abroblog

I just read Andrew Korybko's 'newsletter' for 8th Nov. Titled:

The Latest Reports Suggest That Secret Talks Are Taking Place Between The US & Russia

All about whether secret talks are going on between the USA and Russia over this Ukraine fiasco.  Deadly fiasco.

This is all supposed to be hi-falutin' special stuff the realm of in-the-know experts far removed from the common run.  International politics, you know.

Factors and forces of global significance and intricacy only a tad removed from cosmic in scale and nature. Not really for us to worry our pretty little heads about.

Just for us to stand by ready to take arms and do or die when required.

Well I think the situation at this juncture might be capable of illustration by contemplation of theoretical pack of dogs.

We are, after all, considering humanity functioning at the most basic, elemental, raw level.  Engaged upon no holds barred struggles for who gets the biggest and best chunks of meat off the carcass.

It's a fight for carrion really.  Not really a fight to create carrion, to bring down the prey.  Nope. That's too easily done.  By this strange madness of the human the human can be got to bring down the human and create the 'carrion' that the carrion feeders feast upon.

No. Creation of the carrion is not the point.

It is the warring between the carrion eaters is the point.

The way I see it the carrion eaters of the Western world were (and are) well known to each other.  They had/have their pecking order well worked out, well understood, well observed.  They have their respective areas of influence and generally keep to them. They have their customary tithes, imposts, tributes etc.

It is a finely honed system overall and like perhaps fighters within a large gymnasium largely closed to the public they're warm and comfortable in their and know each other and vie and jockey for position and advantage.

Whether at the top of the heap or at the bottom, whether enjoying and profiting or hating and losing all are part of the club and enjoy that feeling. Share a sense of belonging. Contribute to the club.

When a possible new member comes along for an automatic beginning all the club members are suspicious and uninviting, hostile even.

And that is what happened to Russia.

Arising from the ashes of the USSR Russia stood and said 'I am' and the club looked at Russia and said 'Do you really think so?'

'Then what position do you think you occupy in the club?'

'Do you really want to be a member? We play hardball here, sonny, realise that?'

Get the idea? See the analogy? The illustration?

The dogs saw a new dog come into the circle around the carrion and and naturally and instinctively that new dog had to shoulder its way in and make its presence felt and establish its right to be there, stay there and take a chunk of meat.

I'm mixing two metaphors:  the 'gentlemen's club' and the 'pack of dogs' but perhaps that's alright?

The dogs are concentrating on the carrion, not on each other. They accept any new dogs, any, more or less.  But if there's not enough meat for all then the weaker, the smaller, the unfit, they go without and they die.

Until a new dog 'proves itself' or 'asserts itself' it is treated by default as a weak interloper and no one gives it any room at all.  They all snap at it. Snarl at it. Bare their teeth at it.

You know the idea in the pack and in the boardroom and the club is to be a 'friend' of the biggest dog so that the biggest dog will accept you feasting by his side at the carcass.

You do that by demonstrating you are as tough as the biggest dog so that it is more trouble than it is worth for the biggest dog to try to drive you away.  You become a 'henchman'. You become his 'sidekick'.  You protect his flanks.  They have to go through you to get at  him.  He's untroubled during his feasting by starved interlopers dashing in and out because you keep them away.

So it is all a question of proving yourself to where you get accepted and then order is re established and feasting can continue with the 'new dog' taking his rightful place, no ascertained, proven, established.

Russia has demonstrated she is no half starved chicken shit little cur that'll run away whining, yelping, at a snap, at a baring of the teeth.

So: she gets accepted.

And the pack moves on to the next carrion.

Ukraine was never in contention as one of the 'carrion eaters'.  Ukraine was always prey.  All that was in question was: is Russia prey or Predator?

Russia is predator.  Russia speaks their language. Russia belongs in the club.  Can do all they can do.

Sounds bad for us.

The 'predators' are, of course, the money interests behind the scenes. That transnational money interests that don't really belong to this State or that State.

That for instance are happy to see Germany destroyed while owning the German government,  that are happy to see America destroying itself while owning the American government and so on.

All of them without any care or consideration not only for the people of the States with which they are identified but not even caring for the State itself: happy to ruin the whole State as Germany and USA are being ruined now.

Yet nevertheless they're clearly somehow or other associated with different States and there's a group that is 'Russia' just as there's a group that more or less is 'America'.

Somehow they need these 'elected' govt entities to help them function.  I suppose its all quite predictable and ordinary really: without govts and their record keeping and law maintenance how could you have any riches in that country?

