Who Lost Russia, China, India, ...
Page 1 of 3

Author:  Benjammin' [ Fri Feb 18, 2005 8:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Who Lost Russia, China, India, ...

Some more results of the great NeoCon global strategy (our military is good but it cannot take on half of the planet):

Russia and China become part of strategic alliance – Putin now looks at BRICS alliance (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa)
Sudhir Chadda
Feb. 16, 2005

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese authorities decided to form the strategic alliance for defense, trade and energy. Russia will deliver oil to China and China will collaborate with Russia in Geopolitical strategic defense of Euresia.

Russia's Security Council and the Military Commission of the Chinese Communist Party's Politburo will form a forum and will work closely to make sure both countries can create and maintain the necessary military and political infrastructure as well as coordination.

According to some international think tanks, sources close to Russia's Security Council say recommending countermeasures to check the U.S. geopolitical "offensive" in Eurasia will be perhaps the forum's most important job.

China and Russia are planning joint military exercises. The joint naval maneuvers are scheduled to be held in August in China's Liaodong Peninsula.

Distinctly the world is broken into definite alliances. The first is the US led alliance (thirty or so countries providing military in Iraq). The second one is the European Alliance. There is a considerable overlap between NATO, EU and US led alliance.

The third emerging alliance is BRICS - Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. The newly formed Russia-China alliance provides Putin the necessary critical mass to move ahead and formally create the BRICS alliance.

Recently Brazil moved ahead and formed a business alliance with Venezuela. China and Russia also formed alliance with Venezuela. In spite of Washington’s opposition, Russia plans to provide defense hardware to Venezuela and nuclear reactors to Iran.

India is watching closely Washington’s decision on providing Pakistan with F16. Delivering F16 to Pakistan will make India take a U-turn from its pro-world posture. The Congress party in India has very close relations with Kremlin for many years.

Putin’s current goal is to create the strategic BRIC alliance that will eventually become the strongest trade and military block in the world.

Bush Administration will not sit idle either. Dr. Rice, the current US Secretary of State will take counter measures specially trying to bring India, Pakistan, South Africa and Brazil into US alliances.

The possibility of another cold war between US led alliance and the BRICS looms in the horizon.

The Europeans will act initially as a keeper of the middle ground. The cold war will not be similar to one between America and old Soviet Union. While Putin is putting together the BRICS alliance, he does shy away from meeting US President George Bush. There will be cordial relations between China and America, India and America as well as Russia and America. The covert war will be in the area of trade, commerce and finance. That is where India and China stand out. Russian oil is a great factor. Russia-Venesuela-Iran forms CRICS mail oil and Gas resource.

Russia and China become part of strategic alliance – Putin now looks at BRICS alliance (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa)
Sudhir Chadda
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese authorities decided to form the strategic...

India, Pakistan, China potential threats: US House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
Indo-Asian News Service
The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, in one of its rare open hearings...

Author:  dori [ Sat Feb 19, 2005 3:38 am ]
Post subject: 

And the vast majority of Americans know nothing of this.....

They are busy watching sports or 'reality' shows.

Author:  TheStripey1 [ Sat Feb 19, 2005 4:40 pm ]
Post subject: 

Well in those now immortal words by georgie bu$h...

"You're either with us or against us!"

Looks like more and more are choosing the against us option...


This article also speaks to some purchases made by Venezuela recently...

Doom and Gloom anyone?

[URL=]Hugo Chavez: Another BRICS in the Wall?
By Anthony Gancarski | February 18, 2005[/URL]


U.S. State Department spokesman Lou Fintor recently voiced American concerns that 100,000 Kalashnikov guns and a number of helicopters due to be sold by Russia to Venezuela could find their way to neo-Marxist guerrillas in Colombia and elsewhere. Our friends in Russia, according to the Interfax news service, see U.S. concerns as unfounded, adding, “U.S. protests should be viewed as nothing but a dishonest form of competition and an attempt to squeeze Russian producers from the arms market.” Apart from this purchase, there are reports that Venezuela is also considering Russian MiG-29 fighters as possible replacements for its F-16s. These arms dealings suggest that Russia sees an opening in South America and that Venezuela is not coy about advertising it.


Venezuela is on the move – militarily, economically, diplomatically. Why? The nation sees a changing of the guard globally. Chavez sees an opportunity to strengthen his position at the expense of Washington. And, as this editorial in the India Times claims, the Venezuelan position is rooted in the emergence of a new power bloc – which does not see the 21st as a New American Century.

