Tag Archives: NATO


And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon.

Revelation 9:11

September has arrived again. A month I look forward to because I’m an NFL fan, but also a month that brings with it the anniversary of 9/11.  I lost a close family member on that day, and no matter how many years pile up between then and now, I find myself reliving those feelings and memories. I’ve been told a few times to forget 9/11 and put it behind me, but to me that’s akin to forcing yourself to forget a murdered family member, and many other Americans. The perpetrators have escaped justice, and they are still on the loose fulfilling their agenda.

Continue reading September

Where is Putin?

Over the last two days, myself and everyone who has a blog, a YouTube channel, a Twitter account, or any access whatsoever to comment on the mysterious public disappearance of Vladimir Putin has speculated wildly on the recent events.

Oddly enough the main stream media hasn’t touched the story with a 50 foot flag pole.  The main stream media may have a good reason, but from the past, they have proven themselves untrustworthy, and agenda driven.

Continue reading Where is Putin?

ISIS attack +1

We’re one day into the US bombing of ISIS, and there is not much to tell other than what can be gathered from today’s headlines.  It appears this is going to be a long bombing campaign, and for the most part world condemnation has been very tame, even from Russian.

Reportedly Syria was not warned by the US prior to the airstrikes, but that really should come as no surprise.

I think we need to take a step back here for a moment, and look at what’s going on.  I realize there are many in the United States whom are very Gung ho about the bombings.  The far right republican on the street is even backing Obama on this one.  I understand.  They feel it’s the “right” thing to do.  These ISIS fellows are more demons than men anyway, and after all we’re the good guys, and the good guys should bomb and destroy the bad guys.  It makes us feel all warm and cozy on the inside.  The world makes sense.  Ahhhh…

Continue reading ISIS attack +1

Why did the media use the Obama horn photo?

It may appear I’m being sensational with the Obama/Baphomet photo as my featured image, but my question remains a good one. There was much confusion in conspiracy land as to why most main stream media outlets ran with the ‘Obama Horn’ photo as their thumbnail to advertise his ISIS strategy speech.

Message boards and YouTube videos claimed the photo was “photo shopped”, and some even claimed a green screen was used because the background didn’t appear to match up with the video.  After further analysis, the photo was indeed taken from the President’s speech on 9/10.  In order to get the “horns” into view behind his head, the shot from the cameraman must have a came in at a very low angle.  Continue reading Why did the media use the Obama horn photo?

ISIS declares the Islamic Caliphate

ISIS announced today they have named Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as “the caliph” of their new state and the “leader for Muslims everywhere”.   They also requested they should no longer be known as ISIS or ISIL, but simply as ‘The Islamic State’.

According to Russia Today:

This is the first time since the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1923 that a Caliph – which means a political successor to Prophet Muhammad – has been declared. The decision was made following the group’s Shura Council meeting on Sunday, according to ISIS spokesman Abu Mohammed al-Adnani.

Continue reading ISIS declares the Islamic Caliphate

The cyclical nature of time… 1914 – 2014 (World War I)

Gas! GAS! Quick, boys! – An ecstasy of fumbling,
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling,
And flound’ring like a man in fire or lime …
Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light,
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.

—Wilfred Owen, Dulce et Decorum est, 1917

On July 28th 1914 the first global war began, and ended on 11/11/18 at 11am.  The war killed more than 9 million combatants.  This is not counting the roughly 27 million wounded and missing, and those poor souls who were forever psychologically damaged, and unable to work in society.  Let us not forget the roughly 10 million civilian casualties.

The belligerents in World War I were the Allied or Entente powers versus the Central Powers.

France led the Allied powers which included Great Britain, Russia, and the USA, while Germany led the Central Powers which included Austria-Hungary, and the Ottoman Empire.

The war introduced the world to new technologies that bridged the gap between the warfare of the 19th century to warfare of the 20th.

World War I introduced:

  • Chemical Warfare
  • The flame thrower
  • Tank warfare
  • Aerial warfare
  • Submarines (Submarines first appeared on the scene during the American Civil War, but WWI was on a scale never before seen)
  • Trench warfare

Word War I also brought the world catastrophes and events as the:

  • Revolution in Russia (introducing the Bolshevik Party and the execution of Tsar Nicholas II and his family)
  • War Crimes
  • Birth of Czechoslovakia (among other new nations)
  • Genocide (Armenian Genocide, Assyrian Genocide, Greek Genocide)
  • The fall of the Ottoman Empire

The assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand ignited the horror of World War 1.

Sure there were many other reasons than just the assassination that led to the death of so many, but the assassination is the spark that exploded the powder keg.  The world was walking towards the war with eyes wide open, and only need a spark to start the fire.  (I didn’t mean to quote Billy Joel there!)

100 years later the focus has become the Ukraine, and the Ukraine is not the cause of the tension, but just the symptom of failed and misguided foreign policies.  This time instead of the Allied and Central powers, we see east verse west.

Russia is leading this resistance to this West, and she is clearly supported by China, Iran, Syria, Venezuela, and anyone else who has become weary with America’s foreign policy for the last 15 years.

