Foreign Policy published an article last week by Tim Weiner, author of Legacy of Ashes, with the title, When the Threat Is Inside the White House: What CIA insiders make of the MAGA moles and toadies now in charge of U.S.
We are at war with Russia because of the Wolfowitz Doctrine: We will not all allow Russia, China, or any other state threaten US dollar hegemony. Why doesn't Putin (gee, its geopolitical?) or a host of commentators know about the Wolfowitz Doctrine or its intent. My contractor buddy predicted nuclear war based on this doctrine our security folks take very seriously. Love your work.
Many observers used to say the CIA doesn't do anything for one reason or to achieve one goal. I wouldn't know but 30 years ago it seemed to make good sense. I think it is pretty clear, though, that "doctrine," theory, and long term strategy don't work unless further supported other doctrines, possibilities and efforts. Theory is airy and laced with subjectivity while application is earthy, determinant and checked by reality. The founding idea is that the theory can be directly applied to the earth but the practice involves patching unforeseen cracks and holes and shortfalls a single theory makes inevitable.
A "doctrine" states a military or security goal: The Wolfowitz Doctrine says our military and security purpose is to contain Russia, China, and any military threat or threat to our dollar hegemony. Without a purpose, why spend money on the military? So the political and Financial class give them a purpose: contain Russia, China, and BRICS because they are threatening the US's military and dollar hegemony. Simple. The fact that the US has followed this policy ever since the Cold War ended even though Russia was not opposed to the West demonstrates its long standing and "doctrinaire" status. Tulsi Gabbard also proved it by saying that "Russia-Gate" was a Democrat scam. And if you aren't hearing rumors of wars, you aren't listening. That is what I am hearing from my security "friends" also, and Martin Armstrong.
Legacy of ashes, indeed. Weiner seems to have been co-opted by his erstwhile quarry, rather in the style of William Shawcross, whose damning expose of Nixon and Kissinger’s war crimes in Cambodia he later recanted and followed up with such hard-hitting investigative work as a biography of the Queen Mother.
I wonder also about Seymour Hersh’s stenography of ”trusted” sources who insist that Russia has suffered over a million casualties.
Perhaps Weiner is doing an operation of his own, allowing his sources to damn themselves, as with the admission of recruitment of terrorists. However, he appears to subscribe to the Russiagate hoax, which suggests he has indeed been co-opted and has inadvertently let the cat out of the bag. Either way, it is a significant lapse of narrative control for FP to have published it,
Good article Larry. Let's hope the Gabbard work further highlights how much the Obama and Biden administrations had a bunch of crazies in it. Burns was a huge disappointment.
We are at war with Russia because of the Wolfowitz Doctrine: We will not all allow Russia, China, or any other state threaten US dollar hegemony. Why doesn't Putin (gee, its geopolitical?) or a host of commentators know about the Wolfowitz Doctrine or its intent. My contractor buddy predicted nuclear war based on this doctrine our security folks take very seriously. Love your work.
Many observers used to say the CIA doesn't do anything for one reason or to achieve one goal. I wouldn't know but 30 years ago it seemed to make good sense. I think it is pretty clear, though, that "doctrine," theory, and long term strategy don't work unless further supported other doctrines, possibilities and efforts. Theory is airy and laced with subjectivity while application is earthy, determinant and checked by reality. The founding idea is that the theory can be directly applied to the earth but the practice involves patching unforeseen cracks and holes and shortfalls a single theory makes inevitable.
A "doctrine" states a military or security goal: The Wolfowitz Doctrine says our military and security purpose is to contain Russia, China, and any military threat or threat to our dollar hegemony. Without a purpose, why spend money on the military? So the political and Financial class give them a purpose: contain Russia, China, and BRICS because they are threatening the US's military and dollar hegemony. Simple. The fact that the US has followed this policy ever since the Cold War ended even though Russia was not opposed to the West demonstrates its long standing and "doctrinaire" status. Tulsi Gabbard also proved it by saying that "Russia-Gate" was a Democrat scam. And if you aren't hearing rumors of wars, you aren't listening. That is what I am hearing from my security "friends" also, and Martin Armstrong.
Legacy of ashes, indeed. Weiner seems to have been co-opted by his erstwhile quarry, rather in the style of William Shawcross, whose damning expose of Nixon and Kissinger’s war crimes in Cambodia he later recanted and followed up with such hard-hitting investigative work as a biography of the Queen Mother.
I wonder also about Seymour Hersh’s stenography of ”trusted” sources who insist that Russia has suffered over a million casualties.
Perhaps Weiner is doing an operation of his own, allowing his sources to damn themselves, as with the admission of recruitment of terrorists. However, he appears to subscribe to the Russiagate hoax, which suggests he has indeed been co-opted and has inadvertently let the cat out of the bag. Either way, it is a significant lapse of narrative control for FP to have published it,
Good article Larry. Let's hope the Gabbard work further highlights how much the Obama and Biden administrations had a bunch of crazies in it. Burns was a huge disappointment.
The hatred of a leader, a government or an ideology is fairly normal but a hatred of a ‘people’ is psychopathic.
Weiner is a total blowhard!
AMEN!
Isn’t it ironic that most top operatives of the ‘intelligence’ system are ‘stupid’.