The State Department Says Russia Is Invading Ukraine—Should We Believe It?

[newthinking]

The State Department Says Russia Is Invading Ukraine—Should We Believe It?
A memo to Angela Merkel from Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.
Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
September 2, 2014

http://www.thenation.com/article/181437/state-department-says-russia-invading-ukraine-should-we-believe-them


Angela Merkel (Reuters/Tobias Schwarz)

MEMORANDUM FOR: Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: Ukraine and NATO

[font size=2]
We the undersigned are long-time veterans of U.S. intelligence. We take the unusual step of writing this open letter to you to ensure that you have an opportunity to be briefed on our views prior to the NATO summit on September 4-5.

You need to know, for example, that accusations of a major Russian “invasion” of Ukraine appear not to be supported by reliable intelligence. Rather, the “intelligence” seems to be of the same dubious, politically “fixed” kind used 12 years ago to “justify” the U.S.-led attack on Iraq. We saw no credible evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq then; we see no credible evidence of a Russian invasion now. Twelve years ago, former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, mindful of the flimsiness of the evidence on Iraqi WMD, refused to join in the attack on Iraq. In our view, you should be appropriately suspicions of charges made by the U.S. State Department and NATO officials alleging a Russian invasion of Ukraine.

President Barack Obama tried yesterday to cool the rhetoric of his own senior diplomats and the corporate media, when he publicly described recent activity in the Ukraine, as “a continuation of what's been taking place for months now ... it's not really a shift.”

Obama, however, has only tenuous control over the policymakers in his administration—who, sadly, lack much sense of history, know little of war, and substitute anti-Russian invective for a policy. One year ago, hawkish State Department officials and their friends in the media very nearly got Mr. Obama to launch a major attack on Syria based, once again, on “intelligence” that was dubious, at best.
[/font]

Full Text:
http://www.thenation.com/article/181437/state-department-says-russia-invading-ukraine-should-we-believe-them

For the Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)
David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)
Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)
Elizabeth Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East (ret.)
Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (Ret.)
Coleen Rowley, Division Counsel & Special Agent, FBI (ret.)
Ann Wright, Col., US Army (ret.); Foreign Service Officer (resigned)

[Laughing Mirror]

1. Brandishing the old Russian hobgoblin

like a loaded gun to our collective temple as a way of justifying the expansion of NATO. That's what the State Department is doing here. What else can they can do, given the circumstances, but to fall back on the old jingoistic The Russians Are Coming. Perfectly understandable.

What is the real purpose of NATO anyway? NATO was supposed to have dissolved when the Soviet Union dissolved. USSR was NATO's reason for being, and when there was no longer any USSR there was no longer any real reason for NATO to exist. But instead of folding up its tent, it opened up new campgrounds in formerly enemy territory. It needed an enemy made-to-order to keep on expanding. But now it's reached its limit. So it makes up stories to justify the narrative. It's just that there are too many holes in the narrative for the story to cohere.

This sterling group of veteran intelligence professionals are thankfully the voice of sanity, versus the voice of insanity of the State Department. Thank heavens there is still some sanity in this country. Even if just this.

[ColesCountyDem]

2. NATO was NOT 'supposed to have dissolved when the Soviet Union dissolved'.

No member nation said such a thing at any time.

[Laughing Mirror]

4. If your enemy disbands

That gives you the right to expand into their former territory, then, to protect the people there from an enemy who no longer exists. I do understand that logic of expansion, as practiced by an empire, particularly one in decline. I just don't accept it.

Whenever the enemy du jour is announced, with military and media doing their part, whether it's Hussein or Assad, Khadaffi or Putin, the question I always ask myself is: how is this good for my country, how is this good for my community, how is this good for me?

Never have I received an answer that it was. It always turns out that it wasn't.

It doesn't always have to be that way though. Maybe one day it won't.

[grahamhgreen]

3. Kick