The USA is closest thing we have to a legitimate modern empire, but more and more they are organizing their efforts under the umbrella of NATO, which will one day become a world army if the “elites” have their way.

These two world powers have crossed the proverbial Rubicon, and there is no easy way they can back out from this new Cold War.  Vladimir Putin is a serious as a heart attack about not stepping down to the West, and he absolutely does not want NATO on his doorstep.  Kiev is about 531 miles from Moscow.  I’m sure you can see how uncomfortable Washington would be if the Warsaw Pact wasn’t defunct, and incorporated Mexico into its alliance.  Washington would be damn sure to find an excuse to invade Mexico just like Russia found and excuse to take Crimea and station its troops  on the border with the Ukraine.

Russian Eagle - Russian Coat of Arms
The Russian Eagle or Coat of Arms

The propaganda coming out of CNN and the like are attempting to paint Putin as the next Hitler, and most casual and surface level TV viewers eat it up and swallow it hook line and sinker, because it’s safe. We’ve seen this type of agenda pushed in the past before with Hussein, Gaddafi, and most recently with Assad in Syria.

The West is amazingly hypocritical for criticizing Russia’s action in taking the Crimea and protecting a territory that has always been pro-Russian, when Washington has used very flimsy and clearly contrived excuses in the recent past to invade Iraq, support  a revolution in Libya, as well as doing all it can to get boots on the ground in Syria, which would lead a clear path to turn the pressure up again on Iran.

The Russian government isn’t without fault, but NATO has an agenda to ostracize Russia from Europe, and irritate them enough so they will engage in a new Cold War.  Isolating Russia from Europe,  and making them feel this way is a very bad move, which has clearly led to a new Cold War between Russia and USA.

I fear this war, because I don’t think Russia can complete with military superiority of conventional forces in a war with the USA, and would resort to the use of Nuclear Weapons.  This wouldn’t be your grandfather’s world war, but I don’t think anyone realizes the danger of this crisis spiraling out of control. Russia isn’t Iraq, Libya, or Syria.

The nuclear weapons stockpiled from the 80’s haven’t just disappeared.

We are once again walking into a world conflict with eyes wide open. A path is set.  The war may not occur this year or the next, but only an awakening of the Earth’s population to the mass manipulation of the population will stop a march to the third world war.

News Monkey

Cold War Dreaming (or if this were the 80’s I would be worried!)

I would be worried. In the 80’s we were on the brink of nuclear annihilation, or at least that’s what we were told. The fear that one day the USA and the Soviet Union might edge too close to direct conflict, and then bam!!! Nuclear war! The fear was always there, and we had plenty of movies, and even video games to remind us of the horrible reality. Continue reading Cold War Dreaming (or if this were the 80’s I would be worried!)

A history lesson of sorts, and the Bear makes a move.

I’ve been promising a history lesson, and today I’m getting it done. I want to cover Putin’s counter to NATO’s voracious desire for war in Syria, and I’ll also explain how the strategy applied in Syria is well worn. It’s a strategy which has been deployed once too often by the USA in the 20th and 21st century.

In the past fews months we’ve seen the Syrian crisis continue to escalate. It has now escalated to the climax where NATO has just enough excuse to ask for a “no fly zone”. I’m of the personal belief that many of these atrocities can be blamed on the foreign “freedom fighters”, or the “Free Syrian Army” as they are now euphemistically called by CNN. I’m sure the Syrian military is guilty of killing their own people, but these recent atrocities seem out of place, and in this writer’s opinion, appear to be the work of foreign Sunni extremists.

Now because NATO has their justification almost fully in place, Putin has made an impressive chess move by supplying Syria with attack helicopters. Vlad has demonstrated that Russia will attempt to block further unimpeded expansion and control by NATO. The addition of attack helicopters will decisively change the tide of battle if used correctly. Thus far the rebels don’t show signs of being equipped with stingers or the Russian equivalent IGLA. The lack of these air defense weapons will give control of the skies, and close combat support to the Syrian army.

There are rumors that Putin has also ordered the activation of an infantry division, paratroop division, and Spetsnaz brigade. The Russian’s are looking out for their strategic naval port in Tartus, which allows them to maintain a military presence in the Mediterranean. Putin’s actions show he is determined to respond to a NATO attack. How he responds is the wildcard.

I would like to cover some history that ties in with the war in Libya, and the preparation for war in Syria. The United States government has an awfully bad record of supporting and supplying dictators, or funding and supplying rebels to eliminate or counter a common foe. They tend to operate with an enemy of my enemy is my friend mindset.

Let’s take a stroll down memory lane, military style. On Christmas Eve 1979, the Soviet 40th army rolled into Afghanistan on order from then President Leonid Brezhnev. Three days later the Soviets occupied Bagram Airbase and Kabul, and executed then Afghan President Hafizullah Amin on accusation he was working for the CIA. The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan was a long standing ally of the Soviet Union. The Russian’s weren’t about to lose control of Afghanistan to Western powers, so they effectively started their own Vietnam, which ended with Russian withdrawal from Afghanistan on February 15, 1989. The war saw the loss of roughly 15,000 Russian soldiers, and close to 90,000 Mujahideen. The people of Afghanistan suffered the most, with a rough estimate of 2 million dead. The Soviet Union collapsed on December 26, 1991.

