Category Archives: russia

Trump’s illegal act of war against Syria

Here is my letter to Senator Feinstein:

Dear Senator Feinstein,

I demand an immediate Congressional investigation into the apparent proxy war launched by Donald Trump, whom I believe to be insecure and unstable, against Syria, without authorization of the Congress and without sufficient evidence or even forethought of the consequences. The war in Iraq cost over a million lives and trillions of dollars, and the “regime change” effected there gave rise to the power of ISIS, who took swaths of territory in a country with no real government or infrastructure. The same thing is going to happen in Syria, and we can look forward to a huge ISIS expansion and takeover of Syria as well as Iraq. We need to keep Donald Trump’s twitter finger off the missile launchers and back on the tweet button where it belongs.

Sincerely,
Kenneth Eade
Author and constituent living overseas
info@kennetheade.com

PLEASE REACH OUT TO YOUR REPRESENTATIVE TO OPPOSE THIS ACT OF WAR!  FEEL FREE TO CUT AND PASTE FROM MY LETTER!

To email your Senator: http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/peace/senate.html

To email your Congressman: http://www.conservativeusa.net/mega-cong.htm

THE DIRTY BUSINESS OF WAR

One of our most distinguished and highest ranking military men, Major General Smedley Butler said, “War is a racket.  It always has been.  It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious.  It is the only one international in scope.  It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.”

vietnam

Since the protests of the Vietnam War, it has been “business as usual” under every government since the Reagan administration.  Besides the war in Iraq, which was based on one of the most massive deceptions in recent history for which nobody has been held accountable, and which can be said to be a self-fulfilling prophecy (we now have ISIS in Iraq and Al Qaeda in Iraq thriving where it did not exist before) we are seeing this business rear its ugly head in the conflicts in Syria and the buildup of NATO in Eastern Europe and military advice to the Ukraine, to fight the non-existent threat and fantasy of Russian aggression.

“Perception Management” was pioneered in the 1980’s under the Reagan administration in order to avoid the public opposition to future wars that was seen during the Vietnam War.[1]  The United States Department of Defense defines perception management as: “Actions to convey and/or deny selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning as well as to intelligence systems and leaders at all to influence official estimates, ultimately resulting in foreign behaviors and official actions favorable to the originator’s objectives. In various ways, perception management combines truth projection, operations, security, cover and deception, and psychological operations.”

At the onset of the Iraq war in 2003, journalists were embedded with US troops as combat cameramen.  The reason for this was not to show what was happening in the war, but to present the American view of it.  Perception management was used to promote the belief that weapons of mass destruction were being manufactured in Iraq to promote its military invention, even though the real purpose behind the war was regime change. [2]

Alvin and Heidi Toffler cite the following as tools for perception management in their book, War and Anti-War:1) accusations of atrocities, 2) hyperbolic inflations, 3) demonization and dehumanization, 4) polarization, 5) claim of divine sanction, and 5) Meta-propaganda.

In 2001, the Rendon Group, headed by John Rendon, was secretly granted a $16 million contract to target Iraq with propaganda.[3]  Rendon, who had been hired by the CIA to help create conditions to removal Sadaam Hussein from power, is a leader in “perception management”.  Two months later, in December 2001, a clandestine operation performed by the CIA and the Pentagon produced false polygraph testimony of an alleged Iraqi civil engineer, who testified that he had helped Sadaam Hussein and his men hide tons of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons.[4]  Of course, we now know that there were no weapons of mass destruction hidden in Iraq.

A study by Professor Phil Taylor reveals the differences between the US and global media over the coverage of the war to be: 1) Pro-war coverage in the US made US media “cheerleaders” in the eyes of a watchful, more scrutinous global media; 2) Issues about the war were debated more in countries not directly affected by the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks; 3) The non-US media could not see the link between the “war on terror” and the “axis of evil”, and 4) The US media became part of the information operations campaign, which weakened their credibility in the eyes of global media.

