Tag Archives: Russia

The War in Ukraine: Panel at UW Madison’s The Crossing, November 12

Sunday panel with World Beyond War’s David Swanson

UW-Madison professor Samer Alatout and

UW-Madison professor Andrew Kydd

Organized primarily by World Beyond War Madison 

The event was held at The Crossing on the UW Madison Campus area.


Jerel Ballard of Wkow Channel 27 ABC Madison

Advocates discuss paths to peace in ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict

“More than a year and a half has passed since the start of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and debates continue about how to end the war.

During a recent Peace in Ukraine panel discussion co-hosted by Madison for a World BEYOND War, advocates from diverse political backgrounds discussed the status of the war and explored their strategies of how to achieve peace in Ukraine.

“My view is that we should continue to support Ukraine,” Andrew Kydd, a professor of political science at UW-Madison, said. “Ukraine is fighting a war of self defense against the Russian invasion. If you don’t fight back, that doesn’t necessarily mean the war ends, it just means that you lose.”

While some expressed support for U.S. aid to Ukraine, others stressed the importance of promoting dialogue, diplomacy and negotiation over military intervention to prevent the escalation of a nuclear war.

“I don’t think there’s been any greater risk of nuclear war nuclear apocalypse for the earth than the risks created by the war in Ukraine,” said David Swanson, the International Director of World BEYOND War. “I think the United States needs to stop sending weapons to all of these wars and encourage diplomacy and negotiation and peace, and not everybody agrees with that.”

While everyone agreed that violence is not the best solution, panelists differed on the most effective approach to achieving peace. Ultimately the goal was not to endorse any specific ideology but to layout the different perspectives.” 

ABC 27: Panelists Discuss the War in Ukraine at UW-Madison ~ Video ~

May be an image of 3 people and text


David Swanson , Director of World Beyond War

“Nothing in my lifetime has done more to increase the risk of nuclear apocalypse than the war in Ukraine. Nothing is doing more to impede global cooperation on climate, poverty, or homelessness. Few things are doing as much direct damage in those areas, devastating the environment, disrupting grain shipments, creating millions of refugees. While casualties in Iraq were heatedly disputed in U.S. media for years, there’s widespread acceptance that casualties in Ukraine are already at half a million. There’s no way to precisely count how many lives could have been saved around the world by investing hundreds of billions in something wiser than this war, but a small fraction of that could have ended starvation on Earth. The war is leaving for those who’ve survived lands full of rubble, unexploded bombs and cluster bomblets, poisons of all sorts, poverty, trauma, and hatred and resentment. Ukrainian and Russian families are mourning the loss of loved ones forced into war or charged with the crime of opposing war.

Russia and Ukraine successfully negotiate prisoner exchanges, return of children, return of corpses, safe passage for ships, even as each side claims the other is a monster that cannot be spoken with and must be killed.

Russia and Ukraine each claim that compromise is treason — can you imagine if we taught that in preschools instead of parliaments — and that total victory is just around the corner. But the land gained by each side since January 1st is hardly enough to bury the corpses generated in gaining it, and don’t take it from me: the Ukrainian commander-in-chief General Valery Zaluzhny calls it a World War I-like stalemate. This ends one of two ways: nuclear war that threatens all life on Earth or negotiation.

Negotiation is bad for weapons profits, embarrassing for politicians who have spent years denouncing it, and emotionally difficult — but not intellectually difficult. The basic terms of a settlement are found in the pre-war Minsk II agreement, in the Russian proposal of December 2021, in the agreement nearly reached before Western sabotage of it in the spring of 2022, and in dozens of peace proposals from governments around the world. The terms include: removal of all foreign troops, neutrality for Ukraine, demilitarization, lifting sanctions, and autonomy for Crimea and Donbas. The main sticking point for the West, ironically enough, is democracy. Ever since Crimea voted overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia following a U.S.-backed coup in 2014, hundreds of Western commentators have called it the worst act of the century, worse than the war on Iraq, yet not a one has supported holding a re-vote no matter how conducted. The people in Eastern Ukraine were supposed to have autonomy. Denying it to them in the name of war for the Rules Based Order is a disaster. Doing so with endless free weapons shipments that the U.S. public has never voted for and in some polls would reject if given the chance makes a mockery of the word democracy.

