Philip Giraldi points out that the
primary source of the recent, inexplicable anti-Russian antipathy is the fact
that the (((neocons))) finally lost control of its government after more than
80 years.
I have long believed that the core hatred of Russia comes from the neocons
and is to a large extent tribal or, if you prefer, ethno-religious based. Why?
Because if the neoconservatives were actually foreign policy realists there is
no good reason to express any visceral dislike of Russia or its government. The
allegations that Moscow interfered in the 2016 presidential election in the
U.S. are clearly a sham, just as are the tales of the alleged Russian poisoning
of the Skripals in Winchester England and, most recently, the claimed
assassination of journalist Arkady Babchenko in Kiev which turned out to be a
false flag. Even the most cursory examination of the past decade’s developments
in Georgia and Ukraine reveal that Russia was reacting to legitimate major
security threats engineered by the United States with a little help from Israel
and others. Russia has not since the Cold War ended threatened the United
States and its ability to re-acquire its former Eastern European satellites is
a fantasy. So why the hatred?
In fact, the neocons got along quite well with Russia when they and their overwhelmingly Jewish oligarchs and international commodity thieves cum financier friends were looting the resources of the old Soviet Union under the hapless Boris Yeltsin during the 1990s. Alarms about the alleged Russian threat only re-emerged in the neocon dominated media and think tanks when old fashioned nationalist Vladimir Putin took office and made it a principal goal of his government to turn off the money tap.
With the looting stopped by Putin, the neocons and friends no longer had any reason to play nice, so they used their considerable resources in the media and within the halls of power in places like Washington, London and Paris to turn on Moscow. And they also might have perceived that there was a worse threat looming. The Putin government appeared to be resurrecting what the neocons might perceive as pogrom-plagued Holy Russia! Old churches razed by the Bolsheviks were being rebuilt and people were again going to mass and claiming belief in Jesus Christ. The former Red Square now hosts a Christmas market while the nearby tomb of Lenin is only open one morning in the week and attracts few visitors.
In fact, the neocons got along quite well with Russia when they and their overwhelmingly Jewish oligarchs and international commodity thieves cum financier friends were looting the resources of the old Soviet Union under the hapless Boris Yeltsin during the 1990s. Alarms about the alleged Russian threat only re-emerged in the neocon dominated media and think tanks when old fashioned nationalist Vladimir Putin took office and made it a principal goal of his government to turn off the money tap.
With the looting stopped by Putin, the neocons and friends no longer had any reason to play nice, so they used their considerable resources in the media and within the halls of power in places like Washington, London and Paris to turn on Moscow. And they also might have perceived that there was a worse threat looming. The Putin government appeared to be resurrecting what the neocons might perceive as pogrom-plagued Holy Russia! Old churches razed by the Bolsheviks were being rebuilt and people were again going to mass and claiming belief in Jesus Christ. The former Red Square now hosts a Christmas market while the nearby tomb of Lenin is only open one morning in the week and attracts few visitors.
This
should give considerable hope to Americans, as AIPAC's influence over the three
branches of the US government is considerably more tenuous than the Bolsheviks'
historical control of the Russian government was.
Fortunately, the responsibility of actually governing their own land is fundamentally transforming the Israeli perspective and making smart men like Netanyahu more aware of the intrinsic dangers of attempting to interfere in the internal affairs of other nations. That's why he is openly encouraging the Diasporans to come home rather than act as a fifth column.
Giraldi is certainly correct in at least one regard. If the neocons were simply foreign-policy realists, we'd hear them talking incessantly about China, and to a lesser extent, India, not Russia.
Fortunately, the responsibility of actually governing their own land is fundamentally transforming the Israeli perspective and making smart men like Netanyahu more aware of the intrinsic dangers of attempting to interfere in the internal affairs of other nations. That's why he is openly encouraging the Diasporans to come home rather than act as a fifth column.
Giraldi is certainly correct in at least one regard. If the neocons were simply foreign-policy realists, we'd hear them talking incessantly about China, and to a lesser extent, India, not Russia.
