Comments by "John Roberts" (@view1st) on "Neutrality Studies" channel.

  1. The United States wants to divide the world, controlling Europe like it did from the 1940's to the 1980's. It wants to recreate the cold war and force the European Union to trade mainly with itself, the USA and its client states and will probably try to prop up its currency the dollar by introducing an EU-wide CBDC, possibly using the pooled gold reserves of European countries in an attempt to make its soft currency hard.
    1
  2. ​ @aachoocrony5754 ... and the EU.
    1
  3. Certainly since the creation of the CIA.
    1
  4. It's certainly made them dependent on EU handouts.
    1
  5. You have to destroy the village to save the village. You have to destroy democracy to save democracy. That is the attitude of the USA.
    1
  6. The USA is trying to replicate the conditions of cold war 1.0 with cold war 2.0. It's trying to isolate both Russia and China from the world economy like it did in the cold war. Unfortunately for the USA, China is the biggest economy in the world (fake statistics of the USA aside) and Russia is a major supplier of the world's raw materials. In trying to bring back manufacturing to the USA they think they can just deindustrialise the rest of the world and cut off Asia from trading with Europe and Latin America. Uncle Sam is like King Canute trying to hold back the tide.
    1
  7. No, Russia was.
    1
  8. ​ @ctrlaltdebug Don't forget the money laundering and fraud/corruption.
    1
  9. More like the USA. The USA's military-intelligence apparatus has spent 70 years systematically subverting genuine popular democracy, both at home and in its crypto-colonies, all in the service of a parasitical plutocracy. And Germany, make no mistake about it, is one of the USA's *crypto-colonies. — * I use the phrase 'crypto-colony' because the USA tends to deny (along with Western media in general) that it has colonies, or that European countries like Germany could ever be subject to American neo-colonialism. The idea is dismissed out of hand as ludicrous. Colonialism in the eyes of western media and academia is something that disappeared circa 1970 and, if it still exists at all, it does so as a relic and only in the Global South, a legacy of European – certainly not US – imperialism. Heaven forbid modern Europeans could be colonies or that Israel is a straight-up American colony in the Middle East with its citizens being de facto US citizens á la France and its empire.
    1
  10. The USA adopted the 1930's German model of economics regarding its economy. It implemented a military-industrial economic policy where military research and development and its spin-offs were the drivers of economic growth and not primarily civilian manufacturing.
    1
  11. Like NATO it's an organisation controlled by the United States in any issue of substance (and for everything else, controlled by WEF, Davos, etc.).
    1
  12. China says hold my beer.
    1
  13. Empire of the USA or corporate-banker empire.
    1
  14. 22:27 Sorry Pascal but with regards the USA "dismantling" USAID you are, in my opinion, simply wrong. It's rather quite the opposite: they're merely reorganising USAID to make it even more secretive and more cost-effective.
    1
  15. All part of a plan by US strategic planners to subordinate, divide and impoverish Europe and pave the way for the right wing to gain power across the continent, shoring up neoliberal rentier corporatism and securing Europe for the US empire.
    1
  16. Your use of the word CCP for CPC instantly identifies you as either a bot or someone who is working, wittingly or unwittingly, as a mouthpiece of United States propaganda. At least be more subtle.
    1
  17. War is not just military but also economic and political. Economic sanctions and political ostracism (eg. North Korea, Cuba) can also be considered acts of war.
    1
  18. And even if they did they would still face the same demands from both within and without to police their content in accordance with EU, SCO guidelines and harmonise their laws with the established powers.
    1
  19. What rule or law did they invoke, or what rationale did they give to justify their actions and did they clearly break the law?
    1
  20. ​ @hong3170  And to a large extent the mass media and education systems of the West too. A vast propaganda and perception-forming network whose tentacles stretch right around the world, infecting every social institution from academia to media.
    1
  21. ​ @ashfield1425  The 'free' market has never existed in history. It's a myth. Every western country that ever attained first world status did so by state subsidies, state planning and protectionism. And for the most economically developed, systematically destroying rivals and extracting the surplus value of their labour and raw materials.
    1
  22. They aren't really conservative. They adopted the term rather craftily as a deception because it was familiar to people and had legitimacy. It was a way of making people think they were something they were not. The same goes for neo-liberals, another term hijacked to serve an insidious agenda. Neither of them or either conservative or liberal but, rather, more akin to extreme reactionaries who hated communism and socialism and everything they stood for. Perhaps fascist or corporatist may be too strong a word but they certainly come from the same stable, ideologically speaking. Obviously, they couldn't call themselves fascist so they lied and pretended they were conservative liberals. In short, they are imposters, wolves in sheep's clothing.
    1
  23. I fear you might be right. Unfortunately.
    1
  24. ​ friendlhi  Agreed. Not surprising as it was created by the USA and wasn't a genuine project of European countries.
    1
  25. Maybe a catastrophe for Russia but I don't think it is for China. Indeed China is probably the one country out of all the others that persuaded Putin to give up on Syria. It wants stability and a stake in the reconstruction of Syria and what's left of Palestine. Pipelines, roads, canals... the chance of securing building contracts in Syria and progressing with the Belt and Road Initiative in the greater Middle East are more important that propping up a country in a war it cannot win.
    1
  26. It looks to me to be highly probable that the main actors in this drama have already worked out a deal between themselves on how to divide Syria into various spheres of influence.
    1
  27. The media use it as a scare word and means of deligitimation, like they use the word 'Taliban' for the Afghan government or 'Houthis' instead of Yemenis.
    1
  28. Capitalism/corporatism might be able generate great wealth, but only communism/socialism can distribute that wealth equitably. Ideally, the two can be syncretised into an optimal system of wealth creation and wealth distribution. Wealth that goes to the top 10% and leaves everyone else scrambling for the scraps is not a morally defensible position. Where we can feed the world's population several times over yet people still starve because of a fanatical belief in the monopolising by private interests of resources vital to the healthy functioning of entire societies is not good. The world is suffering from a pathological obsession with the ownership of private property and selfish individualism, none more so than those in the West. It needs to end.
    1
  29. ​ @Pid75  Mexico?
    1
  30. ​ @kuchingkuching  Careful, your jealousy is showing. The whole point of western imperialism and colonialism throughout the centuries up to the very present we live in is, and remains, to seize the wealth of the world's nations to enrich themselves, confiscating the global commons that should by rights belong to all of us for the benefit of just a greedy, selfish few, whether those few be an aristocracy or a plutocracy. It is the very nature of capitalism and the feudalism it grew out of to concentrate all wealth in t their own hands by monopolising resources. Do you think that artificial scarcity caused by capitalism would just go away if the West were to get its dirty hands on Russia's resources?
    1
  31. You said it yourself: the Golan Heights are being illegally occupied by Israel. Officially, under international law the Heights are recognised as territory belonging to Syria. Acknowledging that fact is not necessarily a negation of the legitimate security concerns of Israel but merely a recognition of its illegality.
    1
  32. I wouldn't go as far as saying he was a traitor. Maybe naive, but not really a traitor because he was deceived by the USA. Yeltsin, in the other hand, was in my opinion a traitor.
    1
  33. European Governments cannot be held to account when they are not accountable to the public commonwealth but to private moneyed interests.
    1
  34. ​​ @djape1977 like Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union. Or the USA's invasion of Vietnam and Afghanistan.
    1