So it sounds bad but perhaps the difference is that the 'Russian group' is better, or better controlled, than the 'American group'.

In Russia it seems Putin has a lively interest in the oligarchs within and without his country.   And though there are those who claim he dances to their tune entirely I doubt it is true.

And there's the hope.

Putin tries to get the carrion eaters to help the nation.

In the USA the govt IS the carrion eaters. There is no Putin to attempt to control or influence them.

 

 

 

From 'resident' the Telegram channel.  google translated:

The US is beginning to talk about a plan for a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Ukraine

The American publication The National Interest published an article according to which Western countries and Kyiv are to blame for the outbreak of the conflict in Ukraine. From the author's point of view, Washington should have kept its promise not to expand NATO eastward after 1991. By ignoring its agreements with Russia, the United States created a threat to its security. Ukraine is a traditional zone of Moscow’s influence, so its entry into a military alliance with Russia’s main geopolitical enemy was unacceptable. Kiev also had to understand how their desire to join the EU and NATO would turn out. In addition, Ukraine should have solved the Donbass problem through negotiations, not military force.

The author of the article believes that the United States needs to initiate the start of the peace process. Ukraine will still not be able to achieve success outside of the battlefield, so there is no point in endlessly prolonging the war. From the author's point of view, there are only two obstacles to negotiations – Ukrainian law prohibiting them, and pressure from Washington. If the United States decides that the time for negotiations has come, then the law will be repealed – without American help, the Armed Forces of Ukraine will still not be able to continue to fight.

The author believes that Western countries need to refuse Ukraine's entry into NATO, and in exchange for this it should be offered security guarantees, including from the United States and Russia. At the same time, he notes that all the territories lost by Ukraine will not return to it, and Kyiv must ensure respect for rights and guarantee the safety of the entire Russian-speaking population of the country. The author also proposes to create a demilitarized buffer zone between countries. At the same time, he noted that if negotiations are not started right now, Ukraine will have to agree to much worse conditions.

Gradually, Western countries are beginning to discuss specific plans for a peaceful settlement. Apparently, their leadership has realized that ignoring Russian interests is unacceptable, so any peace plan must respect them and contain significant concessions to Moscow.

And here is the link:

https://t.me/rezident_ua/20392

I saw a video on YT called 'The end of smartphones is near' by a Mr Joe Scott.

It goes on and on and all down the wrong track I think.

So it prompted me to say this which I'd like to repeat here:

@abrogard142
0 seconds ago

concentrating on smartphones is like concentrating on wall power plugs. It's not the plug that's important it is the electricity it brings. at the moment everyone is asleep. that's how come the USA is the 'evil empire', that's how come the Ukraine war, that's how come the Covid madness, that's how come the human-caused climate change lie, that's how come everything! the proof of that is this very video where he 'concentrates on the wall plug'. Listen: the thing is the people of the world were told that they had 'democracy' but they didn't. they couldn't. the world was not ready for it. the world could not deliver it. Why not? Because democracy is government of the people by the people. But how the hell could the people possibly govern themselves? They didn't know what the hell was/is going on. They couldn't every single on of them talk to the government, let their wishes be known. Christ, they couldn't even talk to each other find out what the group was thinking. They couldn't access the masses of data in the world, discover the facts about things. If they did find data they didn't have the expertise to interpret it. If they had the expertise they didn't have the computing power. So. So what they got was 'representative democracy'. Where every few years you get to choose between two points of view. And that was it. The end. Okay? Right? Isn't it so? BUT Now all is different. ALL. Because of the 'electricity' that the smartphone delivers into our headspace. We can now do ALL those things we couldn't do before. ALL. And more. And THAT'S the exciting news of the decade, the millenium. Pass that around. Think on that. Take your eyes off the plug and the pretty distracting pictures and the inane nonsense and seize the world.

And here is a link to his  video.  I guess I owe him that.  🙂

Got to get it into proportion. When I first stumbled across this today I was staggered, shocked to the core.  It felt like the end of the world.  A sudden revelation that all the world has fallen to bits.

But we have all of Africa in the main, I think?  All India? There's 1.5billion.

And all China,  there's another 1.5 billion.

Whew. So it isn't so bad.  But it is BAD.  As though there wasn't enough bad with this 'evil empire' busy destroying everything and everyone it can find.

There's a cure.  Spread the word.  What word?  The stone cold sensible facts have been revealed and are revealed again and again to people almost on a daily basis.