President Bush himself admitted in a televised interview with Katie Couric on the CBS Evening News that, “One of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror.”  Vice President Dick Cheney stated on Meet the Press, “If we’re successful in Iraq…we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11.”

Prior to 2002, the CIA was the Bush Administration’s main provider of intelligence on Iraq. In order to establish the connection between Iraq and terrorists, in 2002, the Pentagon established the “Office of Special Plans” which was, in reality, in charge of war planning against Iraq, and designated by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to be the provider of intelligence on Iraq to the Bush Administration.  Its head, the Undersecretary of Defense, Douglas J. Feith, appointed a small team to review the existing intelligence on terrorist networks, in order to reveal their sponsorship states, among other things.  In 2002, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz wrote a memo to Feith entitled, “Iraq Connections to Al-Qaida”, which stated that they were “not making much progress pulling together intelligence on links between Iraq and Al-Qaida.” Peter w. Rodman, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security, established a “Policy counter Terror Evaluation Group” (PCTEG) which produced an analysis of the links between Al-Qaida and Iraq, with suggestions on “how to exploit the connections.”[5]

“In February 2003, when former Secretary of State Colin Powell addressed the U.N., he described “a sinister nexus between Iraq and the Al-Qaeda network,” stating that “Iraq today harbors a deadly network headed by Zarqawi’s forces, an associate and collaborator of Osama bin Laden,” and that Zarqawi had set up his operations , including bioweapons training, with he approval of the Sadaam Hussein regime.  This has since been discredited as false.  However, in October 2004, due to the fact that the Iraqi insurgency was catching on as a cause in jihadist circles, Zarqawi pledged his allegiance to Al-Qaeda.  This was after his group had exploded a massive bomb outside a Shiite mosque in August 2003, killing one of Iraq’s top Shiite clerics and sparking warfare between the Shiite and Sunni communities.  The tipping point toward a full-blown civil war was the February 2006 attack on the Golden Mosque in Samarra, which is credited to Haythem Sabah al-Badri, a former member of Sadaam Hussein’s Republican Guard, who joined Al-Qaeda after the U.S. invasion.  This gave birth to the AQI, Al-Qaeda in Iraq[6]

General Wesley Clark, the former NATO Allied Commander and Joint Chiefs of Staff Director of Strategy and Policy, stated in his book, Winning Modern Wars, “As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.”

In 2004, John Negroponte, who had served as ambassador to Honduras from 1981 to 1985, was appointed as ambassador to Iraq with the specific mandate of implementing the “Salvador Option”, a terrorist model of mass killings by US sponsored death squads.[7]

In 2004, Donald Rumsfeld sent Colonel James Steele to serve as a civilian advisor to Iraqi Paramilitary special police commandos known as the “Wolf Brigade”.  Steele was a  counter-insurgency specialist who was a member of a group of US Special Forces advisors to the Salvadorian Army and trained counter-insurgency commandos in south America, who carried out extreme abuses of human rights.[8]  The Wolf Brigade was created and established by the United States and enabled the re-deployment of Sadaam Hussein’s Republican Guard.  The Brigade was later accused by a UN official of torture, murder and the implementation of death squads.[9]  The techniques used by these counter-insurgency squads were described as “fighting terror with terror”, which was previously done in other theaters, such as Vietnam and El Salvador.[10]

The use of death squads began in 2004 and continued until the winding down of combat operations in 2008.  In addition to the death squads, regular military units were often ordered to “kill all military age males” during certain operations; “dead-checking” or killing wounded resistance fighters; to call in air strikes on civilian areas; and 360 degree rotational fire on busy streets.  These extreme measures were justified to troops in Iraq by propaganda linking the people to terrorism.[11]

Colonel Steele, with the help of Col. James Hoffman, set up torture centers, dispatching Shia militias to torture Sunni soldiers to learn the details of the insurgency.[12]  This has been attributed as a major cause of the civil war which led to the formation of ISIS.[13]

