to be. You go into a hospital now, it’s dangerous. We can get diseases that can’t be dealt with, that are moving around the hospital. A lot of that traces back to industrial meat production. These are really serious threats, all over the place.
Take something you really don’t think about: Plastics in the ocean. I mean plastics in the ocean have an enormous ecological effect. When geologists announced the beginning of a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene, humans destroying the environment, one of the main things they pointed to is the use of plastics in the earth. We don’t think about it, but it has a tremendous effect. But these are things you don’t see right in front of your eyes. You need to think about them a little, to see what the consequences are. It’s easy to put them aside, and the media don’t talk about them. Other things are more important. How am I going to put food on the table tomorrow? That’s what I’ve got to worry about, and so on. It’s very serious, but it’s hard to bring out the enormity of these issues, when they do not have the dramatic character of something you can show in the movies, with a nuclear weapons falling and everything disappears.
1 For the recent opinions of Princeton University nuclear weapons specialist Bruce G. Blair, see Blair, “Trump and the Nuclear Keys,” New York Times, October 12, 2016.
2 Note that Michael T. Flynn resigned as national security advisor on February 13, 2017, several days after this interview took place
3 See Solomon, “Urgent to Progressives: Stop Fueling Anti-Russia Frenzy,” Antiwar.com, December 21, 2016, http://original.antiwar.com/solomon/2016/12/20/urgent-progressives-stop-fueling-anti-russia-frenzy/; Halimi, January, 2017, ; Jeremy , “Seymour Hersh Blasts Media for Uncritically Reporting Russian Hacking Story,”
4?: The End of the Cold War and the US Offer to Limit NATO Expansion,” International Security 40, no. 4, 2016.
5 On George F. Kennan’s warning about the dangers of NATO expansion, see Thomas L. Friedman, “Foreign Affairs: Now a Word from X,” New York Times, May 2, 1998.
6 Here, Chomsky references the National Security Council memorandum NSC-68, one of the key documents of the Cold War. This document was the topic of Chomsky’s lecture, which preceded the interview. The document text is now fully declassified and available online. See “A Report to the National Security Council – NSC 68,” April 14, 1950, made available through the Harry S. Truman Presidential Library, https://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/coldwar/documents/pdf/10-1.pdf.
7 Regarding Bernard Fall’s writings on Vietnam, see Fall, Last Reflections on a War. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967.
8 The book Chomsky references with regard to the Kosovo intervention is David N. Gibbs, First Do No Harm: Humanitarian Intervention and the Destruction of Yugoslavia. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press, 2009.
9 This e full text of this declassified document is now available online. See US Department of Defense, Strategic Command, “Essentials of Post-Cold War Deterrence,” 1995 [no exact date indicated], made available through provided by the Federation of American Scientists, Nuclear Information Project, http://www.nukestrat.com/us/stratcom/SAGessentials.PDF.
10 The idea that President Richard Nixon subscribed to a “madman” theory of international relations first appeared in the memoir by former Nixon aide H. R. Haldeman, in Haldeman and Joseph DiMona, The Ends of Power. New York: Times Books, 1978, p. 98.