The Judge & Australian Public Radio
Estic obligat a escriure en diversos idiomes perquè: 1. A la majoria de la gent dels Estats Units se'ls ha rentat el cervell perquè cregui que els jueus són la seva salvació; i 2., el seu anglès és una merda i no poden romandre en silenci el temps suficient per escoltar o veure el que òbviament passa al seu voltant . . .
El judeomessianisme fa gairebé dos mil anys que escampa entre nosaltres el seu missatge verinós. Els universalismes democràtics i comunistes són més recents, però només han reforçat la vella narrativa jueva. Són els mateixos ideals.
Els ideals transnacionals, transracials, transsexuals, transculturals que aquestes ideologies ens prediquen (més enllà dels pobles, races, cultures) i que són el sosteniment diari de les nostres escoles, als nostres mitjans de comunicació, a la nostra cultura popular, a les nostres universitats, i sobre al nostres els carrers han acabat reduint la nostra identitat biosimbòlica i el nostre orgull ètnic a la seva mínima expressió.
Els banquers jueus han inundat Europa amb musulmans i Amèrica amb escombraries del tercer món . . . L'exili com a càstig per als que predicen la sedició s'hauria de restablir dins el marc legal d'Occident . . .
El judaisme, el cristianisme i l'islam són cultes a la mort originats a l'Orient Mitjà i totalment aliens a Europa i als seus pobles.
De vegades ens preguntem per què l'esquerra europea es porta tan bé amb els musulmans. Per què un moviment sovint obertament antireligiós es posa del costat d'una religiositat ferotge que sembla oposar-se a gairebé tot allò que l'esquerra sempre ha pretès defensar? Part de l'explicació rau en el fet que l'islam i el marxisme tenen una arrel ideològica comuna: el judaisme.
Don Rumsfeld tenia raó quan va dir: "Europa s'ha desplaçat en el seu eix", va ser el bàndol equivocat que va guanyar la Segona Guerra Mundial, i es fa més clar cada dia . . . Què ha fet l'OTAN per defensar Europa? Absolutament res . . . Els meus enemics no són a Moscou, Damasc, Teheran, Riad o algun eteri bogeyman teutónic, els meus enemics són a Washington, Brussel·les i Tel Aviv.
Nationalism as a policy of enduring geopolitical value should be more important than the delusions associated with liberal hegemony. In a related article from 2019, Mearsheimer presupposes that the U.S.-led liberal international order was destined to collapse from the start. John Mearsheimer! These statements you make are utter nonsense, and you are making excuses for the rule of authoritarian anti-human regimes! There is no such thing as liberal hegemony! And your realist view that "interactions between great powers are described as primarily driven by a rational desire to achieve regional hegemony in an anarchic international system" is inherently problematic and wrong and unfounded! The fact is that some democracies help their own popular allies everywhere because they defend themselves against the expansion of their enemy's authoritarian allies to maintain their own security! The realist perspective ignores popular oversight and control of elected officials and power, which is completely unrealistic! Even if one can't assume that the leaders of a democracy won't make bad decisions just by trusting their materialism, the oversight and control of officials and public power of all kinds in a democracy is effective in curbing such mistakes! The control of power in a democracy is the control of public power not to do anything wrong on a more realistic level! The realist kind of willful ignorance of the fact that people make decisions because of their own values that are not necessarily the same as other values is patently false! And nationalism is a narrow and grossly offensive value, and it is often used by dictators to incite hatred against foreign countries, especially democracies, to distract or even counteract the attention of the population from domestic conflicts and wrong policies! How can this be good for regional peace and security if the world is full of such dictators who incite hatred for the sake of authoritarian rule? Do you have the courage to answer me this question? And it is the regimes controlled by those anti-humanists who deprive people of their rights for the benefit of authoritarian rule that are the real hegemonies! Some countries oppose and attack democrats simply because of their extremely stupid and ignorant minds! It only proves that such ignorant people are not highly civilised. You rumour-mongering pro-authoritarian media always spread irrational disinformation under the guise of the so-called anti-mainstream media, pretending that you are the real deal! Stop playing such childish tricks! And you say "Putin is pursuing a realistic geopolitical programme to secure Russia's national interests in the face of the ever-expanding threat of NATO." It is even more irrational in the extreme! You are completely delusional in trying to rationalise Putin's invasion! You don't always look at things wrongly and imperfectly with your irrational realism of events! Ukraine is autonomously trying to join the EU in order to develop its economy, not NATO-initiated expansion as you claim! Your statement "If China's power is extended to Canada and Mexico is absolutely different in nature! Because Ukraine has legitimacy to join other organisations as a popularly empowered democracy and has no ambitions to undermine security, and Ukraine is not provoking Russia militarily! Whereas the Chinese government is an absolute authoritarian and anti-human government that does not even have a one-person, one-vote electoral system, and is itself opposed to democracy and freedom, China's political and military expansion with the post-expansion purpose of violating and destroying democratic countries is clearly illegitimate and will definitely undermine regional security! China's expansion for the post-expansion purpose of violating and destabilising democracies to maintain the stability of dictatorships is obvious, cannot be ruled out at all and is extremely probable! As a democracy the Ukrainian government and elected officials are unquestionably qualified to honour the choices made by the population in terms of economy and security! And what you are saying is a completely delusional attempt to rationalise Russia's invasion and crimes! And I'll say it again! The world is simply not explained away by your highly irrational realism with ignorant dialectical overtones! Rather, it is driven by a variety of values and ideas, like the famous saying that all history is the history of ideas. Only values that do not harm the rights and freedoms of the population can create peace and prosperity! Your claim that the US-led liberal democratic world order must be destroyed is also completely illogical and impossible! What is possible is only that the United States will no longer lead the liberal-democratic world order, not that the liberal-democratic world order will disappear from the world!