The operation of death squads as counter-insurgency measures was also common knowledge at the time.     [14]

Private contractors, such as Steele, were often subject to different rules than the military forces they served and, in some cases, served with.  As of 2008, an estimated 155,286 private contractors were employed by the US on the ground in Iraq, compared to 152,275 troops.  The estimated annual cost for such contractors ballooned to $5 billion per year by 2010.[15]

In August 2006, four American soldiers from a combat unit in Iraq testified in an Article 32 hearing that they had been given orders by their commanding officer, Colonel Michael C. Steele, to “kill all military age males”.[16]

The “targeted killing” program that has been developed under President Obama’s watch is being hailed as the most effective tool against fighting terrorism.[17]  Unfortunately, no mention is made in the mainstream media of the innocent victims (collateral damage) caused by this assassination program, nor its lack of authority under international law.[18]  According to the journalist Glen Greenwald, all military age males in strike zones of the latest drone aircraft strike programs are considered militants unless it can be proved otherwise.  Some say that this has resulted in more civilian casualties than has been reported by the government.[19][20]

BW1

Kenneth Eade is a political novelist and author of “A Patriot’s Act” and “Beyond All Recognition”, both of which are available in bookstores and Amazon.com.

noname

[1] Parry, Robert (December 28, 2014) “The Victory of Perception Management” Consortium News

[2] Brigadier BM Kappor (2016) The Art of Perception Management in Information Warfare Today, USI of India

[3] Bamford, James (November 18, 2004) The Man Who Sold the War,Rolling Stone

[4] Brigadier BM Kappor (2016) The Art of Perception Management in Information Warfare Today, USI of India 2016

[5] Richelson, Jeffrey (February 20, 2014)  U.S. Special Plans: A History of Deception and Perception Management, Global Research

[6] Cruickshank, Peter and Paul (October 31, 2007) Al-Qaeda in Iraq: A Self-fulfilling Prophecy, Mother Jones

[7] Chossudovsky, Michel (November 17, 2013)  “The Salvador Option for Syria: US-NATO Sponsored Death Squads Integrate ‘Opposition Forces’” Global Research

[8] Mass, Peter  (May 1, 2004) “The Way of the Commandos” New York Times

[9] Buncombe, Andrew (February 26, 2006) “Iraq’s Death Squads: On the Brink of Civil War” The Independent

Spencer, Richard (October 25, 2010) “WikiLeaks War Logs: Who are the Wolf Brigade?” The Daily Telegraph

Leigh, David (October 24, 2010) “The War Logs:  Americans handed over captives to Iraq torture squads” The Guardian

 

[10] Snodgrass Godoy, Angelina (2006) Popular Injustice: Violence, Community and Law in Latin America, Stanford University Press, pp. 175-180.

[11] Davies, Nicolas J. (November 20, 2014) Why Iraqis may see ISIL as Lesser Evil Compared to U.S. Backed Death Squads, AlterNet

[12] “US trained death squads organized torture sites across Iraq” Russia Today (April 8, 2013)

[13] Freeman, Colin (June 29, 2014) “Death Squads, ISIS and a new generation of fighters – Why Iraq is facing break-up”

[14] Cerny, Jakub (June 2006) “Death Squad Operations in Iraq, Defence Academy of the United Kingdom

[15] Dunigan, Molly (March 19, 2013) “A Lesson From Iraq War: how to outsource war to private contractors”, The Guardian

[16] Von Zielbauer, Paul (August 3, 2006) GI’s Say Officers Ordered Killing of Young Iraqi Men, New York Times

[17] Jaffe, Greg, “How Obama went from reluctant warrior to drone champion”, Washington Post, July 1, 2016

[18] ACLU, U.S. Releases Casualty Numbers and New Executive Order on Targeted Killing, ACLU Press Release July 1, 2016

[19] Greenwald, Glenn (May 29, 2012) Militants: Media Propaganda,Salon.com

[20] Obama’s Kill List –All males near strike zone are terrorists (May 30, 2012) RT America.