As the leading holdout on basic human rights treaties, top opponent of international courts, top abuser of the veto at the UN, and leading weapons dealer to dictatorships and so-called democracies, the U.S. government has plenty of room to shift to promoting democracy and peace by example instead of by bombing.

U.S. and other Western diplomats, spies, and theorists predicted for 30 years that expanding NATO would lead to war with Russia. President Barack Obama refused to arm Ukraine, predicting that doing so would lead toward where we are now — as Obama still saw it in April 2022. Prior to the so-called “Unprovoked War” there were public comments by U.S. officials arguing that the provocations would not provoke anything. “I don’t buy this argument that, you know, us supplying the Ukrainians with defensive weapons is going to provoke Putin,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) One can still read a RAND report advocating creating a war like this one through the sorts of provocations that senators claimed wouldn’t provoke anything. And doing so for the purpose various Congress Members tell you the war is being waged: to hurt Russia.

Provoked or not, you have a horrendous, murderous, criminal invasion — predictably and absurdly counterproductive from the perspective of the Russian claim to be pushing back against NATO. It may be true that if the shoe were on the other foot, that if Russia had put nuclear-capable missile bases near the U.S. border, the U.S. would have done something just as evil. The U.S. recently did things more evil in Iraq and Afghanistan with fictional excuses. When the Soviets put missiles in Cuba the U.S. almost destroyed the world. But then it resolved the matter through compromise, even while publicly pretending to have done so through machismo, teaching those of us yet to come the wrong lesson. And there is no question that both sides built up to this catastrophe for years. Zelensky was elected for peace, and then bullied by the rightwing, with the U.S. accepting or supporting the shift toward hostility. But once you have a brutal invasion, what can be done?

One thing that could have been done is negotiate peace. According to Ukrainian media, Foreign Affairs, Bloomberg, and Israeli, German, Turkish, and French officials, the U.S. and UK pressured Ukraine to prevent a peace agreement in the early days of the invasion. Since then, the U.S. and allies have provided mountains of free weapons to keep the war going. Eastern European governments have expressed concern that if the U.S. slows or ends the weapons flow, Ukraine might become willing to negotiate peace again.

Another thing that could have been done is unarmed resistance. Coups and dictators have been nonviolently ousted in dozens of places. An unarmed army helped liberate India. In 1997 unarmed peacekeepers in Bougainville succeeded where armed ones had failed. In 2005 in Lebanon, Syrian domination was ended through a nonviolent uprising. In 1923 the French occupation of part of Germany was ended through nonviolent resistance. Between 1987 and 91 nonviolent resistance drove the Soviet Union out of Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania — and the latter established plans for future unarmed resistance. Ukraine had nonviolently ended Soviet rule in 1990. Some of the tools of unarmed resistance are familiar from 1968 when the Soviets invaded Czechoslovakia.

In polls in Ukraine, prior to the Russian invasion, not only did people know what unarmed resistance was, but more of them favored it than favored military resistance to an invasion. When the invasion happened, there were hundreds of incidents of Ukrainians using unarmed resistance, stopping tanks, etc. But there was near media silence on early unorganized and unsupported attempts at unarmed resistance. What if the attention paid to Ukrainian war heroes was paid to Ukrainian unarmed resister heroes? What if the world of people who want peace were invited to join in the unarmed resistance, and the billions spent on weapons had been spent on that? What if Ukrainians had been asked to host international protectors, people like us with and without any training, rather than to flee their country or join the war?

People would likely have been killed, and for some reason, those deaths would have been deemed far worse. But they would very likely have been far fewer. The path that has been chosen in Ukraine has led to half a million casualties, 10 million refugees, an increased risk of nuclear war, a severing of international cooperation that pretty well dooms us to climate collapse, a diversion of resources globally into militarism, environmental destruction, food shortages, and risk of disaster at a nuclear powerplant.

