Kermit Heartsong - Ukraine - ZBIG's Grand Chess Board & How The West Was Checkmated

Other nation-states that have been enlisted for what can be clearly described as US aggression directed at China — a country deemed far less aggressive than the US — are Australia, South Korea, and the Philippines.

In a truly disturbing turn of events, the US is seeking to station yet another military base on South Korea’s “Peace Island,” Jeju, in order to more effectively pivot towards China. Why disturbing? The single greatest massacre in Korean history took place on Jeju Island, where sixty thousand Koreans were killed by forces allied to a Korean Strong Man (military dictator) under US command (Zeese et. al 2013). A total of four million Koreans and one million Chinese would be killed over the course of the Korean War, June 1950—July 1953. As S. Brian Willson (2013) writes:

This was a staggering international crime still unrecognized that killed five million people and permanently separated ten million Korean families. (Willson 2013)

Russian aggression? Perhaps a clear indication of who’s been aggressing whom is best represented by a twenty-first century map of Europe with regard to NATO countries. On such a map one would see NATO bases at or quite near the Russian border. These are the former Soviet satellites and Warsaw Pact countries, that have been gobbled up and then excreted as NATO forward operating bases.

On April 10, 2014, NATO released satellite images that clearly showed Russian “aggression” with troops massing on Ukraine’s border. As stated by NATO’s top military commander, General Philip Breedlove, “There is evidence of 40,000 Russian troops on the Ukrainian border.”

The images depicted Russian tanks, helicopters, fighter jets, and special-forces brigades. However, the images were satellite photos of the Combat Commonwealth exercises held in the south of Russia in 2013, eight months “before” the stated date of the NATO satellite photos (Zeese 2014).

This allegation begs the larger question, regardless of its inaccuracy does not a state have the right to amass military resources on its territory in response to a potential threat?

Next there was the allegation of Russian special forces’ involvement in Eastern Ukraine, based upon a picture supplied by the government in Kiev. The pictures supplied by Kiev found wide use in the mainstream media, appearing on channels from NBC to CNN to the BBC and to the pages of the revered New York Times .

The pictures were purported by Western governments and attendant media to show clear evidence of a particular member of the Russian special-forces, who had been active in Georgia, and by association his comrades, as the same soldier deployed in Eastern Ukraine. However, the soldier identified in the photos was a different man entirely. He was not a Russian special-forces member and his name was Alexander Mozhaev, a Cossack and a member of the “rapid reaction force of the local Novorossiya militia” (Human Rights Investigation 2014). There has been no critical examination, no forensic investigation of any kind, regarding the supposed photos of Russian special-forces.

On July 24, 2014, during her press briefing, State Department Spokesperson Marie Harf presented the story that Russian artillery strikes were taking place against Ukrainian military bases along the border. Of course, Ms. Harf’s evidence was secret and her sources were not to be revealed.

In Ukraine, however, the situation was not as Ms. Harf had described. Jason Ditz (2014) writes in his article, “US Invents Report of Russia Attacking Ukraine Bases: No Reports Out of Ukraine on Any Such Incidents”:

During the past several days, there has not been a single report out of Ukraine of an artillery strike against any of their military bases, anywhere in the country. The last such incident was two weeks ago, when rebels fired a BM-21 grad at a military base. (Ditz 2014)

As the story failed to gain traction in light of the missing secret evidence and with no other corroborating sources, it became imperative to serially invent numerous and undocumentable cases of aggression, that would each have ever diminishing half-lives.

In closing this section, there is a a question that must be asked. Does an aggressive country deemed a threat to the world, hell-bent on increasing its empire, call continuously for, and embark on missions of shuttle diplomacy for peace between warring parties (Geneva, Minsk)? Further, are the parties who continually eschew, completely ignore, serially violate, or demonize peace plans actually non-aggressors?

RUSSIA INVADES (AGAIN)

The Washington hawks still hope to force Putin to intervene militarily, as it would give them the opportunity to isolate Russia, turn it into a monster pariah state, beef up defence spending and set Europe and Russia against each other. They do not care about Ukraine and Ukrainians, but use them as pretext to attain geopolitical goals.

— Israel Shamir, “The Ukraine in Turmoil”

To read or listen to the mainstream media with regard to Russian “invasions” in the Ukraine is, as we have outlined above, Orwellian in all respects and reflects psychological projection, psychological warfare, or perhaps collective insanity.

The statements of various leaders in the West, from Obama to Kerry to Hollande to Merkel to Cameron to various NATO officials, have been warning that Russia will not only invade Ukraine, but that it may soon be invading the whole of Western Europe (and maybe even Kansas). It does make one curious as to whether or not the latest crop of speech writers have been “renditioned” from Hollywood’s “B” movie ranks to the various Western capitals. After all, how does one explain the “unreality of phantom Russian subs in Swedish waters, invading Russian armored columns that journalists inexplicably fail to photograph, and BUK missile launches whose existence Western security services refuse to prove by making their intelligence public?” (Byzantium 2014)

After weeks and then months of waiting for the Russians to invade Ukraine and Western Europe, and with nary a Soviet tank on the horizon, the West decided to take things into its own hands. Indicative of this has been the State Department’s propensity to utilize images lifted directly from video games, satellite pictures (apparently illustrated by children), and social media as “common sense” proof of a Russian invasion.

In an article entitled, “Russia Has Already Invaded Ukraine,” Strobe Talbott, President of the Brookings Institution, found it “Maddening and incomprehensible how governments and the media keep talking about the possibility, the danger, the threat of Russia invading,” as he believed that Russia had indeed already invaded (Gardels 2014). Mr. Talbot’s proof:

Russia invaded Ukraine early in the spring. They started with the so-called “little green men”—Russian soldiers without insignia on their green uniforms — then proceeded with uniforms with epaulets and the annexation of Crimea. Russia has been the force behind, and on the ground, with the separatists in eastern Ukraine. (Gardels 2014)

Mr. Talbot’s proof was, unfortunately, without forensic data — radar, satellite imagery, on the ground photographs, video of Russian tank columns crossing into Ukraine or, as has been the case with the State Department et al., not even “common sense” social media.

Mr. Talbot, however, did wax romantic for former Soviet leaders Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin, who he believed:

In these back-to-back tenures of the last president of the Soviet Union and the first president of post-Soviet Russia, Gorbachev and Yeltsin, over a period of 20 years, put Russia on a new and promising track — promising for Russia itself. (Gardels 2014)