MY EMAIL TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

Dear President Obama,

I am writing to urge you, the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, not to provide the much talked about military aid to the current government in the Ukraine and provoking World War III. This would be an act of aggression toward Russia and will lead to war in Europe; something that would make even Presidents Reagan and Nixon roll over in their graves. If US soldiers or weaponry are deployed in Ukraine, I have no doubt that Moscow will act swiftly and take Kiev. Then the US will repeat its rhetoric about “aggression” and it will escalate to a war between the two most heavily armed nuclear nations in the world.

Everybody with a brain knows this is about money, and that the American populous is too ignorant and uninformed to care. Russia’s geopolitical interests in the Ukraine are very clear and go back centuries; far beyond the Soviet Union. The threat of a Russian invasion and takeover of the Ukraine is ridiculous, but it will be very real if Russia is provoked and has to defend its interests. It would have already happened if it was going to happen, without much fanfare and with little or no resistance. The annexation of the Crimea was a logical result of the Washington backed coup of the Ukrainian government. The Crimea provides the strategic location of a Russian naval base on the Black Sea, established in Sevastopol, a city built by the Russian Empire in 1783, before the penning of the United States Constitution. It is this naval base that is the key to the Russia’s access to the Black Sea. The current base, before the annexation of Crimea to Russia, was under lease from the Ukrainian government to Russia. Unlike Crimea, Russia has no interest in annexing the Ukraine, a relatively poor country, which would only place a burden on Russia’s already heavily burdened social welfare system.

The current crisis in the Ukraine, orchestrated by the United States, only benefits the U.S. military industrial machine and U.S. oil and gas barons. Gas poor Europe, their primary potential customer, has thrown its hat in (as usual) with the United States and joined it in imposing economic sanctions against Russia, which have caused billions of dollars of damage to the Russian economy. These sanctions are tantamount to a declaration of economic war against Russia. The double speak supporting these sanctions is as hypocritical as your Peace Prize. The official reason cited is a response to Russia’s alleged military aggression in the Ukraine.

It is no secret that the United States is now at war in Syria, under the guise of fighting ISIS, but the real reason the U.S. in bombing Syria is the same reason that it bombed Iraq into oblivion. The real struggle is over oil and gas and its transmission to Europe in this critical region. Dominance of the area is critical to the U.S. energy barons and the continuing success and profit of the never ending U.S. military hardware and support industry. But to extend its reach into Russia’s rich and vast natural resources by attempting a “regime change” in Russia is the equivalent of playing Russian roulette.

Russia is not an aggressive nation. But, sure as Napoleon in the 19th century and Hitler in the 20th discovered, it does not take kindly to invasion, and every man and woman in Russia will join together to defeat any such attempt. It is in their blood. With all the experts on Russia in our government, why haven’t you consulted them on this? It is crazy for the United States to pick a fight with this nation. And to pick a fight with the strongest leader at the helm of the country since Joseph Stalin is even crazier. Despite all the efforts to chip away at Putin’s popularity, he remains popular with the people, and for just reason. Things are much better in Russia under his leadership. I know. I have seen it. Unemployment is down, pension payments are up, corruption is down, and the quality of life is significantly better than it was before.

Joe Biden may find European critics to Russian economic sanctions “annoying,” but the people of the United States have to realize that we are not threatened by this peaceful, but very powerful nation which occupies the largest land mass on earth. He has told Putin to “get out of Ukraine,” which seems to be throwing the gauntlet down, while at the same time he has installed his son onto the board of the largest privately owned gas company. At the same time, your administration is considering weaponizing the newly installed government, which has already established a history of ethnic cleansing, with hundreds to billions in military aid. Sitting right on the Russian border is no place to put a NATO presence, but the war hawks do not seem to care, and the people of the U.S. seem oblivious to it.