One of the facets of US strategy for defeating the Soviets, was to supply the Mujahideen with the stinger missile. The stinger was a major game changer for the Mujahideen. The weapon allowed them to destroy Soviet aircraft in great numbers, and increase the pucker factor of those pilots that survived. The ground war was one of attrition, and one the Mujahideen could win because the Soviets were ill prepared to fight an asymmetrical war. The Soviet war machine at that time was designed for mass combined arms assault. A great tactic if this was WWII, and the opponent was Nazi Germany.

Another key ingredient to the Soviet defeat was the son of billionaire construction magnate Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden. The son we know as Osama bin Laden, and the CIA knew him by his code name “Tim Osman”. After Osama graduated from college in 1979 he went to Pakistan to join Abdullah Yusuf Azzam in his fight against the Soviets, and helped support the Mujahideen with construction equipment and cold hard cash.

We can see how the US secretly allied with the Mujahideen when they could be used as a tool against the Soviets. After the Soviet defeat, Afghanistan fell into a civil war which eventually saw the Taliban victorious. Afghanistan was a very western nation in appearance when they were the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. You would be surprised if you sought out photographs, and saw exaclty how western they were. The country is drastically different today, as we well know. I’m not a supporter of Communism or the Soviet Empire, but you can clearly see how supporting the Mujahideen back fired for the United States.

It never backfires for the military industrial complex, because enemies are good for business.

The same tactic in Afghanistan was applied in Iraq with Saddam Hussein, and most recently was applied in Libya. With Libya we supported the rebels ouster of Muammar Gaddafi, through NATO’s “no fly zone”, and a persistent media campaign. Many of these rebels were affiliated with al-Qaeda, and have no love for America. We’re seeing the same tactic applied in Syria. The only difference this time is Vlad Putin.

There is a confrontation brewing in the Middle East.

Many believe we are heading for a second cold war, but I believe the signs are point to a future hot war between Russia and NATO.

News Monkey Info

Provoking The Bear

Nato Russia FlagOn May 21st NATO’s secretary general Anders Fogh Rasmussen said NATO’s missile defense shield was operational in an interim capacity. I had to figure out what he meant by “interim” and apparently it’s defined as missile interceptors loaded on a U.S. ship in the Mediterranean, and a radar system based in Turkey.

This lone U.S. missile interceptor ship won’t be alone for long, as NATO anticipates to have a total of four in the Mediterranean. The strategy of employing a floating missile defense system is smart, because it makes them a harder target for potential enemies, especially if they are camouflaged to appear as a commercial ship. The NATO missile defense system doesn’t stop here, the ultimate stated goal is protection of NATO territories in the Euro/Atlantic location by 2022.

The missile defense system has angered the Bear (aka The Russian Federation), because the system upsets the balance of MAD. MAD for those of you that didn’t grow up in the 80′s stands for Mutually Assured Destruction. This concept is supposedly what kept the nukes sleeping in their silos during the cold war, because it made waging global thermonuclear war a game that can’t be won except for cockroaches or course. The computer program Joshua quickly learns this in the movie War-games when he says “the only winning move is not to play”.

This brings us to Russia’s main concern of an operational NATO missile defense system. Russia has said the system itself makes the prospect of a nuclear war shift from mutual destruction to be perceived as war that could be won. This is because in their view, the system will allow NATO (aka the USA) first strike capability. Which means in layman’s terms, we can take out your missiles when they launch, allowing Russia to be vulnerable, and leaving Europe and the United States with a lot less destruction. In a real exchange, nukes would get through no matter what, but the devastation Russia could receive would cease their existence as a political entity.

NATO has told Russia the missile defense system is being put in place for rogue nations, specifically in their view Iran and North Korea. Now since North Korea and Iran haven’t shown the capability to hit Europe or the USA for that matter with an ICBM, one can easily see how this makes Russia nervous. Combine the news with the fact that NATO is much larger than it was during the cold war (a promise NATO broke to Russia), and that the United States and NATO are right in Russia’s backyard in the former Soviet republics.

It may be better in the long run to discontinue the missile defense system, or assure Russia in some way the missile defense system is not aimed at them. I can’t see how that would be possible in the long run, because Russia will remain suspicious of NATO, just as NATO would be suspicious of Russia if they were working on a similar missile defense system. I believe the only solution is for Russia to immediately counter NATO’s move by building their own missile defense system, or complete nuclear disarmament.

Russia has stated they would consider using a first strike on the interceptor systems to prevent them from weakening their nuclear deterrent. In reality this proposed ABM system will lead to a new arms race. The technology being proposed in the final stage to complete the ABM system is not even in operational existence. More than likely Russia will target the land based interceptor systems once they are in place in Poland and the Czech Republic, and figure out ways to improve their nuclear deterrent to by pass the system.

NATO’s current path will ruin relations, and create a possible flash point for future armed conflict between NATO and Russia.

The News Monkey Logo