If instead of blowing up pipelines and selling fossil fuels some 10% of what has been spent had gone into green energy in Ukraine, humanity’s future would be brighter. At this point, some observable action must precede negotiations. Either side could announce a ceasefire and ask that it be matched. Either side could announce a willingness to agree to a particular agreement. If a ceasefire is not matched, the slaughter can be quickly resumed. If a ceasefire is used to build up troops and weapons for the next battle, well then, the sky is also blue and a bear does it in the woods. Nobody imagines either side as capable of switching off the war business that quickly. A ceasefire is required for negotiations, and an end to weapons shipments is required for a ceasefire. These three elements must come together. They could be abandoned together if negotiations fail. But why not try?”  ~


 

Veterans for Peace was a sponsor of the event and assisted in organizing the event.

Please check out the VFP position and actions around Ukraine and Russia/US proxy war.

Position Statements | Veterans For Peace

 

Letters for Peace August

Please join us in writing and communicating with the public and our elected officials. Respond to the nonsense whether written in the mainstream media, in your local newspapers or magazines.

 

NATO should be trying to end war in Ukraine — Gil Halsted

Military thrives as needs go unmet – Susan Friess

Better use of Pentagon dollars – Stefania Sani

It’s time to reallocate U.S. military spending — Glenn Hoffarth

Negotiation could end war – Gil Halsted

 


NATO should be trying to end war in Ukraine — Gil Halsted 

“A NATO spokesperson was recently forced to apologize for suggesting a possible diplomatic solution to the war in Ukraine.

Stian Jenssen, the chief of staff to the NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, speaking at a panel discussion in Norway, said one way to end the war in Ukraine would be for Ukraine to give up some territory in return for being granted NATO membership. But his boss immediately forced him to walk back that suggestion and stick with the current NATO strategy, which is to support Ukraine unconditionally with more weapons that can only prolong the war.

NATO should be working to promote peace, not prolong wars. The word “treaty” is in the organization’s name (North Atlantic Treaty Organization). Treaties are what happens when wars are ended and peace is established. Jenssen’s proposal may not be the best way to end the war, but it deserves discussion instead of an immediate veto.”

Gil Halsted, Madison


Military thrives as needs go unmet – Susan Friess

 

Dear Editor: I was indoors the other day. I paused and replayed a portion of a podcast and interrupted Zoom as I interviewed new teachers in the afternoon.

Why? The F-35s overhead. Where do I live? Near Schenk’s Corners in Madison. When I’m outside I cringe as they fly over the gardens. In the company of dear friends, tears come to my eyes. I wish to acknowledge my sense of despair and paralysis. I wish to push back.

The fires rage as this summer of undeniable climate change draws to a close. Housing and income insecurity in our town increase. Devastating migration is necessary for so many worldwide. Ongoing war flares around the globe, heightening the threat of nuclear detonation.

I start by acknowledging these nuclear-ready jets in our midst are part of our nation’s military complex — the biggest institutional contributor of greenhouse gases in the world and the recipient of over half the country’s budget — all while energy shifts lag, social supports are further frayed and ongoing insecurity and suffering intensify around the world.

I push back with what I have, my heart and mind. I dare to imagine a world in which the military industrial complex’s presence is not woven throughout this nation and beyond. A world where resources address the pressing needs of humans and the earth of which we are a part.

It is not impossible nor wrong to imagine a world beyond war. In fact, it is healthy and the first step to sanity.

Susan Freiss

Madison

 

 

 


Dear Editor: In a recent story on Wisconsin Public Radio, Sen. Tammy Baldwin is credited with having secured $69 million in federal funding to replace some Fort McCoy facilities. She is quoted as saying: “They just weren’t keeping up with the times.” She said there were all sorts of failures.

But is she keeping up with the times on this issue? Federal assistance is needed in many other areas that are showing “failures.”

What else could that $69 million have done for the general population of this state? Just for example:

• Feeding Wisconsin reports that one in seven people experience hunger.

• Those facing hunger report needing an average of $22.12 more per week to meet their food needs (Second Harvest Heartland).

• The rate of poor and low-income people in Wisconsin is calculated at 31% by the Center on Poverty and Social Policy at Columbia University.

The funding of the military is directly contributing to all the real perils we face. Perils that need immediate attention and all the funding they can get. Those perils are many, from the overall inequity to global warming to underfunded social services.

Even a micro-funding for military barracks contributes to the system that keeps us perpetually ready for war and that also impoverishes our society.