The 'mystery' of life is no mystery any more.  The NDE people keep coming 'back' and telling us the truth.

That's the 'cure'.

And here is the problem:

https://x.com/RitaPanahi/status/1720189467196371117?s=20

 

I am guilt ridden.  At a low but chronic level.  I find.  To my surprise.

It went undetected all my life.  Now I find it lurking there.  A sort of substratum.

Guilt about what?  About not doing enough.   Doing what?  It doesn't matter. Not specified.  The point is I should be doing.  Merely to be doing is the thing.

But:  here's the rub – no matter how much I do the guilt can never assuaged, sated.  It is always there saying 'don't stop'.

Is this common? Is this the Anglo-saxon 'original sin' thing?

 

 

Got this from MoA, too, today:
Dmitry Medvedev writes: 

Israel keeps postponing its ground operation in Gaza. Mostly under pressure from the United States and fearing global anger.

But do not flatter yourself. The operation will take place, and will result in the most serious bloody consequences. Moloch always demands more and more victims, and the machine of mutual violence will now work for years.

In addition, the West is very tired of Ukraine. And he enthusiastically took up the support of Israel. Even the new speaker of the US House of Representatives, Michael Jackson (sorry, Mike Johnson, although what difference does it make), called helping Tel Aviv his first business.

Or maybe it's better to resume the Middle East settlement process and finally try to implement UN Security Council Resolution No. 242 of 11/22/67? Or even the original Plan for the partition of Palestine, adopted on November 29, 1947 by UNGA Resolution No. 181?

Those questions are, of course, rhetorical. After all, it is much more interesting to divide the loot for someone else's war away from the USA. The war must go on…
https://t.me/Slavyangrad/70553

 
Posted by: Down South | Oct 27 2023 13:59 utc | 2

Alistaire Crooke has a piece today in the 'Strategic Culture Foundation'  within which I found this quote from an Israeli 'senior war Cabinet source' :

"This is the most important point — ‘our deterrence’”, the senior war Cabinet source said. “The region must quickly understand that whoever harms Israel the way Hamas did, pays a disproportionate price. There is no other way to survive in our neighbourhood than to exact this price now, because many eyes are fixed on us and most of them do not have our best interests at heart”.

See that?   Just like the Americans.  They're both exactly the same.  They see no options in the world bar brute force and unchallenged supremacy for themselves.

It's like talking to a mad dog, that's exactly the way it sees the world.

A link to the piece:

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2023/10/26/escalations-cannot-be-stopped-the-white-house-is-rattled-escalations-might-all-fuse-into-one/

I just lifted this from MoonofAlabama.  An excellent site which pretends to be like a 'public bar',  a pub, you know?  Publishes some good stuff.  Has a noisy opinionated clientele all talking at once in a format that forbids easy following of threads..  very much like a pub.  If they don't mind me doing so: I recommend it.

I read this today and thought it really funny and sadly real:

 

From 'October 27th'  'Two Middle East Outlooks'

Jake Sullivan, National Security Advisor and dimwit, had written a laudation of his own and his bosses foreign policy for the November print edition of Foreign Affairs. The piece was finalized before the war in Palestine had begun.

The Sources of American Power
A Foreign Policy for a Changed World

Excerpts:
Indeed, although the Middle East remains beset with perennial challenges, the region is quieter than it has been for decades.The progress is fragile, to be sure. But it is also not an accident.
…
[The president's] approach returns discipline to U.S. policy. It emphasizes deterring aggression, de-escalating conflicts, and integrating the region through joint infrastructure projects and new partnerships, including between Israel and its Arab neighbors. And it is bearing fruit.
…
This disciplined approach frees up resources for other global priorities, reduces the risk of new Middle Eastern conflicts, and ensures that U.S. interests are protected on a far more sustainable basis. Challenges remain. The Israeli-Palestinian situation is tense, particularly in the West Bank, but in the face of serious frictions, we have de-escalated crises in Gaza and restored direct diplomacy between the parties after years of its absence.

There you go.  'Leaders of the free world'.  (choke, choke).  You can trust every word they say, can't you?  Really got their finger on the pulse, right?

 

 

Hint: look under the coat tails of the guy with the stripey pants:

https://open.substack.com/pub/karlof1/p/sunday-sermon-images-and-questions?r=b7hw3&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

I just had an exchange with a middle aged Greek, apparently.   I put myself out a bit knocking out a kinda long winded response to him which altogether kinda summarises my thoughts, feelings, attitudes towards a fair chunk of this Ukraine thing and perhaps even the world in general.

