#RussiaFail · #RussiaLies · CounterPropaganda · Information operations · Information Warfare · Propaganda · Russia

Dan Kovalik, Russian Useful Idiot Or Propagandist?


Listen Liberals: Russia Is Not Our Enemy [Ed. comment – Yes, Russia is. Russia has declared themselves to be in an information war with the United States by calling us their enemy]

02/15/2017 04:01 pm ET | Updated 6 days ago

I must say that I am simply baffled by what appears to be the prevailing view in this country, and especially among liberals, that Russia is somehow a threat to the United States. [Ed. comment – I don’t see anything wrong so far.  He is baffled.]

In truth, one of the only redeeming qualities of a Trump presidency that I saw was the possibility that his administration would repair ties with Russia and work with that country in trying to solve issues of mutual concern, particularly in the Middle East. Yet, that is one goal of the new White House which the establishment, both in Washington and in the media, seem hell-bent on preventing. Indeed, I agree with the assessment of a number of commentators, including Dennis Kucinich who is breaking ranks with fellow liberals over this issue, that the U.S. intelligence community’s successful attempt to remove Mike Flynn as National Security Adviser was motivated by the desire to keep the new Cold War going.

[Ed. comment – Wait, just last week liberals were accusing Trump of being too cozy with Russia, but somehow repairing relations was good?  Calling Russia illegally annexing Crimea is “hell-bent on preventing” better relations with Russia?  Isn’t that just telling the truth, calling them out?  Which is it? Removing Flynn continues the Cold War which has been over since…  1991? Except in someone’s mind, but who knows what goes on in his mind.]

While I certainly understand it is in the interest of the military-industrial complex, again as Kucinich explains, to continue to vilify Russia in order to justify our already-bloated military spending, I am a bit taken aback at how eager most liberals are to embrace and even stoke this demonization.

[Ed. comment – bloated? SECDEF Mattis says the military is depleted and this self-declared liberal snowflake somehow knows better than a warrior-scholar?  SECDEF Mattis is saying we need to increase manpower and ships, but a “human rights, labor rights lawyer and peace activist” is somehow more knowledgeable than a Marine Corps General?]

Given the poor historical knowledge of most Americans, a little refresher on past and current affairs is in order.

Russia was our ally in WWII in defeating the Nazis. And, contrary to what most Americans are taught, it was Russia that truly won that war in Europe, having lost over 20 million people to the war and having been responsible for 80 percent of the Allies’ Nazi kills.

[Ed. comment – oh, please, don’t mention Lend Lease.  The implication is that Russia won WW II alone, as in “truly” won the war.  It was a team effort, that is why we were called allies. The US, Britain, and the rest of the allies created a Western front, freeing up Russia enough to finally make progress.  20 million soldiers were lost by Russia, many of which were sent into combat without weapons, without ammunition, and in all likelihood were traded, lives for land. But the Russian generals were somehow “great” because they sacrificed 20 million Russian souls. Now let’s talk about the Russian tactic of failure being reinforced with more soldiers.  I would call that poor generalship. But he is a”human rights, labor rights lawyer and peace activist” and I’m only a retired career Army officer.]

In addition, while many of us might not like the messenger, Donald Trump was correct when, asked about Putin being a killer, he suggested that the U.S. has been less than innocent in this respect. Indeed, though many were horrified by such a moment of candor by a U.S. President, Trump was engaging in gross understatement.

[Ed. comment – Russia has a reputation for assassinations, cruelty, inhumane actions, and indiscriminate killing of innocents – called collateral damage. The United States has a solid reputation, except by “human rights, labor rights lawyer and peace activist”s, of ethical, moral, and legal actions to every extent possible. The United States prosecutes violators, but I don’t recall any trial for human rights abuses in the Russian army.]

Let me be so bold as to say that, certainly since 1960 and up to the present time, the U.S. has been much more brutal and blood-thirsty than Russia. It is not even a close call here. For example, as Noam Chomsky (no lover of the USSR is he) has explained:

[Ed. comment: According to Russia’s own Foreign Ministry, Russia has killed 70,000 in Ukraine, alone, in the past three years. See text to the right from the Russian MFA for their admission.]

It is not seriously in question, as John Coatsworth writes in the recently published Cambridge University History of the Cold War, that from 1960 to “the Soviet collapse in 1990, the numbers of political prisoners, torture victims, and executions of nonviolent political dissenters in Latin America vastly exceeded those in the Soviet Union and its East European satellites.” Among the executed were many religious martyrs, and there were mass slaughters as well, consistently supported or initiated by Washington.

Chomsky goes on to detail the millions killed by the U.S. in Indochina during its shameful war on Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, and Reagan’s support of apartheid South Africa’s rampage through Southern Africa which resulted in the deaths of 1.5 million people.

[Ed. comment – since you’re throwing around numbers, didn’t Stalin kill 20 million of his own people in addition to killing 20 million in World War II?  Let’s talk about this Russian resort area called Siberia, how many millions died? Those are just Russian citizens. We haven’t talked about Aleppo and Syria.]

And, what about today? While many are up in arms about Russia’s annexation of the Crimea (though this was done with the approval of the majority of Crimeans who are happy to be returned to Russia) as well as Russia’s intervention in the war in Syria, these actions pale in comparison to the U.S.’s own intervention in Syria, its recent destruction of Libya, its destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, its continued support for the Saudi rape of Yemen and the U.S.’s support for the pillaging of The Democratic Republic of the Congo which has cost the lives of around 6 million innocents.