Wisconsin taxpayers contribute more than $11 billion to the Pentagon and military yearly. According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness there are 4,907 homeless individuals in Wisconsin. Half of them are families and 36% are veterans.

Stefania Sani

Madison


In 2022 Congress approved over $113 billion in assistance to support the war in the Ukraine. All the while, our country suffers from climate-related emergencies such as the recent fire in Maui and a variety of social ills related to massive poverty and inequality.

In his famous “Iron Cross Speech,” former President Dwight Eisenhower stated that, “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.” His goal in the speech was to highlight how money spent on militarism is money not spent on meeting the many needs of citizens.

A recent report noted that homelessness across the country has increased by 11% this year from 2022. Local food banks have seen a dramatic increase in demand for their services. Military spending is nearly half of the federal discretionary budget. This is unsustainable and unethical. The plague of militarism must end. American citizens must demand a shift in our values away from the destruction of war and instead to the construction of a healthy society.”

Glenn Hoffarth, Madison


Negotiation could end war – Gil Halsted

Dear Editor: In a recent letter to constituents U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan said the war in Ukraine ”will only ultimately end with a negotiated settlement.”

He said “it is critical that the U.S. prioritize maintaining communication” between both Moscow and Kiev. I applaud Pocan for insisting that negotiations should be at the top of the priority list for ending the slaughter in Ukraine. But instead the Biden administration, with congressional approval, has armed Ukrainians with cluster bombs that have been banned by most other countries and whatever else the U.S. arms industry can provide to keep the war hot on the battlefield. Negotiations remain somewhere further down the list of strategies.

This approach will lead to more civilian casualties and ongoing profits for the arms industry, and, in my view, will not lead to a lasting peace. The only winners will be the weapons makers. Continuing to spend American taxpayer dollars on weapons for Ukraine instead of putting intense economic and diplomatic pressure on both Kiev and Moscow to settle at the table will insure more death and destruction.

My fervent hope is that others in Congress will join Pocan in calling for making communication between the warring parties a priority instead of sending more weapons. The best and eventually the only way to win the war is to stop fighting it and start serious negotiations.

Gil Halsted

Madison

Ukraine and the Expansion of NATO – Jeffrey Sachs – VFPConvention2023

The crimes related to this current violence in Ukraine began long before Russia invaded Ukraine.

Thank you to Jeffrey Sachs for sharing some of his knowledge.
Saturday August 26, 2023

HOME | VFP Convention

 

“Jeffrey D. Sachs is University Professor and Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, where he directed the Earth Institute from 2002 until 2016. He is President of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, Co-Chair of the Council of Engineers for the Energy Transition, Commissioner of the UN Broadband Commission for Development, academician of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences at the Vatican, and Tan Sri Jeffrey Cheah Honorary Distinguished Professor at Sunway University. “

Speakers (vfpconvention.org) Veterans for Peace 2023 Convention Speakers


The transcript is from an earlier talk in June, but similar topics.

“This conflict is actually decades in the making. It didn’t just come out of a Russian invasion in 2022, as is often said in the Western mainstream media. The war is often defined as an unprovoked attack in 2022. Actually, the roots of this war go back to the end of the Soviet Union and to the geopolitics around that.

In 1990, the US and Germany promised the Soviet government at the time, Mikhail Gorbachev, the President, that NATO would not move one inch eastward if Gorbachev went ahead and disbanded the Soviet Military Alliance. In other words, there would be a deal that on the Soviet side, the military alliance, the so-called Warsaw Pact, would be ended, and on the Western side, NATO would not take advantage and Germany would be reunified, but NATO would not move one inch eastward. The US cheated on that because as soon as the Soviet Union ended in 1991, the policymakers in Washington, especially in the Pentagon and in the permanent state in the United States, immediately planned for the Eastern expansion of NATO.

