Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
I think you're pretty spot on with the assessment.
The only thing I would possibly take issue with is this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Avvakum
I think these Neo-Soviet strategists that operate to this day, do and have made various mistakes and miscalculations, largely due to one man; George Herbert Walker Bush, during his Presidency. I kind of sense this when I saw an old photo of Gen. Ion Pacepa's book; 'Red Horizons' sitting on the desk at the Oval Office. He would've known then that the Russians and Chinese were full of shit. So, what did he do? Instead of working to get rid of NATO and dismantle it as the Crypto-Bolsheviks wished, he expanded NATO membership.
If this is the case, why did GHWB oversee one of the largest draw downs of our military? If I recall correctly he cut 1/3 of our forces after the Wall fell. He also could have pushed for a purge of sorts of the Soviet/Russian leadership as was done when the Nazi regime fell.
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ryan Ruck
I think you're pretty spot on with the assessment.
The only thing I would possibly take issue with is this:
If this is the case, why did GHWB oversee one of the largest draw downs of our military? If I recall correctly he cut 1/3 of our forces after the Wall fell. He also could have pushed for a purge of sorts of the Soviet/Russian leadership as was done when the Nazi regime fell.
Well, I think it's because he was also correct with another assessment; that while the 'liberalization' was indeed false, it did happen to be true that the Soviet Bloc economies were in the tank and the Commies would need huge infusions of cash to prop them up, and that in the interim they would not be capable of any military adventures at all, giving Bush free reign to deal with their factotum in the Middle East, Saddam Hussein. What Bush could not have realized at the time is that part of the reason for the economic collapse was that the Communists were monetizing everything of value, trillions, looting everything and putting it into the global financial system. There is or was something called the 'Global Security Program', chaired by Prince Charles and Mikhail Gorbachev, that alone has a rumored slush fund of 26 Trillion dollars worth.
That's enough money to corrupt almost anyone on Earth, and put a fatal reliance by the financial giants on these funds, on or off the books. Over a million Russians died of starvation in the streets in the 1990's.... And V. Putin is now one of the richest men in the World.
The Russians are not bothering to go to war militarily against the world yet. Bush got peace in his time, and when he saw the false liberalization and the years went by after his presidency without a return to Marxist-Leninism, he and others assumed the 'best'; communists being corrupted by their stolen loot. I am somewhat inclined to think these days however that the hodgepodge Despotic ideology of Eurasianism is a replacement for Communism proper, so that the Kremlin can maintain it's policies of Anti-Americanism and striving for World Domination, without being too straightjacketed by a rigid Marxist-Leninism.
The 'Beauty' of Eurasianism from a Chekist Neo-Soviet perspective is that Communists can work with Islamists, Commissars with Monarchists, 'Orthodox Christians' with Atheists, Jews and Anti-semites, Fascists with Liberals and Leftists, Shamans and Neo-Pagans and so forth, under the big umbrella that Alexander Dugin has provided for Putin and his cronies. Eurasianism has a long pedigree, going back to the 1920's in the Soviet Union. At the time the ideas of Eurasianism were being used by the Communists as a kind of Front, but today it's been dusted off and actually promoted. This gives Golitsyn credit, while accounting for moves and behaviors of the Russian political elite that would be impossible to a regular Marxist Leninist. I think that in the inner corridors of power in the Kremlin, they planned on replacing Communism with Eurasianism all along as far back as the late 1950's. Many people grew up in the Soviet Union being hyper-patriotic about the Soviet Union, and even 'Bolshevist', without being Marxist-Leninist as such, and Eurasianism can hold these people together when the Kremlin tries to revive the 'Soviet Union 2.0' project.
So, Bush and others like him in the know probably felt that the false liberalization and restructuring would be an opportunity for a draw-down of forces and that former Communists would become too addicted to their new-found wealth to challenge the global system itself. The fatal flaw in Westerners in general is that they saw people being corrupted by an evil ideology, and not evil people choosing evil ideologies that best mesh with their evil desires....