Most Americans have yet to hear of the BRICS alliance – BRIC standing for Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. That is unfortunate, as the position of this alliance is devoted to muscling the U.S. out of global markets where possible. As the editorial claims, Russia is now trading oil to China in exchange for collaboration in the “Geopolitical strategic defense” of Eurasia.


Good Job, georgie... NOT!!!

Author:  dori [ Sat Feb 19, 2005 8:49 pm ]
Post subject: 

War has been our major product for YEARS! Wherever there is conflict we are right there to sell our goodies.

Does anyone really wonder why we are hated?

Author:  Benjammin' [ Mon Feb 21, 2005 5:11 am ]
Post subject: 

India Closely Watching US Covert Ops In Northwest Pakistan

Who is watching who? Washington DC (UPI) Feb 02, 2005
U.S. covert activities in Pakistan's Northwest Frontier Province (NWFP) have increasingly drawn the interest of India's Research and Analysis Wing intelligence agency. The U.S. agents are actively seeking Osama bin Laden, as well as al-Qaida and Taliban remnants.

RAW operatives speaking on condition of anonymity said that the Bush administration has set up a "secret shop" in the region despite unsettling China. Besides U.S. Special Forces, the CIA has also established "listening posts" in Pakistan's NWFP Areas to monitor communications.

The U.S. Army has also conducted military exercises in Deosai, 18 miles from Skardu. Not that the U.S. military is limiting itself to Pakistan; Indian and U.S. Special Forces have also conducted a high-altitude joint exercise in Ladakh, just across the border from Skardu.

Former RAW secretary B. Raman said that the U.S. military now has a chain of monitoring stations in Gilgit and Baltistan to keep track of telephones and wireless communications, ostensibly run by Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence.

A number of U.S. intelligence officers are attached to the monitoring stations; many of them are U.S. nationals of Afghan origin. Why is China edgy about U.S. Special Forces scampering around the Himalayas?

According to Raman, the U.S. National Security Agency has had a NWFP presence for years, monitoring Kazakhstan space establishments and China's nuclear facilities in Xinjiang.

All rights reserved. © 2004 United Press International. Sections of the information displayed on this page (dispatches, photographs, logos) are protected by intellectual property rights owned by United Press International. As a consequence, you may not copy, reproduce, modify, transmit, publish, display or in any way commercially exploit any of the content of this section without the prior written consent of United Press International,

Related Links
Search SpaceDaily
Subscribe To SpaceDaily Express

U.S. Contingency Plan For Pakistani Nukes
Washington DC (UPI) Jan 19, 2005
Secretary of State-nominee Condoleezza Rice has revealed that the United States maintains a contingency plan to prevent Pakistani nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of Islamist fundamentalists if they came to power.

Author:  waihdag [ Mon Feb 21, 2005 3:56 pm ]
Post subject: 

2005-02-19 15:09 * IRAN * RUSSIA * PRESIDENT * VISIT * DOCUMENTS *


TEHRAN, February 19 (RIA Novosti's Nikolai Terekhov) - Secretary of the Iranian Supreme National Security Council Hasan Rowhani said that a number of documents on cooperation would be signed during Russian President Vladimir Putin's forthcoming visit to Iran.

"The Russian Federation and Iran have several joint projects, in particular, the purchase of passenger liners from Moscow, the construction of the second unit of the nuclear power plant in Bushehr, the issue of ships on the Caspian Sea and others," Mr. Rowhani told journalists on arriving from Moscow on Saturday.

"Some agreements have been already drafted and will be signed during Vladimir Putin's forthcoming visit to Iran," Mr. Rowhani noted.

In his words, the exact time of the Russian President's visit has not been fixed yet.

Source: RIA Novosti Russian News & Information Agency

Ben, another mosaic stone to add to the picture


Author:  waihdag [ Mon Feb 21, 2005 6:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Russia determined to continue nuclear cooperation with Iran

Pravda: Russia determined to continue nuclear cooperation with Iran
02/19/2005 16:13

The US administration is not happy about the Russian-Iranian cooperation

President Putin stated that Russia would continue the nuclear cooperation with Iran, because the latter does not intend to produce nuclear weapons. The Russian president released the statement during a meeting with Hassan Rowhani, the head of Iran's national Security Council in the Kremlin.

