31 March 2014 — Youtube
The Russian interviewer asks Putin, ‘what does he think of the West alleging that the ‘missile shield’ in Europe is to protect the US and Europe from an Iranian attack.
31 March 2014 — Youtube
The Russian interviewer asks Putin, ‘what does he think of the West alleging that the ‘missile shield’ in Europe is to protect the US and Europe from an Iranian attack.
31 March 2014 — Youtube
The Russian interviewer asks Putin, ‘what does he think of the West alleging that the ‘missile shield’ in Europe is to protect the US and Europe from an Iranian attack.
20 February 2012 — 012
23 December 2011 — Stop NATO
8 November 2011 — Stop NATO
7 October 2011 — Stop NATO
16 September 2011 — Stop NATO
11 August 2011 — Stop NATO
29 July 2011 — Stop NATO
8 July 2011 — Stop NATO
8 July 2011 — Stop NATO
20 May 2011 — Stop NATO
Anti-war essays, poems, short stories and literary excerpts
16 May, 2011 — Stop NATO
31 March 2011 — Stop NATO
Updates on Libyan war: March 31
30 March, 2010 — ericwalberg.com
Two floundering presidents grabbed at a chance to show some results. No one will be happy, as always with compromises, says Eric Walberg
The US administration is preening itself on finally clinching a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) with Russia, President Barack Obama calling it the most comprehensive arms control agreement in nearly two decades. It is to be signed in Prague 8 April, where Obama launched his campaign for a nuclear weapons-free world a year ago, and which was supposed to get a US missile defence base. Obama axed this, at least for the moment, to mollify the Russians.
Despite it being the only flicker of peacefulness out of Washington in nearly two decades, the reaction in the US is one of indifference or hostility as the right now latches on to each and every Obama initiative to show its displeasure over healthcare and other Obama-inspired liberal policies.
In Russia the reaction is sullen caution and hostility. Obama’s announcement was greeted officially only by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who warned that Russia reserved the right to withdraw from the treaty if it deems American missile defences a threat. Yes, Obama backed down a bit on the original Bush bases in the Czech Republic and Poland. But then all of a sudden, out of the wild blue yonder, Romania and Bulgaria said they would be getting them instead by 2015, and Poland invited the US to station troops there on a new base. What a coincidence. Despite the last minute addition of a few words as a sop to the Russians, US Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs Ellen Tauscher was quick to emphasise there would be no constraints on the expansion of interceptor missile deployments.
28 March, 2010 — Stop NATO
U.S. and NATO military expansion along Russia’s western and southern flanks diminishes the need for Cold War era nuclear arsenals and long-range delivery systems appreciably. Washington can well afford to reduce the number of its nuclear weapons and still maintain decisive worldwide strategic superiority, especially with the deployment of an international interceptor missile system, unilateral militarization of space, and super stealth strategic bombers and the Pentagon’s Prompt Global Strike plans for conventional warheads with the velocity and range of intercontinental ballistic missiles to destroy other nations’ nuclear forces with non-nuclear attacks.
On March 26th U.S. President Barack Obama and his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev reached an agreement on a successor to the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START 1) of 1991.
The new accord, if it is ratified by the U.S. Senate, will reportedly reduce U.S. and Russian active nuclear weapons by 30 per cent and effect a comparable reduction in the two nations’ delivery systems: Intercontinental ballistic missiles, strategic long-range bombers and ballistic missile submarines.
After a phone conversation between the two heads of state to ‘seal the deal,’ Obama touted it as ‘the most comprehensive arms control agreement in nearly two decades.’ [1]
23 January, 2010 – Global Research – StopNATO
2010 is proceeding in a manner more befitting the third month of the year, named after the Roman god of war, than the first whose name is derived from a pacific deity.
On January 13 the Associated Press reported that the White House will submit its Quadrennial Defense Review to Congress on February 1 and request a record-high $708 billion for the Pentagon. That figure is the highest in absolute and in inflation-adjusted, constant (for any year) dollars since 1946, the year after the Second World War ended. Adding non-Pentagon defense-related spending, the total may exceed $1 trillion.