[Ed. comment – Crimean election?  Oh, you mean an illegal, forced, and unmonitored election held at gunpoint. While you’re throwing around the Whataboutisms, let’s talk about the illegal annexation of South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Crimea, and Donbass. Let’s talk about the destruction of Syria. Let’s talk about Russian intervention in Eritrea, Angola, Ethiopia, Afghanistan, Transnistria, Tajikistan, Chechnya (1 & 2), and Dagestan.  But, you also did not mention Russia’s lack of support for fighting ISIS, helping in Yemen, helping the refugees from Syria. You didn’t mention a long list of Russian provocations against Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden, Norway, Poland, Belarus, Finland, Kazakhstan, UK, even the United States – clearly belligerent actions. If nothing else, please look at the long list of Russian vetoes by the late Churkin against censure actions by the UN against Russia. Churkin all but claimed all Russians are choirboys.]

It is these U.S. wars, along with the U.S.’s over 800 military bases in more than 70 countries (Russia has bases in only one country (Syria) outside the former Soviet Union) which has led to the U.S. rightly being viewed in a poll of people in 65 countries as by far the greatest threat to world peace.

[Ed. comment – that is US foreign policy, called power projection (“to apply all or some of its elements of national power – political, economic, informational, or military – to rapidly and effectively deploy and sustain forces in and from multiple dispersed locations to respond to crises, to contribute to deterrence, and to enhance regional stability.”).  Many countries are potential aggressors, belligerents, or adversaries and, without a US global presence preventing belligerent actions, chaos and war might soon follow.]

Meanwhile, at the U.S.’s urging, and despite its promises to Russia in return for the Soviet Union relinquishing any hold over Eastern Europe, NATO now has troops up to the Russian border and the U.S. has just sold extended-range missiles to Poland which will surely be pointed at Russia. Russia is not similarly postured along the U.S.’s boundaries, and it is unthinkable that it ever would be.

[Ed. comment – Russia is making an unsubstantiated point – no promise was made nor signed, but please, keep trying and throw more Russian propaganda around. But, please don’t forget, the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, of which Russia was a signatory but chose to violate its stipulations and invade Crimea, a part of Ukraine. Troops on the Russian border would not be necessary if Russia mass buildup of troops and equipment on the border, constant provocations, and hostile words did not necessitate and increased defensive posture. True, it is not remotely possible for Russia to posture along US borders, so why threaten? You threaten an impossible action. Shirley, you jest.] 

In other words, it is Russia which should be afraid of us, and not the other way around. And, President Trump’s expressed desire to stop antagonizing Russia and to work with it in defeating ISIS in places like Syria should be welcomed as eminently reasonable and indeed necessary to avoid a possible nuclear confrontation. This should also be welcome by an American public whose resources have been drained by the greatest military-spending spree by far on the planet.

[Ed. comment – Russia has three goals: cause chaos and dissent in the West, promote Russian national interests, and undermine Western democracy. These are not peaceful goals and Russian words and Russian actions are similar. Your freedom of speech to spout Russian propaganda is only guaranteed by a strong military, a strong economy, a strong message, and strong diplomacy. Instead of complaining, you should be thanking the United States and President Trump.]

Certainly, liberals, who at least once stood for peace and for greater social spending, should be in the lead in cheering such overtures instead of drumming up anti-Russian hatred which can only lead to more war and more impoverishment of our society.

[Ed. comment – liberals must be so confused by Russian propaganda, disinformation, and fake news. Russia was supporting Trump only a few short weeks ago. Now the Russian propaganda machine is railing against him, supporting protests, coddling immature crybaby marches, supporting work outages, and helping slow progress – all acts of subversion.  But you’re saying liberals hate Russia and Russian propaganda is loving the liberals?   Such cognitive dissonance!  Incapable of adjustment and certainly not accepting of opposing opinions.]

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/listen-liberals-russia-is-not-our-enemy_us_58a4ba39e4b0fa149f9ac0c8

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Dan Kovalik, Russian Useful Idiot Or Propagandist?

  1. You are so right. This guy deals in sound bites and obfuscation. Here is my reply to a friend’s FB post before I had a chance to ready your more complete analysis..

    “The sound bite “Russia is Not Our Enemy” sounds nice and like something everyone, including me, would would like to embrace. Certainly if the title were changed to “The Russian People Are Not Our Enemy” there would be no disagreement at all. Regrettably, Mr Kovalik uses the tactic of defending bad behavior by trying to point out that other people have behaved badly also. His use of hyperbole and utterly incredible “facts’ makes him poorly suited to promote good relations between any one, let alone the USA and Russia. (For example in his article he cites ” Millions killed by the US in Indochina”…seriously? Millions? And does killing anyone by the US justify the genocide in Chechnya or the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Army? Let there be no doubt, either, that Stalin forced the native Tatars from Crimea which itself was a humanitarian crime and then repopulated the area with ethnic Russians. Claiming that the “Crimeans” voted to allow Russia to take their country, against all international post World War II norms, would be akin to the Germans saying that the Poles invited them to invade their country and , after killing all of the Poles and repopulating the country with Nazi’s that the vote to join Nazi Germany proved the invasion’s legitimacy. If it is beyond the scope of a FB comment to go into further detail, it should suffice that Mr. Kovalik defended and supported Hugo Chavez, the ruthless leader of Venezuela who left his country in a shambles. Now innocent Venezuelans are starving and desperate due to the looting of that country both financially and ethically by Chavez and his thugs. When this is the kind of company one keeps, it is hard for me to see the justification to rally to another of their headline grabbing, misleading causes.Mr. Kovalik makes the same unjustified hyperbolic ‘noise’ that other of Mr. Putin’s ‘trolls” are famous for publishing.”

Comments are closed.