*

So this war started, in my opinion, because the United States could not accept a peace in which the military alliances of both sides of the Cold War would stand down. Well, many things happened over the 30 years between the early 1990s and today, but probably the highlights to mention are that in 2008, George W. Bush forced NATO, pushed NATO, but really pressed that NATO would announce that Ukraine would become a member. And that happened at the Bucharest NATO Summit in 2008. The Russian leadership was furious. They had warned again and again: Don’t do that. We don’t want your military right up against our 2000-kilometer border with Ukraine. Then a Ukrainian President won the election in 2010 on the program of neutrality for Ukraine. Viktor Yanukovych won the election based on the idea that Ukraine doesn’t want to become the battlefield between two superpowers and called for neutrality, which had been enshrined in the original Ukrainian Declaration of Independence, but then was abandoned by some of the NATO-oriented politicians of Ukraine.

So in 2010, Jankovich called for neutrality, but he was overthrown violently in early 2014 with US participation. So this was really a terrible escalation because the relatively pro-Russian president, but one who called for neutrality, which I think was the only safe course for Ukraine, was overthrown. And the United States played a significant role in that. People know about the famous tape of Victoria Nuland, who is now our Under Secretary of State. At the time, she was the Assistant Secretary of State and she described who the US would see as the next government three weeks before a violent overthrow.

*

The US signed several statements in 2021 confirming that NATO would enlarge. I think this was all absolutely irresponsible. Russia massed troops on its border and put on the table a draft US-Russia security agreement on December 17th, 2021 based on no NATO enlargement. The Biden administration formally replied that it was not willing to negotiate over that issue in a response in January. Then Russia invaded on February 24th, 2022, making clear that it was the failure to reach an understanding on the NATO question that was central to Russia’s action.

Four weeks later, Zelenskyy declared that Ukraine was accepting of neutrality. In other words, the initial Russian invasion brought Ukraine to the negotiating table, and during the second half of March, with the Turkish government being the mediators, Russia and Ukraine hammered out a peace agreement.

Incredibly, the United States blocked it because the United States told the Ukrainian government you fight on because American policymakers had two ideas. One was that Ukraine should not be neutral. It should be a NATO country. And second, that the war would be won by some combination of Western armaments and financial sanctions.”

JUne 2023 


Home | Veterans For Peace

 

Stop War: Story of Ukraine and Russia (Updated)

 

 

US bases and weapons are everywhere.  #Hypocrisy

The US sells more weapons than anyone.

 

The people of Ukraine deserve their human rights and the nation its sovereignty. But the US is not the policeman to the world. It’s the weapons dealer and sometimes narcotics distributor and leader for corporate rule.

We allow the bullies to rule. We need democratic institutions that represent all nations, not just the interests of the few that pull the strings.

Enforce the laws.

That should be a priority.  We should have a system that works objectively and democratically represents all nations.

#Freedom
#Accountability
#Transparency


“The monthly Balance & Accuracy in Journalism program in Chapel Hill. With an awareness spanning the many issues affected by the proxy war in #Ukraine, Medea Benjamin equipped us to press for a negotiated end to the conflict. “

from January 16, 2023

War in Ukraine – Medea Benjamin Book Discussion

How the U.S. provoked Russia in Ukraine: A Compendium – WA State Liberals

 

No War with Russia Pictures – Veterans for Peace National

Pictures from February from Code Pink – We have been in the streets. Join US

 

 

 

Putin’s Invasion of Ukraine Salon
with Ray McGovern, John Mearsheimer

 


Professor John J. Mearsheimer will discuss the current Russian invasion on Ukraine whilst exploring the potential causes and consequences of the crisis.

 

Dem Now, Phyllis Bennis: The Best Way to Help Ukraine Is Diplomacy, Not War & Increased Militarization

 

Journalist Peter Hitchens and comedian Konstantin Kisin debate the causes, consequences and future of the Ukraine war at The Ukraine Debate, hosted in the UnHerd Club and recorded Thursday 23rd February 2023.

 

“The CIA is overseeing a secret intensive training program in the U.S. for elite Ukrainian special operations forces and other intelligence personnel, according to five former intelligence and national security officials familiar with the initiative. The program, which started in 2015, is based at an undisclosed facility in the Southern U.S., according to some of those officials.”

CIA-trained Ukrainian paramilitaries may take central role if Russia invades

 

Follow the money.  Look where the weapons are.