(p.s. what a drag, turns out I can't just copy and paste because I lose all formatting. aaarrgghh…  have to edit the  whole thing… labour, labour, labour..)

So I'm going to keep that exchange right here so's I've got it when I want to find it:

@MiddleAgedGeek
3 minutes ago

 @abrogard142  Are these the same DPR battalion who shot down Malaysian Flight 17? Justice will soon come for the victims of that war crime. Keep on admitting your DPR is an armed terrorist unit fighting the legitimate government that has indisputable sovereignty over the Donbass region, Ivan.

@abrogard142
0 seconds ago

 @MiddleAgedGeek 

Hello. You raise an interesting point. I know nothing about it. Except of course the barest things. I certainly don't know if a DPR battalion shot down Flight 17. I therefore wouldn't know if this was the same battalion.

I can't 'keep on admitting..' because I never began.

The 'legitimate government' is clearly a matter of great dispute. And therefore 'indisputable sovereignty..' is also clearly disputable and is being disputed.

I think what you need to get clear: what everyone needs to get clear, is what you mean by 'a nation'.

Okay?

Now is 'a nation' a stretch of country? Or is it a people? Or is it a government? Or it is a mere idea? Or all of the above? Or none of the above?

It's like 'conversations' ( i.e. acrimonious illogical shouting matches ) about 'god' and religion.

There is never clear definition of the terms used.

Now I tend to agree with the Jews. Shall we say. For an example.

For they consider 'the nation' to be the people. A people. A group of people who self identify as being a group.

There was a 'Jewish Diaspora', you know? When they had no land of their own and were spread around the world. 'Lost Jews'.

But they always considered themselves a nation. A nation in need of land.

Now I tend to think along those lines at least in the beginning. I certainly don't follow the Jewish line of thoughts to where it is today but the first bit: ' a nation is a people ' I certainly do agree with.

And so does the United Nations, I think, or some similarly self important august body.

For they have enshrined in their 'legislation' the 'right to self determination' which is a right that 'people' have.

Not that 'land' has, not that 'governments' have, not that 'ideas' have. But something that a collection of people have.

Similarly it is an idea that Kiev Ukrainians at least once used to have for I remember early in this conflict before they settled down into their set mantras, memes, doctrines, they would loudly proclaim they 'had a right to self determination'.

They did that, of course, because those that spoke it were the more rabid nationalists. And what they meant was that they were trying to create a 'pure' Ukrainian nation and they had every right to do that.

Well they were wrong.

You don't have any rights to 'create' nations. Nations are gatherings of people.

They create themselves. That is: they manifest as they manifest. That manifestation IS the manifestation of that nation as it IS.

It is for us all to recognise that.

Not for us to look at it and say this won't do, I'm going to have to change this: you must manifest THIS way or else you are not a nation.

That's just simple logic. But apart from the simple logic as applied to the theory of what they were doing there was the actual pragmatic fact of what was happening before their very eyes.

THEY were not 'self determining' – DONBAS was.

THEY were actually denying the Donbas their right to self determination.

When those two facts filtered into their consciousnesses they stopped shouting those words.

We haven't heard them for a long time.

So anyway what I am simply saying, excuse my laborious spelling it out, I am trying to be clear, is that the nation of Ukraine is its people and no one and nothing (but nature) (and in Kiev's case, the USA) has sovereignty over them.

They choose their own 'sovereigns'.

This is their right.

For it is all people's right and it's the way it works in nature in the end anyway.

Pointless to fight against it.

Now here is the point: You seem to think the 'legitimate government' has 'absolute sovereignty' over the Donbas region.

You are not clear what you mean by that but I think it is a fair guess you mean all the land, all the property and all the people.

Well they simply do not. Read what I've said.

I will stop now. Because it is no use flogging a dead horse.

You either, by now, begin to understand or you don't and if you don't me saying more isn't going to help is it?

I'll finish with this though:    Consider these three things:

. In the Christian bible it says 'ye shall know them by their fruits'.
. Viktor Orban says 'the first duty of the politician is to protect his people'
. Ukraine is the people of Ukraine: count the 40 million that existed before all this and still exist somewhere now.

And now ask yourself this in the light of those three things:
"What have been the fruits of governance by Kiev and USA and how well have they protected their people and by how much have they strengthened that nation?"

If you are satisfied by the answer you get you and I live on entirely different planets.