UPDATE II: ‘Absolute Invulnerability for America Means Absolute Vulnerability For Others’

Foreign Policy,Homeland Security,Middle East,Propaganda,Republicans,Russia,Terrorism


Truth is truth no matter who propounds it (and why, pray tell, am I forced to repeat this no-brainer year-in and year-out?). The next statement is immutably true—even profound—although Americans will first look at the man who uttered it, and will denounce his wise words, given that he is not a member of the DC duopoly and the comitatus that props these Demopublicans up (i.e., the “the sprawling apparatus … that encompasses not only the emperor’s household and its personnel … but also the ministries of government, the lawyers, the diplomats, the adjutants, the messengers, the interpreters, the intellectuals”).

Via Eurasia Review:

“’The Americans are obsessed with the idea of ensuring their absolute invulnerability – a thing, I would point out, that is utopian and achievable neither from a technological nor a geopolitical standpoint.
And herein lies the problem. Absolute invulnerability for one means absolute vulnerability for all the others. It is impossible to agree with this perspective.’
Addressing the unrest in the Arab world, Putin said Russia would not permit a ‘Libyan scenario’ to take place in Syria, where he said Moscow wanted to see an immediate halt in violence and a national dialogue to resolve the crisis.
He defended the decision by Russia and China to veto a resolution earlier this month pushed by Washington and its European and Arab allies that Moscow said would have opened the door to foreign military intervention in Syria.
Russia in particular faced blistering criticism that ‘bordered on hysterical’ from Western countries for its decision, Putin said, adding that Moscow strongly hoped the United States and others would not resort to force in Syria without UN approval.
Referring more widely to the Arab Spring, Putin said that efforts backed by the United States and the West to bring about ‘democracy with the help of violent methods’ were unpredictable and often led to precisely the opposite result.

UPDATE I (Feb. 28): Finally, China stands up to the ludicrous Hildebeest:

“The United States’ motive in parading as a ‘protector’ of the Arab peoples is not difficult to imagine,” it said in a commentary. “The problem is, what moral basis does it have for this patronising and egotistical super-arrogance and self-confidence?”
“Even now, violence continues unabated in Iraq and ordinary people enjoy no security. This alone is enough for us to draw a huge question mark over the sincerity and efficacy of US policy,” it added.

UPDATE II (March 4): “Putin [has] said the main problem is that the United States wants ‘to acquire complete invulnerability’ through missile defense. He also mentioned Washington’s refusal to provide written guarantees that the system will never be aimed at Russian territory.” [RT]

4 thoughts on “UPDATE II: ‘Absolute Invulnerability for America Means Absolute Vulnerability For Others’

  1. Rebel Without a Clause

    When you are running a Ponzi-economy based on debt and monetization of debt, which is in turn based on the status of the dollar as world reserve currency, then you simply must attack anyone attempting to drop the dollar…especially the central petrodollar. Thus Iraq, Libya, and now Iran. But if the IranWar lasts more than a few weeks – as I expect it will -it’ll kill the dollar anyway, via >$200/barrel oil. That’s the general background. The actual spark will probably be provided by Israel, and its demand for for (Putin) “absolute invulnerability” vis a vis an (eventual) Iranian nuke. Poor Obama: No Way Out.

  2. Myron Pauli

    In my lifetime, here are the military interventions by the Evil Empire Soviets/Russians: Hungary (1956) , Czechoslovakia (1968), Afghanistan (1979-1989), and Georgia (2008). Here is China’s since 1960: India (1962) and Vietnam (1978) on border incidents.

    Now here is the peace-loving USA:


    OK – some are just “threats” which probably shouldn’t count – but whether it is 30 or 50 interventions in the last 50 years, it is a lot. And this is not border disputes with Canada. It would be like China invading Portugal or the Russians bombing Argentina. It is too many for me to count. Panama, Yemen, Somalia, … all existential threats to Joe the Plumber.

    How does this make us the “land of the free”? And when the President rubs out someone on or sends drones to knock out people on his say so, we are told it is none of our business (other than to pay for it and cheer!). Even more absurdly, many of Obama’s “liberal” supporters oppose the death penalty for heinous domestic criminals after extensive due process and appeals through an adversarial judicial system as “cruel and unusual” but cheer the death penalty if the Messiah deems it by his whim alone.

  3. james huggins

    I am only concerned with the United States. Anything to our advantage is fine with me and the other countries can like it or not. However, this requires wise and decisive leadership which recognizes that our strength goes a lot farther in a world that we effect in a positive way militarily, economically and culturally. This is and hasn’t been the case for some time. We barge around the globe alienating our friends and giving aid and comfort to our enemies. The only chance the world has to avoid global chaos is for a strong United States to be in the fore. Alas we are on a downhill slide to mediocrity of our own doing.

  4. Myron Pauli

    “Einstein: Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Or as Yogi Berra says, “Déjà vu all over again”:

    “The US must lead the coalition/NATO/UN against BUCKTOOTHISTAN led by the evil HITLER with ties to Al Queda. We will hold elections to prove that 99.99% of the people back us up. The other 0.01% are dead-enders/insurgents/TERRORISTS whom we will defeat with the surge/pacification/winning-hearts-and-minds. The elected government, while corrupt, just needs training/aid/encouragement to achieve stability. Although the war winds up expanding into and destabilizing neighboring PASTRAMI, this shows that the strategy is WORKING and we cannot leave because it: questions-our-credibility/means-our-troops-have-died-in-vein/THEY-endanger-our-freedoms. Although we have won every battle and have victory, if we leave, it will all fall apart so we can never leave. And our elites back THE TROOPS (e.g. the redneck and minority kids whom the elites would not give the time of day to back home) who are brave against the COWARDS who fight foreign invaders with spears/suicide-backpacks/grenades …”

Comments are closed.