What do you do when you are very publicly wrong? Yet used a correct method! You fucking course correct, also known as "adjust fire". We are gonna contain China militarily, compete economically, trade and invest because contra Mearsheimer liberal peace theory when backed up with clear deterrent signalling works. There was no 3d world war in 2008 2019 or 2023 and Mearsheimers theory cannot explain why. Mine can.
Israel demands safety above all else. Palestinians demand dignity. Palestinians need a fight they will not lose, or not lose decisively to be able to negotiate anything, again. Like Sadat in Yom Kippur war. Israel needs a defeat, or at least not a decisive victory, but a costly draw, that would bring it down to real earth, to be able to negotiate, again. Israel has defeated all major Arab armies, but will not feel safe, not be safe, until the last Islamic opposing army is defeated, Iran’s army. Sunni Moslems are historically on the side of the West, Britain, US. Whatever their leaders say, Sunni states are allied with US and Israel. Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Sudan...are economically politically strategically oriented on US and dollar. Using China and Russia to bargain better position in US ruled world, not really ready to risk what they have today for some imaginary multipolar profit.
US and Israel will have no real problems with Sunni ruling class, revolts of the masses will be relatively easily controlled, manipulated, the problem are possible revolts inside secret services, armies of respective countries, that will produce elites that deep inside hate, mistrust, the US led order, but understand one cannot fight openly against US and Israel. Like Erdogan or Salman does. But there is no danger for US and Israel until Turkish presidential and Saudi royal Airplanes land at Damascus airport and Bashar al Assad is offered help.
What is the danger of US supporting war on Russian border, what is the downside of this strategy? If one goes back and tries to imagine reversal of US strategic decisions that some people today consider wrong, mistaken.
Vietnam country run by communists, with an economy that is decisively turning towards capitalism and export, an ally, today. What was the downside ?
US has gained enormously with successful provoking of Russian aggression. Created previously nonexistent Ukraine army that is keeping a front of thousand kilometers, united Ukrainian population around previously extreme right, nationalistic core. Moved the frontier between two fighting camps into regions that are historically Russian, cut, severed economic ties between Germany and Russia, and in the next step China, united Europe and at the same time kept control over Europe through NATO. All of this at relatively small cost, no loss of US life.
Forcing Russia to fight a war with high casualties. And most importantly blocking Russia to achieve its political goals, of having neutral Ukraine by raising the price of Russian victory in human losses above the level Russia is willing to pay. Nothing is really lost, unless there is a decisive Russian victory, with collapse of Ukrainian army.
Now, we are still at the beginning, more precisely at the end of the beginning of the war. Now comes the main part of the war, that Russia will fight against weakening Ukrainian army, that will still be a formidable opponent if supplies from the US and Europe/West continue, but even with all support will finally lose, although at a high cost for Russia.
Front will not move in months, perhaps seasons to come if supplies from the West keep coming, at the price of about 120 billion per year, half from US. In the end Ukraine will lose, but if victory is to come through fighting, it will mean another 300.000 to 400.000 Ukrainian deaths, and some 100.000 Russian, at least 200 billions $ spent, and having to solve the problems of state that will remain from Ukraine. US can make Russia pay very high price, still defeat is inevitable. Part of the price, will be payed by Europeans. And biggest part by Ukrainians.
Russian strategy is deliberately slow, to give enough time to Ukrainians and Europeans to understand they are going to lose, and badly, and offering a deal that is still acceptable to honest brokers. But, and here we go at the beginning of Prof. Mearsheimer expose, there is something in Russian offer for Ukrainians, something for reasonable Europeans, there is nothing for US. US would lose with peace, the better, more fundamental agreement, more US stands to lose.
First in arms trade, second in gas trade, third in political, strategic influence.
My views on the Palestine problem go back to the founding of the Jewish state, a bad idea propelled by emotion, as Theodor Herzl saw. Another bad idea was the UN's determination in 1967 of the boundaries of Israel and the residual Arab land of the West Bank and Gaza. The latter was a divided area; the former, a coastal state with a narrow waist. No one was happy with the '67 boundary. Cold WarI made peace impossible, because the US saw Israel as its Middle East outpost. Cold WarII continures the impossibility with greater international dangers. I don't see any resolution until the imperial ambitions of my country, the USA, are overcome by sanity in Washington, DC. From what I read, the vast majority of Israeli citizens regard the Palestinians with contempt and fear. The Palestinians continue to make demands for restitution and restoration to the land they occupied in 1947. Nothing is possible!
Already watched and shared them.
Great John M keep up the
U Tube shows
IF you want people to take you seriously John. Please understand that there are a LOT of deaf people in the World such as me.
You need to do transcripts.
Two things struck me as very true in the Neapoliano interview. (1) Israel's military will have a very difficult time in Gaza and (2) Israel's opposition to two state "solution" is misguided but I have some caveats that were not addressed in the interview.
It is my understanding that their opposition was based on right of return and Arafat turned down an offer during Clinton administration that did not include that. I do not know what "right of return" means. If it includes just West Bank I'd say Israel "messed up" but if it included citizenship in Israel Arafat likely was at fault. I'm leaving other caveats such as Palestenian's being willing to leave Israel alone; if they can't do that, then I'm sorry but there is no solution other than fighting.
Thanks for letting me know! Looking forward to listening to both.