“CIA paramilitaries had been training Ukrainian forces on the frontlines of the Donbas war against Russian-backed separatists since 2014…”

Antiwar: Report: 8-Year Secret CIA Training Program in Eastern Ukraine Helped Prepare for Russian Invasion

 

The Intercept: UKRAINIAN LOBBYISTS MOUNTED UNPRECEDENTED CAMPAIGN ON U.S. LAWMAKERS IN 2021 

We need to learn again some of the lessons of the Age of Reason. What is up. What is down. What rights humans have, like the right to not be bombed. We have the right to govern ourselves, and not be controlled by politicians who are owned by big money like that of the war profiteers: Raytheon, Boeing, Northrup, Lockheed and contractors connected to the military, fossil fuels and the owners of the biggest banks.

Somehow Americans should teach the use of critical thought that allows us to understand the propaganda that is all around us. The big money manipulates us and divides us.


Veterans for Peace Members and Chapters across the country have been taking action to protest the U.S. role in escalating the extremely dangerous tensions with Russia over Ukraine.

 

 

 

In a contest between Ukrainian & Russian ultranationalists, we do not need to pick sides. We can defend peace, democratic rights and all minorities, without contributing to the polarization and strengthening the rise of fascism. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
– Zoltan Grossman paraphrase 

Zoltan Grossman: Borderland Ukraine

Great information and maps in this presentation.

Ray McGovern: What Role Has the U.S. Played in the Ukraine Crisis?

“As Russia’s attack on Ukraine wages on, and Ukrainian civilians die daily, the fog of war has seemingly been clouding more nuanced analysis in the United States, argues “Scheer Intelligence” host Robert Scheer. To get more perspective on the historical context of the current conflict, Scheer invites former CIA analyst Ray McGovern to discuss the role the U.S. and NATO have played in Ukraine. McGovern has long been an outspoken critic of what he’s coined as the American Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-Tank (MICIMATT) for leading the world ever closer to a nuclear war.

McGovern spent 27 years as a CIA analyst, during which time he led the Soviet Foreign Policy Branch and prepared The President’s Daily Brief for three U.S. presidents. Months before the Iraq War, the former intelligence analyst joined a group of his peers to ward against the “insanity” of war, creating the group Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS). Now, as news of the war in Ukraine fills American media, McGovern has attempted to call for sanity once more.

The CIA veteran sees the conflict, which he argues is as a direct result of what he calls a Western-orchestrated coup against Vladimir Putin’s ally, former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, as global brinkmanship at its most dangerous given the nuclear arsenal that both Russia and the U.S. possess. Scheer pushes back on McGovern’s use of the term “coup” as well as his assessment of Russian attacks on Ukraine, which the “Scheer Intelligence” host—who covered the Soviet Union and later Russia, as well as Ukraine, as a foreign correspondent—has condemned as a war crime.

The two ultimately consider how NATO’s expansion past eastern Germany may have baited Putin into his current position, indefensible as it may be. The former CIA analyst, who played a critical role in drafting The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I) signed by George W. Bush and Mikhail Gorbachev in 1991, also warns listeners about the dangers of the U.S. allowing nuclear treaties to expire that, for 30 years, have kept us from annihilation. Listen to the full discussion between McGovern and Scheer as they offer differing but critical perspectives on the Ukraine conflict absent in most Western media.”

More

2022: Ray McGovern on the US/Russia/Ukraine Conflict


 


The situation in Ukraine has much to do with who controls fossil fuels profits and pipelines.

We need to get bribery under control, conflicts of interest must be regulated more effectively, and there must be transparency. We cannot have representative government by the people with SECRET government manipulation. We cannot be represented properly when we do not know what is going on, or when we are lied to.

It is public knowledge that the CIA has been supporting troops near the Russian border in Ukraine since at least as far back as 2014 when the last Ukrainian coup took place, likely much longer. Around the time of the last coup in 2014, the US Vice President’s son ended up being appointed to a top position in the largest gas company in Ukraine. Funny how that works. I’d say that is a pretty obvious sign of corruption and conflicts of interest, Hunter Biden making all that big money with almost no experience.

“A month before Hunter Biden joined Burisma’s board, his father traveled to Ukraine as vice president and announced an aid package designed to enable Ukraine to boost its energy production….”
September 28, 2019 – Washington Post

Gangsters and oligarchs, purchased politicians making deals that benefit them and not us.  Conflicts of interest matter, they should be exposed, no matter what party is involved.  Sadly, Americans are distracted and entertained and taught to work for party and nationalism over truth and accountability.  This lack of integrity is a recipe for corruption which eats at the heart of democracy, much like fascism tries to.

