Bolton Must Go
Srdja Trifkovic
Russia-Insider.com
Wed, May 22, 2019
Donald Trump won in November 2016 in part because he had promised to turn a new leaf in America’s global engagements. Three years ago he spoke against his opponent’s imperial delusions, voiced doubt about the utility of NATO, expressed certainty that he’d find a common language with Putin (declaring Crimea none of our business), promised there would be no more U.S-led wars in the Middle East (calling the war in Iraq “disastrous”), and pledged there would be no more regime-change operations.
All this was sacrilege to the duopoly of liberal-globalist hawks and neoconservative global hegemonists. These two cosmopolitan camps may differ on many more or less peripheral legislative matters, but on the big issue of opposing Trump’s foreign heresies they are virtually indistinguishable. Giving up the desire to dominate the world was never acceptable to most politicians, to the controllers of the mainstream media discourse and taxpayer-subsidized think-tank nomenklatura. More seriously, key components of the intelligence, national-security and military-industrial machines united in resisting Trump’s attempt to revamp realist criteria in defining “interests” and “threats.” The Swamp pulled ranks, with six lamentable results:
The military industrial complex has juicer contracts now than ever in U.S. history, justified by the hegemonistic assumptions of America’s full-spectrum dominance.
Trump has accepted the mantra of NATO Is Forever, and insists that its spending should be boosted to two percent of each member’s GDP.
America’s relations with Russia are worse than at any time since Ronald Reagan’s first term, and the tone of hysterical Russophobia is shriller than ever.
Handing Crimea to Ukraine—an impossible demand—is now a formal precondition for improved relations with Moscow.
The United States is on the verge of going to war against Iran, for no rational reason and with likely consequences far more disastrous than the Iraq fiasco.
The regime-change experiment in Venezuela has now turned into a charade, devoid of strategic purpose or tactically feasible moves to make it happen.
The seemingly irreversible continuity of Washington’s global strategy is apparent in a 250-page dossier published in early May by the official school of the United States’ Special Operations Command. It documents a decades-long history of Pentagon-backed interference around the world, in order to provide guidelines on how best to approach such efforts in the present and future.
Support to Resistance: Strategic Purpose and Effectiveness was compiled by Army Special Forces veteran Will Irwin of the official Joint Special Operations University. It provides an exhaustive analysis, in 47 case studies, of the methods used by the U.S. to undermine and overthrow foreign governments between 1941 and 2003. Notably, the numerous U.S.-orchestrated coups d’etats since World War II were not even listed, “as they did not involve legitimate resistance movements.”
The Rest…HERE