"We are certain that the global proliferation of nuclear weapons does not assist in the strengthening of security either in the region or in the world on the whole. The latest steps on Iran's behalf persuade us that Iran has no intention of building an atomic weapon. Consequently, we will continue to cooperate with Iran in all fields, including in nuclear energy," the Russian president said.

The head of the Federal Agency for Nuclear Energy, Alexander Rumyantsev, confirmed that Russia and Iran would sign an agreement for the return of spent nuclear fuel to Russia. The document is to be signed at the end of February, during Rumyantsev's visit to Iran. "We are going to sign an additional protocol to the inter-governmental agreement for the return of spent nuclear fuel," Alexander Rumyantsev said. The head of the Federal Agency also said that nuclear fuel is normally delivered to a nuclear power plant about six months before the launch of the reactor. "As far as the Iranian nuclear power plant in Bushehr is concerned, nuclear fuel deliveries to the station will be conducted within the scope of this condition," Rumyantsev added.

The United States suspect Iran of an intention to use the nuclear plant in Bushehr (the station was built in cooperation with Russia) for the production of nuclear weapons. Tehran has repeatedly emphasized, though, that Iran's nuclear program was of solely peaceful character. It was particularly said that Iran needed the program for solving energetic problems in the country. However, the US administration is not happy about the Russian-Iranian cooperation. The issue is expected to be raised during the forthcoming meeting between Vladimir Putin and George W. Bush in Bratislava on February 24th. Hassan Rowhani said during the meeting with President Putin that Iran was going to temporarily close the uranium enrichment program not to cause more concern in the West: "Everybody knows that our activity in the nuclear field is of absolutely peaceful character," Rowhani said.

Read the original in Russian: (Translated by: Dmitry Sudakov)



Author:  Catherine [ Mon Feb 21, 2005 7:09 pm ]
Post subject: 

Many of us have long felt that Russia would not allow Iran to become another Iraq, and neither will China.

Traude, how are the German people feeling about Bush's upcoming visit as it gets closer?

(An aside, which is off-topic, so my apologies.)


Author:  waihdag [ Mon Feb 21, 2005 7:52 pm ]
Post subject: 


apologies for what??? I hope not for Dubya - you wouldn't apologize for him! At least I don't see him as an American even is he is supposed to be "your" President. He's nothing more than a criminal, one of the worst kind!


I moved the Spiegel Report to a new thread "Bush in Europe"

Author:  waihdag [ Mon Feb 21, 2005 9:19 pm ]
Post subject: 


I'm sorry, I didn't pay attention in responding to Catherine's question.
I certainly didn't want to spoil your thread.


Author:  Benjammin' [ Tue Feb 22, 2005 9:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Heating Up?

Hey, Traude; You've only added to my thread and I thank you! :D

Some more "interesting" developments:

McCain Calls for Permanent Afghan Bases 

Associated Press Writer 

02/22/05 "AP" -- KABUL, Afghanistan - A senior American lawmaker called Tuesday for permanent U.S. bases in Afghanistan to safeguard American security interests in a region that includes Iran as well as nuclear-armed Pakistan and China. 

Sen. John McCain, part of a five-strong U.S. Senate delegation which held talks with President Hamid Karzai, said he was committed to a "strategic partnership that we believe must endure for many, many years. 

"Not only for the good of the Afghan people, but also for the good of the American people because of the long-term security interests that we have in the region," McCain told reporters at the presidential palace in the Afghan capital. 

Asked what such a partnership would entail, he said: "Economic assistance, technical assistance, military partnership including — and this is a personal view — joint military permanent bases and also cultural exchanges." 

McCain, the No. 2 Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, didn't elaborate, and Karzai didn't address the issue at a joint news conference. 

Afghanistan's neighbors include Pakistan to the east, Iran to the west and China to the northeast. 

Officials from the Afghan government and the U.S.-led military coalition in Afghanistan told The Associated Press earlier this month they are examining a military partnership which could include permanent American bases here. 

However, Afghan Defense Minister Rahim Wardak has also requested high-tech weaponry such as attack helicopters and special forces for the new U.S.-trained Afghan National Army to reduce the need for foreign troops. 

There are currently about 17,000 U.S. forces in Afghanistan, hunting remnants of al-Qaida and the former ruling Taliban. 

The Afghan army, which currently numbers about 20,000 and is taking part in counterinsurgency operations in troubled areas near the Pakistani frontier, is to reach its full strength of 70,000 by the end of 2006. 

