COMMENTS POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY BEN KENTISH IN THE
INDEPENDENT
Vladimir Putin says he
may seek re-election as President of Russia in 2018
And every thoughtful person on the planet hopes so.
God, here is the most sensible and capable leader of a major
state we have, a voice for stability, peaceful pursuit of economic growth,
respect for all players, and an opponent of aggression and tyranny.
And we are lucky to have him at a time of threatening
political midgets, absolute midgets - May, Macon, Merkel, Trump - and genuinely
bloody tyrants - Netanyahu, Salman, Erdogan.
_____________________
Response to another
reader who said: The opposition in Russia is either the communist party or pro-western
types, who many Russians do it even trust. Putin will always smash them at the
ballot box.
I think that is a very astute observation, a fact ignored by
many in their efforts to denigrate Putin.
_______________________
Response to another
reader who said: The Indy doesn't like Russia, it's owned by a Russian
'Liberal' and written by pro 'rebel' journos who I do not need to name.
The Independent, for whatever reasons, is also quite
perceptibly under the Israel Lobby's influence.
Not as badly as The Guardian, which has become almost an
official house organ in Britain for Israeli interests, but still clearly
influenced in its selection and slant on many topics.
Just go back to the months of filthy propaganda and Senator Joe
McCarthy style attacks over non-existent anti-Semitism in Jeremy Corbyn's
Labour Party.
The Guardian was even worse, but The Independent was plenty
busy throwing mud.
Why does the Israel Lobby not like Putin when Israel itself
appears to have reasonably good relations with him?
Because Putin's Russia is quietly viewed as a threat to
America's current bout of hyper-aggression and determined global dominance. At present,
Russia is the only serious deterrent to American absolutism, China’s military
capabilities being not yet nearly as well developed.
Israel and its Lobby like a highly aggressive United States
because it is seen in terms of protection and succor for Israel's own
smaller-scale hyper-aggression and effort to dominate its region.
The entire thesis of Washington's Neocon crowd, people who
have strongly influenced American foreign policy for the last two decades, has
been that a hyper-aggressive United States is a good thing.
A typical statement of the American Neo-cons has been that
if America has the power, it should use it.
The last 15 years of American-generated war and terror in
the Middle East, involving the deaths of a couple of million and the creation
of many millions of refugees, directly reflects Neocon influence.
One country after another has been bombed or overthrown or
terrorized, none of them having threatened the United States.
The United Nations remains largely silent on the aggression because
at the same time that America has bombed and terrorized these lands, it has
worked methodically and ruthlessly at the UN to silence voices of opposition
from the other 95% of humanity. The UN has been effectively neutralized through
threats and bullying.
Why does the United States do this? Because it creates a
cordon sanitaire around Israel and it assures Israel's dominance in the region.
It also eliminates independent-minded leaders there, creating something of a
homogenized region unopposed to American intrusions.
All the renewed noises around Iran reflect precisely the
same influence, and, given America’s recent history in the region, are quite ominous.
Of course, Iran’s 80 million population – compare 18 million for Syria or 6
million for Libya - makes it a much more formidable opponent to take on.
Iran has completely complied with its international nuclear
deal and is not a country which has launched any aggressive war, but that is
not enough for Israel, a country which has broken every agreement in existence
on nuclear weapons and which has launched conflict after conflict.