Please put this insanity to a stop immediately!

Sincerely yours,

Kenneth Eade

MY EMAIL TO SENATOR DIANE FEINSTEIN

Dear Senator Feinstein,

I am writing to urge you to stop President Obama, the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, from providing the much talked about military aid to the current government in the Ukraine and provoking World War III. This would be an act of aggression toward Russia and will lead to war in Europe; something that would make even Presidents Reagan and Nixon roll over in their graves. If US soldiers or weaponry are deployed in Ukraine, I have no doubt that Moscow will act swiftly and take Kiev. Then the US will repeat its rhetoric about “aggression” and it will escalate to a war between the two most heavily armed nuclear nations in the world.

Everybody knows this is about money, that the American populous is too ignorant to care. But, Senator Feinstein, you and I have usually seen eye to eye on most things and I implore you to carry the voice of reason to Washington.

Russia’s geopolitical interests in the Ukraine are very clear and go back centuries; far beyond the Soviet Union. The threat of a Russian invasion and takeover of the Ukraine is ridiculous, but it is very real if Russia is provoked and has to defend its interests. It would have already happened if it was going to happen, without much fanfare and with little or no resistance. The annexation of the Crimea was a logical result of the Washington backed coup of the Ukrainian government. The Crimea provides the strategic location of a Russian naval base on the Black Sea, established in Sevastopol, a city built by the Russian Empire in 1783, before the penning of the United States Constitution. It is this naval base that is the key to the Russia’s access to the Black Sea. The current base, before the annexation of Crimea to Russia, was under lease from the Ukrainian government to Russia. Unlike Crimea, Russia has no interest in annexing the Ukraine, a relatively poor country, which would only place a burden on Russia’s already heavily burdened social welfare system.

The current crisis in the Ukraine, orchestrated by the United States, only benefits the U.S. military industrial machine and U.S. oil and gas barons. Gas poor Europe, their primary potential customer, has thrown its hat in (as usual) with the United States and joined it in imposing economic sanctions against Russia, which have caused billions of dollars of damage to the Russian economy. These sanctions are tantamount to a declaration of war against Russia. The double speak supporting these sanctions is as hypocritical as Obama’s Peace Prize. The official reason cited is a response to Russia’s alleged military aggression in the Ukraine.

It is no secret that the United States is now at war in Syria, under the guise of fighting ISIS, but the real reason the U.S. in bombing Syria is the same reason that it bombed Iraq into oblivion. The real struggle is over oil and gas and its transmission to Europe in this critical region. Dominance of the area is critical to the U.S. energy barons and the continuing success and profit of the never ending U.S. military hardware and support industry. But to extend its reach into Russia’s rich and vast natural resources by attempting a “regime change” in Russia is the equivalent of playing Russian roulette.

Russia is not an aggressive nation. But, sure as Napoleon in the 19th century and Hitler in the 20th discovered, it does not take kindly to invasion, and every man and woman in Russia will join together to defeat any such attempt. It is in their blood. With all the experts on Russia in our government, why hasn’t our Commander-in-Chief been briefed on how suicidal it would be for the United States to pick a fight with this nation? And to pick a fight with the strongest leader at the helm of the country since Joseph Stalin is even crazier. Despite all the efforts to chip away at Putin’s popularity, he remains popular with the people, and for just reason. Things are much better in Russia under his leadership. I know. I have seen it. Unemployment is down, pension payments are up, corruption is down, and the quality of life is significantly better than it was before.

Joe Biden may find European critics to Russian economic sanctions “annoying,” but the people of the United States have to realize that we are not threatened by this peaceful, but very powerful nation which occupies the largest land mass on earth. He has told Putin to “get out of Ukraine,” which seems to be throwing the gauntlet down, while at the same time he has installed his son onto the board of the largest privately owned gas company. At the same time, the Obama administration is considering weaponizing the newly installed government, which has already established a history of ethnic cleansing, with hundreds to billions in military aid. Sitting right on the Russian border is no place to put a NATO presence, but the war hawks do not seem to care, and the people of the U.S. seem oblivious to it.