Other members of the U.S. delegation, which arrived in Kabul after stops in Baghdad and Islamabad, also backed long-term U.S.-Afghan ties but gave no specifics. 

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a New York Democrat, said she hoped to expand a "friendship and partnership which is very important to the United States and something that we believe very strongly is in the interests of both" countries. 

Karzai limited himself to expressing thanks. 

"It is because of help from the United States that Afghanistan has what it has today: Be it in reconstruction, be it in economy, in elections, in the very fact that this is a country that is now owning itself." 

The other senators were Republicans Susan Collins of Maine and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Russ Feingold, a Democrat from Wisconsin. All but Feingold are members of the Armed Services Committee, which oversees the Defense Department budget. 

Copyright: Associated Press.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Information Clearing House endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

Author:  Benjammin' [ Tue Feb 22, 2005 9:48 pm ]
Post subject:  And, "The Future's So Bright, I Got To Wear Shades...&q

Doomed to fail

By Scott Ritter

02/22/05 "Baltimore Sun" - - NORTH KOREA'S dramatic public revelation that it possesses nuclear weapons represents a stark challenge for the Bush administration. 

The North Korean claim, if true, underscores the failure of President Bush's nonproliferation policies that since the beginning of his first term had been subordinated to a grander vision of regime change. That policy was intended to transform strategically vital regions of the world into Western-style democracies supportive of the United States and the Bush administration's vision of American global dominance. 

The intermingling of nonproliferation and regime change policies was doomed to fail. One requires skillful multilateral diplomacy based on the principles of uniform application of international law, the other bold application of a unilateral doctrine of aggressive liberation rhetoric backed by the real threat of military power. When blended, as the Bush administration did, unilateralism trumps multilateralism every time. North Korea's announced accession to the nuclear club represents the inevitable result. 

The end of America's meaningful role as a promoter of global nonproliferation can be traced to decisions made in the 1990s regarding regime change in Saddam Hussein's Iraq. The United Nations had embarked on a bold effort to roll back the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction through disarmament and, despite some initial difficulties, scored a dramatic success. 

It is now clear that Iraq, under pressure from U.N. weapons inspectors, was disarmed of its WMD by 1991 and had dismantled and destroyed the last vestiges of its weapons programs by 1996. But the United States had, since 1991, committed to a policy of regime change in Iraq, which required economic sanctions-based containment linked to a continued finding of Iraqi noncompliance with its disarmament obligation. 

Rather than embracing weapons inspections, three successive U.S. administrations denigrated and subverted the work of the inspectors in order to keep the primary policy objective of regime change in Iraq on track. The nail in the coffin of U.S. nonproliferation efforts came when the Bush administration willfully misstated the extent of the Iraqi WMD programs in order to justify its invasion of Iraq. 

North Korea and Iran concluded from events leading to the U.S. invasion of Iraq that the Bush administration did not regard nonproliferation as an endgame but a tool designed to weaken a target state to the point that it could succumb to the grander U.S. policy objective of regime change. 

Mr. Bush had stated that the world would be a better place with the regimes in Pyongyang and Tehran removed. Therefore, all diplomatic efforts - whether the six-party framework with North Korea or the European Union-brokered negotiations with Iran - were regarded as disingenuous fronts intended not to facilitate nonproliferation and stability but rather instability and regime change. 

With Iraq a model of the reality of America's unilateral militaristic approach toward bringing about regime change, North Korea and Iran have embarked on the only path available to either of them - acquisition of an independent nuclear deterrent intended to forestall what they perceive as irresponsible U.S. aggression. 

The Bush administration has come face to face with the reality of the failure of its policies. Rather than curtailing the proliferation of nuclear weapons, the administration's crusade against global tyranny has served as an accelerant in placing the most dangerous weapons known to man in the hands of xenophobic regimes that have been backed into a corner. 

But the situation in North Korea and Iran could still be resolved in a way that promotes global nonproliferation objectives. 

Real and meaningful economic incentives, backed by U.S. and allied willingness to permit North Korea and Iran to possess civilian nuclear programs operated under stringent international monitoring, could succeed in rolling back North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons and provide incentive for Iran to cease and desist in its own program. 

But the key to any such salvation lies with the willingness of the Bush administration to unlink nonproliferation efforts from regime change. This is highly unlikely, given the reality of the ideological composition of those at the senior decision-making levels of the Bush national security team and the huge political investment Mr. Bush has made in support of his global crusade against tyranny. 