 

 

Donald Trump pulled out of the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty on Feb 2, 2019 and new weapons began to magically appear almost instantly. They were preparing for that for years, but the US mainstream media Inc blamed Russia of course. Look deeper. 

 


“America’s primary interest is to help ensure that no single power comes to control this geopolitical space [Central Asia]… Eurasia accounts for 60% of the world’s GNP and three-fourths of the world’s known energy resources.”
– Zbigniew Brzezinski, Council on Foreign Relations study 1997

Allen Ruff: Missed by the Mainstream: Observations on the Ukraine Crisis

Image


I’ve learned much about the Ukrainian situation from [background] Ray McGovern a former CIA analyst who did the morning briefings for Reagan and daddy Bush, then there’s historian Alfred McCoy and Allen Ruff.

THE ILLEGALITY OF NATO – Popular Resistance

“…Esty Dinur discusses the latest developments in NATO–Russia relations and the historical context with David Gibbs, professor of history at the University of Arizona Department of History, and Will Griffin from the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space.

They talk about the history and future of NATO, Biden’s failed promise of a new era of American diplomacy, Russia’s nuclear capability, and much more.

 

Esty Dinur, A Public Affair: How NATO Provokes Russia

As Robert “Fighting Bob” La Follette said…

“The supreme issue, involving all others, is the encroachment of the powerful few on the rights of the many…

Shall we, with statesmanship and constructive legislation, meet these problems,

 or shall we pass them on with all the possibilities of conflict and chaos, to future generations?”


 

 

“Victoria Nuland has promoted a foreign policy of intervention through coups, proxy wars, aggression, and ongoing occupations. The policy has been implemented with bloody and disastrous results in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Ukraine…”


President Joe Biden had nominated Victoria Nuland for State Department, Under Secretary for Political Affairs.
Why Victoria Nuland is Dangerous and Should Not be Confirmed

During a press briefing, Lee asked Price, former CIA, to furnish proof of the accusation, that Russia is plotting a false flag attack involving a “propaganda video… depicting corpses, crisis actors as mourners, and images of destroyed locations or military equipment.

The press calling out the lies of the administration

Code Pink staging antiwar protests but says Dems mum on Biden’s hawkish moves at Russia

Lies, bullying, humiliation, the destruction of Ukraine, no act is too low for those who want to control Russia. on Stop the Wars At Home and Abroad

“…In this sense, Ukraine is simply a tool to reach this goal. This can be done in different ways: by drawing us into some armed conflict, or compelling its allies in Europe to impose tough sanctions on us like the US is talking about today.”

Take a step forward, learn something new or disprove something because you can.

“…Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky denied that a Russian invasion was imminent and asked NATO to dial down its war rhetoric.

…The US National Security Council (NSC) initially denied this account. “Anonymous sources are leaking falsehoods,” said NSC spokeswoman Emily Horne. “President Biden said that there is a distinct possibility that the Russians could invade Ukraine in February. He has said this publicly and we have been warning about this for months. Reports of anything more or different than that are completely false.” 

Zelensky then gave a press conference, however, publicly reiterating statements Horne had denied he had made to Biden. Zelensky was urging NATO heads of state to stop inciting panic with talk of an imminent NATO war with Russia over Ukraine, he said. “I started talking to the leaders of the countries and to explain to them that we need to stabilize the economy,” Zelensky told the press. “They are saying ‘tomorrow is the war.’ This means panic.”


“In Western military circles, it’s common to refer to the “balance of forces”—the lineup of tanks, planes, ships, missiles, and battle formations on the opposing sides of any conflict. If one has twice as many combat assets as its opponent and the leadership abilities on each side are approximately equal, it should win. Based on this reasoning, most Western analysts assumed that the Russian army—with a seemingly overwhelming advantage in numbers and equipment—would quickly overpower Ukrainian forces. Of course, things haven’t exactly turned out that way. The Ukrainian military has, in fact, fought the Russians to a near-standstill. The reasons for that will undoubtedly be debated among military theorists for years to come. When they do so, they might begin with Moscow’s surprising failure to pay attention to a different military equation—the “correlation of forces”—originally developed in the former Soviet Union.

