On Bolton And Others...

As you may have heard already, Donald Trump got himself new National Security Adviser in form of John Bolton. John Bolton is an odious figure and, among many fine qualities defining this guy is his draft-dodging, cowardice and a complete detachment from any military-political realities of the world, he is a lawyer by trade and sometimes goes under the title of diplomat, which he is not. In fact, diplomacy as such--a craft of building and maintaining international relations to the benefit of own nation--does not exist anymore in the US. Bolton is not an exception, if someone thinks that Trump went completely mad by appointing this psychopath--they are wrong. Bolton, in fact, is a concentrated embodiment of modern US "elites" or "establishment". The problem is not just Bolton, however insanely aggressive (the obverse side of cowardice and a collection of inferiority complexes) he is at the expense of others--the problem is institutional and cultural--it is increasingly obvious degeneracy of US ruling class.

America can not and does not produce anymore real statesmen. And most American establishment are people of similar nature as Bolton. I did a short review of the situation with US "elites" about 2.5 years ago. So, now this guy has Trump's ear. What possible "advice" will this "adviser" give Trump. Let's list some of them:

1. War on Iran;

2. War on Syria;

3. War on North Korea;

4. Possibly war on Russia (China?).

I am not being  facetious, I just listed points of Bolton's agenda which he was promoting for years and never made a secret of it. Once Mattis and Kelly, last two people in Trump Administration who have at least some grasp of real warfare, are removed from Administration, the preparation with the war on Iran will start. 

What kind of war, one may ask? Well, if it is going to be land invasion of Iran, that will be the end of the United States as a country. Not because Iran can attack the US, but because even if the US Armed Forces overcome, with relatively few casualties, Iranian Army, which is better than Arab militaries but still is not a first class fighting force, what would follow--that is going to be a wowser. Unlike anything US encountered before in the Middle East, occupying such country as Iran, where overwhelming majority of Iranian 80+ million strong population will be thirsting for American blood and will have many means to draw it, is simply beyond American resources. To start with, Iran's area is five times larger than, say, Vietnam's. Unlike Iraq, Iran's terrain is extremely complex and mountainous. In general, the number of casualties US military will face will be on the order of magnitude larger than in Iraq and Afghanistan combined. In fact, Vietnam War may begin to look like a rather tame military affair. In the end, can US control Iran without capturing Tehran (a city of 12 million people) or Mashad (3 million), Isfahan (1.9 million) among many, or without controlling Mazenderan and its coast? I am all eyes and ears for anyone to give me a realistic number of US troops required to occupy this country. Do I hear the word Draft (which Bolton and most US elite so successfully dodged) in the air? So, in this case the issue of American internal policies not only may but will become so huge and so toxic that, well... make your own conclusions.

But the main issue here is not even Iran, but, as you might have guessed it already--Russia. And Russia can do a lot and I mean a lot, to address the Iran War, if one breaks out, and to make sure that Iran stands as a nation. In fact, something tells me that such contingencies are being discussed already between Russia and Iran. Iran is no friend of Russia but, judging by the latest events in Russia, Russia and overwhelming majority of Russians had it with the US and the West and Russia is a very wrong country to fvck with on any level once she decides that she had enough and it seems like that she, indeed, had it. But I am sure, John Bolton being a "specialist" in military affairs knows all that, right? I kid, I kid. I, in the last 4 years observed not a single American civilian, and even, which is terrifying, many military people, of prominence, who understand modern warfare realities of this moment of time. 

I am not going to review what Russia may do, and she will, since she also has some issues in Caucasus which need serious diplomatic addressing and she will not allow destabilization of Caucasus. Nor will she allow appearance of any hostile power on the shores of Caspian Sea. Bolton, being totally ignorant (it is not an assumption--I know this for a fact) of actual US resources, or lack thereof, issue will have, or already has, in mind a sort of replay of the sharper and more aggressive Cold War 1.0. There could be very few less qualified than Bolton people in Washington who could be entrusted with such an amateur plan, but once the first bombs start falling on Iran, or, for that matter on North Korea, the United States will start its countdown to own implosion. It seems that in general the United States has a constant issue with her National Security Advisers, be it late Zbig, whose loyalty was to Poland and who in his pathological Russophobia unleashed forces of Islamic jihad, or be it John Bolton, who is utterly unqualified in any matters concerning actual national security--the pattern is very clear. So, in order to not leave all of you in a somewhat depressed mood, I suggest we all listen to Bolton himself, Michael, of course. And what did you think? BTW, what a beautiful piece of music and lyrics. 

 

Fulton Speech

Yesterday it was 70 years since Churchill's famous "Iron Curtain" speech, also known as Fulton Speech. It was the first salvo in what later became known as Cold War. It was also the start of what can only be described as a massive propaganda campaign in convincing Western public opinion in hostile intentions of Soviet Union and imminent attack of those nasty Russkies, who just lost 27 million of own people and had their country destroyed, on everything Sir Winston held so dear--the myth of Anglo-Saxon exceptionalism. 

Today, when archives are opened and the truth of the Cold War is finally emerging, position of Sir Winston, a man of many talents, becomes as clear as never before. Speaking in plain language--the guy was a sore, in fact, bitter frustrated loser. It would be later that both Churchill's daughter and his personal dentist Lord Moran would describe a heavy feeling of jealousy Churchill experienced towards relations FDR and Stalin had. Churchill might have been a crafty politician but great military strategist he was not. He presided over, in fact precipitated, Great Britain's departure from the status of global power precisely for the reasons that great strategist he was not.  As Correlli Barnett succinctly observed:

        

Barnett, The Collapse Of The British Power, page 593

It is unenviable fate for a statesman to preside over the collapse of own state, for Churchill it was also unbearable to lose elections in 1945 and be left without "job". All that happened to Churchill in the most dramatic fashion and it left a scar. By the mid-WW II his strategy was heavily criticized by Britain's main ally, the United States, as was stated in General Stanley Embick's memorandum on "primrose path", which was circulated at Casablanca.    

  

David Eisenhower, Eisenhower At war, 1943-1945, page 21.

  

Later, Churchill would recite his experiences of WW II in what can only be described as the most self-serving memoirs of them all The Second World War, with volume The Grand Alliance being especially the case in point--an unbelievable combination of false narrative and self-aggrandizing. Yet, the results were clear by 1946--two superpowers emerged, the USA and USSR, and it was up to them to form a new world in which Great Britain would remain important but secondary player. And so "The Iron Curtain" descended. The greatest historical secret of Anglo-Saxon world that USSR did not have any plans for attacking and conquering Europe was locked into the vault of bodyguards of lies of none other than Churchill's creation:

In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies.
Read more at: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/winstonchu111291.html

"In wartime truth is so precious that she should be attended by a bodyguard of lies."

And Churchill followed his own dictum to the last letter--he lied. Today, 70 years later we still live in the world of Sir Winston, in the world which Stanley Embick's memorandum is as relevant as it was in 1942. We see it in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Ukraine. We see it in unrelenting propaganda and lies of the Western media, we see and hear it in words and actions of West's political class. This time, however, The Iron Curtain, the real one, is descending. Rephrasing Sir Winston: "From Riga in the Baltic to Varna in the Black Sea, an iron curtain has descended across the Continent."  But one can lie only for so long.......