"Freedom is on the march," Mr. Bush has said. Unfortunately for the United States, North Korea and Iran don't see it that way. And if America keeps marching, it could very well be in the direction of a nuclear apocalypse. 

Scott Ritter, a former intelligence officer and U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq, is author of the forthcoming Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America's Intelligence Conspiracy. 

Copyright © 2005, The Baltimore Sun 

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Information Clearing House endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

Author:  Benjammin' [ Tue Feb 22, 2005 11:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Deep Fondu

Chirac defies Bush on China arms

China's military build-up has alarmed the Pentagon

US President George W Bush has voiced "deep concern" about European plans to lift an arms embargo on China - putting him at odds with the French president.

Jacques Chirac said it was "no longer justified" but Europe and the US should agree on conditions for lifting it.

Earlier, Mr Bush warned that arms transfers to Beijing would "change the balance" of China-Taiwan relations.

He was speaking after a Nato summit in Brussels that stressed alliance unity.

'Deep concern'

"There is deep concern in our country that a transfer of weapons would be a transfer of technology to China," Mr Bush said.

He voiced a willingness to consider safeguard clauses, but he hinted that the US Congress could still take action against any move by the Europeans.

The EU imposed a ban on exports of military equipment to China in 1989, following the crackdown on democracy activists in Tiananmen Square.

The BBC's business reporter Mark Gregory says the Pentagon is worried that at some point it might be called upon to defend Taiwan from Chinese attack.

Agreement on Iraq

In a positive signal for the White House, Mr Chirac - a staunch opponent of the US-led invasion of Iraq - said France would join the Nato mission to train Iraqi forces.


Monday: Talks with Belgian leaders and a speech on transatlantic relations. Dinner with French President Jacques Chirac
Tuesday: Breakfast with UK Prime Minister Tony Blair. Meets Ukrainian and Italian leaders at Nato HQ, then meets EU leaders
Wednesday: Leaves Brussels for Germany. News conference with Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder in Mainz, then meets US troops in Wiesbaden
Thursday: Gives speech in Slovak capital, Bratislava, meets Russian President Vladimir Putin

Diary: Odd couple of nurses
At a glance: US/Europe splits

"Europe and the United States are true partners," he told the Nato summit, urging more dialogue.

Mr Bush said Nato was the "cornerstone" of the transatlantic relationship.

All 26 Nato member countries are now helping the Iraqi government, Nato officials announced.

Mr Bush also held talks with European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso and Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker, whose nation holds the rotating EU presidency.

At a joint news conference, Mr Juncker announced plans for the EU and US to co-host an international conference on Iraq - "should the Iraqi government invite us".

The intention, he said, was to encourage and co-ordinate international support for Iraq.

Author:  Benjammin' [ Tue Feb 22, 2005 11:31 pm ]
Post subject:  And, From The Information Clearinghouse:

EU chief dampens mood of entente with Bush:

The EU's foreign policy chief cast public doubt on the health of the
transatlantic partnership yesterday, puncturing the euphoric claims by
European and American officials that President George W Bush had opened a
new era in relations.


Europeans Ask: Is Bush a Wolf in a Granny's Suit?:

How much of what this president -- known for his knack for hyperbole --
says will translate into deeds? And what of the looming crises in Iran,
Iraq and over the EU's desire to lift its Chinese weapons embargo? ... 07,00.html


Gwynne Dyer: Realigning the global power game :

The Russian-American relationship is not thriving, and the proof of it
is the fact that the United States granted political asylum a month ago
to Alyona Morozova, a Russian citizen who claims that her life is in
danger because of her role in investigating a series of “terrorist”
bombing attacks that killed 246 Russians in September 1999. The chief
suspect in the bombings, according to her, is Vladimir Putin. ... 7&cat_id=1


Putin Says Russia Will Pursue Democracy on Its Own:

President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday that Russia would pursue
democratic change on its own and would not allow the issue to be used by
other countries for their foreign policy goals.


In Pictures: Bush Not Welcome In Europe:

Page 2 -





Author:  waihdag [ Tue Feb 22, 2005 11:41 pm ]
Post subject: 


If I had known that you are going to cover Europe as well I wouldn't have moved the Spiegel article to a new thread Bush in Europe. :D

I just started another thread "US Military, President Out Of Control" in Deceptive Reporting, I guess it could be of interest to you as well.


Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group