That notion differs from the “balance of forces” by placing greater weight on intangible factors. It stipulates that the weaker of two belligerents, measured in conventional terms, can still prevail over the stronger if its military possesses higher morale, stronger support at home, and the backing of important allies. Such a calculation, if conducted in early February, would have concluded that Ukraine’s prospects were nowhere near as bad as either Russian or Western analysts generally assumed, while Russia’s were far worse. And that should remind us of just how crucial an understanding of the correlation of forces is in such situations, if gross miscalculations and tragedies are to be avoided.

THE CONCEPT IN PRACTICE BEFORE UKRAINE

The notion of the correlation of forces has a long history in military and strategic thinking. Something like it, for example, can be found in the epilogue to Leo Tolstoy’s epic novel, War and Peace. Writing about Napoleon’s disastrous invasion of Russia in 1812, Tolstoy observed that wars are won not by the superior generalship of charismatic leaders but through the fighting spirit of common soldiers taking up arms against a loathsome enemy…”


Madison community members  came together for an event… Stop War over Ukraine

learn more  

[Note: Gather information and question and challenge what you know.  Challenge what we say and claim to know.  Don’t believe us and don’t believe the US corporate media, lapdogs of the war profiteers.  Dig.  Seek.  See what you believe.  There are multiple factors that brought us here: Russian crimes, US corporate rulers, US war machine, CIA arming military forces, consolidated power of oligarchs. ]  

 


Rally at the Wisconsin State Capitol and picket outside Senator Tammy Baldwin’s Office to
protest her support of aggressive war policies.  We recognize the fact that our other Senator Ron Johnson has always voted for the war profiteers and against justice. 

Dave Schwab created this clip of the WORT piece [WORT 89.9 FM Community Radio] on our No War with Russia rally.  

“Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy appealed to his American counterpart to dial back his appraisals of the threat Russia poses to the former Soviet state, also criticizing President Joe Biden for his dramatic decision to remove the families of U.S. diplomats from Kyiv this month.”
– US News By Paul D. Shinkman Jan. 28, 2022

US News: Zelenskiy Criticizes Biden: Talk of War With Russia a ‘Mistake’


“Terrible things could be averted if people were more active.” – Howard Zinn

Please go like these groups and subscribe to their website updates:
Code Pink on Facebook
Veterans for Peace Madison on Facebook

Join us
Veterans for Peace  

Articles going back to 2014 

“We’ve been here before. For the past couple of months street protests in Ukraine have been played out through the western media according to a well-rehearsed script. Pro-democracy campaigners are battling an authoritarian government. The demonstrators are demanding the right to be part of the European Union. But Russia’s president Vladimir Putin has vetoed their chance of freedom and prosperity.

It’s a story we’ve heard in one form or another again and again – not least in Ukraine’s western-backed Orange revolution a decade ago. But it bears only the sketchiest relationship to reality. EU membership has never been – and very likely never will be – on offer to Ukraine. As in Egypt last year, the president that the protesters want to force out was elected in a poll judged fair by international observers. And many of those on the streets aren’t very keen on democracy at all.

In Ukraine, fascists, oligarchs and western expansion are at the heart of the crisis | Seumas Milne | The Guardian

 


 

“The degradation of mainstream American press coverage of Russia, a country still vital to US national security, has been under way for many years. If the recent tsunami of shamefully unprofessional and politically inflammatory articles in leading newspapers and magazines—particularly about the Sochi Olympics, Ukraine and, unfailingly, President Vladimir Putin—is an indication, this media malpractice is now pervasive and the new norm.

There are notable exceptions, but a general pattern has developed. Even in the venerable New York Times and Washington Post, news reports, editorials and commentaries no longer adhere rigorously to traditional journalistic standards, often failing to provide essential facts and context; to make a clear distinction between reporting and analysis; to require at least two different political or “expert” views on major developments; or to publish opposing opinions on their op-ed pages. As a result, American media on Russia today are less objective, less balanced, more conformist and scarcely less ideological than when they covered Soviet Russia during the Cold War.

Distorting Russia | The Nation