The $708 billion includes for the first time monies for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq which in prior years were in part funded by periodic supplemental requests, but excludes what the above-mentioned report adds is the first in the new administration’s emergency requests for the same purpose: A purported $33 billion.
Already this month several NATO nations have pledged more troops, even before the January 28 London conference on Afghanistan when several thousand additional forces may be assigned for the war there, in addition to over 150,000 already serving or soon to serve under U.S. and NATO command.
Washington has increased lethal drone missile attacks in Pakistan, and calls for that model to be replicated in Yemen have been made recently, most notably by Senator Carl Levin, Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who on January 13 also advocated air strikes and special forces operations in the country. [1]
The Pentagon will begin the deployment of 1,400 personnel to Colombia to man seven new bases under a 10-year military agreement signed last October 30. [2]
This year the U.S. will also complete the $110 million dollar construction of new military bases in Bulgaria and Romania to house at least 4,000 American troops. [3]
25 November, 2009 — Global Research
US nuclear doctrine, missile defence in Europe and NATO expansion
The Caucus (University of Ottawa), Vol. 10, No. 1 (Fall 2009): pp. 20-22. – 2009-11-12
This article was first published in The Caucus, a political science and international development journal published by the University of Ottawa. The article raises an important question in relation to the twentieth anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall (November 9, 1989):
Has the Cold War really ended?
The article deals with Russian anxieties with the U.S., American nuclear doctrine, American missile defence in Europe, and NATO expansion.
The twentieth anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall is approaching, but has the Cold War really ended and is it really a historic relic of the not too distant past? The Soviet Union may no longer exist and the Warsaw Pact may have long been dissolved, but many of the remnants of the Cold War still exist, like the conflict in the divided Korean Peninsula, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and finally the issue of missile defense. In the last few years the relations between NATO and the Russian Federation have become tense and described in terms reminiscent of the Cold War. One of the main impetuses for this resumption of Cold tensions has been the U.S. missile shield project in the European continent. The Russians have consistently made no secret about maintaining that the missile defense shield, above all else, is a threat to them.
30 September, 2009 — Global Research – Stop NATO
Wars have brought untold horrors upon Europe over the centuries, especially the two world wars of the last one. Until now, though, the continent has been spared the ultimate cataclysm of a missile war.
Though twenty years after the end of the Cold War recent news articles contain reports that would have been shocking even during the depths of the East-West conflict in Europe that followed World War II.
A dispatch quoting a Finnish defense official two days ago bore the title “US could launch missiles from the Baltic Sea” and a U.S. armed forces website yesterday spoke in reference to proposed missile shield plans of “a big, complex, dangerous battle in the space over Europe.”
On September 28 a feature called “BMD fleet plans Europe defense mission” appeared in the Navy Times which reported that “Ballistic-missile defense warships have become the keystone in a new national strategy….Rather than field sensors and missiles on the ground in Poland and the Czech Republic, the U.S. will first maintain a presence of at least two or three Aegis BMD ships in the waters around Europe, starting in 2011.” [1]
This development is in keeping with U.S Pentagon chief Robert Gates’ presentation of September 17 in which, confirming President Obama’s announcement to replace and supplement his predecessor’s project of placing ten ground-based interceptor missiles in Poland and a complementary radar installation in the Czech Republic, he laid out a three-step strategy to enhance (his word) U.S. missile shield plans in Europe.
20 September, 2009 — Global Research
Anthony Fenton, Dee Nicholson, James Petras, Gail Davidson & Jack Rasmus on The Global Research News Hour
Program details, September 21-25
– 2009-09-25
Major Conference Event on the H1N1 Swine Flu Pandemic, Montreal
Presentations in French, debate in French & English
– 2009-09-23
Israeli War Crimes: United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict
– by Justice Richard Goldstone – 2009-09-20
Planning the H1N1 Flu Pandemic: Body Bags, Mass Graves, Quarantine Orders
Selected Evidence
– by Michel Chossudovsky – 2009-09-20
The entire construct is politically motivated and corrupt
VIDEO: Preparing for the H1N1 Pandemic: Body Bags for the Canada’s First Nations
– 2009-09-20