Please put this insanity to a stop immediately!

Sincerely yours,

Kenneth Eade

NEW IRON CURTAIN ON UKRAINIAN BORDER?

http://rt.com/op-edge/230407-yalta-conference-wwii-ukraine/

70 years after the Yalta Conference that marked the final months of the World War II, Russia is facing a threat of isolation, with President Putin being “demonized” – something that British professor Richard Sakwa considers to be “extremely dangerous.”

“Russia has not been taken seriously – ultimately, since [the] Malta [Summit]. That was the moment when the idea of the Soviet Union and then Russia was lost as a genuine source of innovation and thinking on European security,” professor of Russian and European politics at the University of Kent, Richard Sakwa, explained one of the reasons behind the escalation of the ongoing Ukrainian conflict in an exclusive Thursday interview to RT.

“This continental crisis which we are now witnessing is all about failure of communication, failure of trust, and of course, the attempt to delegitimize either side.

Now we see the demonization of Putin, we see the attempt to delegitimize the Russian government, which I think is extremely dangerous,” Sakwa added.

READ MORE: NATO involvement in Ukraine is ‘destructive’ – Russian envoy to alliance

Calling the Ukrainian crisis “the one which has brought war back to the center of the continent,” the professor urged the “use diplomacy to find a way forwards.” In the “multi-pluralistic” world system, introduced in the XX century, it is crucial to consider interests, views and traditions all players, large and small ones. That is, with no room for a “disastrous and catastrophic way,” unfortunately chosen by“both sides to impose their views on world order and on security issues,” according to Sakwa.

The expert also stressed the important role the European Union could play in finding solution to the current crisis, “because there is a danger at the moment of [the] Ukrainian crisis becoming a genuine international conflict.” To achieve what the Minsk peace process has failed to – and the current level of escalation, and rhetoric, and violence suggest that it “is really coming to an end” – the EU should act as“an independent force,” and “as a friend to all and an enemy to none”.

READ MORE: Hollande, Merkel go to Moscow to discuss Ukraine without consulting US – report

However, the modern phenomenon, dubbed “New Atlanticism” – the rapprochement of Brussels and Washington – has some drawbacks, as “in geostrategic terms … it removes an independent player from the equation,” while isolating Russia and undermining the ability of the EU to act independently.

Sakwa concluded, “What we do need is all sides come together in … a new Yalta Conference … to establish the new basis for European security for the future.”

The Yalta Conference united three leaders of world powers – US President Franklin Roosevelt, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Soviet General Secretary Joseph Stalin – in February, 1945, in Crimea, with the aim of defining the new post-war world order.

Within the framework of the seven-day-long conference, allied forces examined plans to divide Germany, formulated an agreement on Poland, and a declared their readiness to establish the United Nations organization to maintain peace and security.

A military operation in eastern Ukraine commenced last April, after rebels in Donetsk and Lugansk regions refused to recognize the new authorities in Kiev, and the situation escalated in further in January, with constant shelling striking civilian areas. According to UN estimates, over 5,000 people have been killed since the beginning of the conflict.

Obama’s Russian Roulette

st basils-cathedral

I probably know more about Russia than most Americans.  I have had the pleasure of visiting the “evil empire” on many occasions, since I am married to a Russian national.  The effect of the current international sanctions have been a blessing in disguise for me, because my U.S. dollar has more than double the spending power that it used to here.  It is puzzling that I have not been asked, even once, about the current efforts of our Nobel Peace Prize winning and warmongering president and the neocons, warmongers and fossil fuel kings who own him, to destabilize the Ukraine and force a showdown with Russia.

Russia’s geopolitical interests in the Ukraine are very clear and go back centuries; far beyond the Soviet Union.  The threat of a Russian invasion and takeover of the Ukraine is ridiculous.  It would have already happened if it was going to happen, without much fanfare and with little or no resistance.  The annexation of the Crimea was a logical result of the Washington backed coup of the Ukrainian government.  The Crimea provides the strategic location of a Russian naval base on the Black Sea, established in Sevastopol, a city built by the Russian Empire in 1783, before the penning of the United States Constitution.  It is this naval base that is the key to the Russia’s access to the Black Sea.  The current base, before the annexation of Crimea to Russia, was under lease from the Ukrainian government to Russia.  Unlike Crimea, Russia has no interest in annexing the Ukraine, a relatively poor country, which would only place a burden on Russia’s already heavily burdened social welfare system.

The current crisis in the Ukraine, orchestrated by the United States, only benefits the U.S. military industrial machine and U.S. oil and gas barons.  Gas poor Europe, their primary potential customer, has thrown its hat in (as usual) with the United States and joined it in imposing economic sanctions against Russia, which have caused billions of dollars of damage to the Russian economy.  These sanctions are tantamount to a declaration of war against Russia.  The double speak supporting these sanctions is as hypocritical as the drone-loving warmongering Obama’s Peace Prize.  The official reason cited is a response to Russia’s alleged military aggression in the Ukraine.

It is no secret that the United States is now at war in Syria, under the guise of fighting ISIS, but the real reason the U.S. is bombing Syria is the same reason that it bombed Iraq into oblivion.  The real struggle is over oil and gas and its transmission to Europe in this critical region.  Dominance of the area is critical to the U.S. energy barons and the continuing success and profit of the never ending U.S. military hardware and support industry.  But to extend its reach into Russia’s rich and vast natural resources by attempting a “regime change” in Russia is the equivalent of playing Russian roulette.

Russia is not an aggressive nation.  But, sure as Napoleon in the 19th century and Hitler in the 20th discovered, it does not take kindly to invasion, and every man and woman in Russia will join together to defeat any such attempt.  It is in their blood.  With all the experts on Russia in our government, why hasn’t our Commander-in-Chief been briefed on how suicidal it would be for the United States to pick a fight with this nation?  And to pick a fight with the strongest leader at the helm of the country since Joseph Stalin is even crazier.  Despite all the efforts to chip away at Putin’s popularity, he remains popular with the people, and for just reason.  Things are much better in Russia under his leadership.  I know.  I have seen it.  Unemployment is down, pension payments are up, corruption is down, and the quality of life is significantly better than it was before.

Joe Biden may find European critics to Russian economic sanctions “annoying,” but the people of the United States have to realize that we are not threatened by this peaceful nation which occupies the largest land mass on earth.  He has told Putin to “get out of Ukraine,” which seems to be throwing the gauntlet down, while at the same time he has installed his son onto the board of the largest privately owned gas company.  At the same time, the Obama administration is considering weaponizing the newly installed government, which has already established a history of ethnic cleansing, with up to $3 billion in military aid.  Sitting right on the Russian border is no place to put a NATO presence, but the war hawks do not seem to care, and the people of the U.S. seem oblivious to it.

The threat comes from us, and, if it comes to a showdown, I for one, will not relish the thought of my American brothers shipping off hallway around the world to fight to the death against my Russian brothers, who will lay down their lives to protect their mother and fathers, sisters and brothers.  United States military aggression has reached the point of idiocracy, and it must end.  The holder of the Gold Codes and nuclear football needs to be reminded that he answers to us, not the American oligarchs he has been catering to for the past six years.

Kenneth Eade is an attorney and best-selling author of A Patriot’s Act, the fictional story of a naturalized U.S. citizen, captured in Iraq and held indefinitely at Guantanamo, and the Brent Marks Legal Thriller Series.