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
Av,
Went ahead and moved your thread over to this forum since it is a serious TAA discussion thread and so that it doesn't get buried under things like the Friday Follies and Beer threads. :D
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
And here I was about to post jokes in this thread... /chuckles
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ryan Ruck
Av,
Went ahead and moved your thread over to this forum since it is a serious TAA discussion thread and so that it doesn't get buried under things like the Friday Follies and Beer threads. :D
I don't know, beer is a pretty serious subject to me, lol....
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
It's not Eurasianism that has replaced Commuism, Marxist-Leninist Communism. Marxist Leninism is behind Eurasianism to an even greater degree than in the 1920's, just that the undercover Bolsheviks are using this 'Eurasianism' more widely and effectively as a Mask-and not even an original one, at that.
Communism is not dead, it's not even hardly disguised or in hibernation anymore, and if we're not careful it will soon overcome every nation on Earth.
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
New lies for old... downloaded. I recommened that you post the golitsyn predictions.
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
Communism hasn't changed. It never went away. It was rarely disguised, except here in the US by the Leftists who wanted to hide it and chocolate coat it.
Communism wants to destroy the world. Why? It is the Evil Empire of Star Wars that's why.
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
American Patriot
Communism hasn't changed. It never went away. It was rarely disguised, except here in the US by the Leftists who wanted to hide it and chocolate coat it.
Communism wants to destroy the world. Why? It is the Evil Empire of Star Wars that's why.
The 'Nameless Beast' of the Apocalypse, as Winston Churchill once called it a few decades before his embrace of Stalin at Tehran and Yalta, apologizing to the Great Helmsman for the earlier anticommunist rhetoric of his youth...
Yep, really simple actually. The aim is the destruction of civilization and the enslavement of all mankind, the boot grinding the face, forever.
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
samizdat
New lies for old... downloaded. I recommened that you post the golitsyn predictions.
Where is it? I'd love to.
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
falcon
Thanks falcon! I used to have the book and also his 'Perestroika Deception', Jan Sejna's 'We will bury you', 'Red Cocaine' by John Douglass, 'Thru the eyes of the enemy' by Stanislav Lunev, 'Spetsnaz' by Victor Suvorov, 'Red Horizons' by General Pacepa, and many other materials which I was slowly digesting, not willingly I might add. And then one night the girl in the apartment upstairs from me went to work with her bathtub running and destroyed almost everything I owned....
No insurance either.
2 Attachment(s)
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
Anybody need a picture to know that Communism never died, it just went 'silent running'?
Attachment 1440
Or this pic?
Attachment 1441
These pictures are of statues of Stalin and a rally in a public square under a statue of Lenin, both statues in the eastern ukraine/southern russia area. If there were statues of Hitler in modern Germany in public places of honor, and Germany's government consisted of 'former' Nazis and was headed up by a 'former' Gestapo and SS man, I have no doubt people would wonder if Nazism was just under the surface there controlling things. But when it comes to the Left, so many even on the Right can see no Communism or Neo-Soviets anymore.
It is I believe a literally diabolical blindness in origin.
1 Attachment(s)
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
Is it just me or does the statue of Lenin look a lot like an oversized Monopoly play piece?
http://www.transasianaxis.com/attach...tid=1442&stc=1
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
I am never more convinced than now of the essential correctness of Anatoly Golitsyn and the other defectors and whistleblowers who posit a false 'death of Communism' by Soviet strategists, who want to create a Totalitarian One-World Bolshevik Government.
I spend a good deal of what little free time I have on political forums on the internet, and I can tell you that Cyberspace is FULL of Marxist Leninist Demoniacs. They 'collapsed' Communism temporarily, so they could infiltrate the institutions of the Free World and undermine them from within while they worked to build up an even stronger Soviet 2.0 Bloc for the future.... Once everybody else was too weak to effectively resist the coming open Communist military takeover. That, and they have an opportunity to take a page from Antonio Gramsci and attempt to 'Communize the inner man'.
I go online to talk about these things, and the so-called RIGHT WING is more vehement in denying me any credibility whatsoever. I think Pat Buchanan has GOT to be a Soviet Agent from way back; maybe HE'S 'DEEP THROAT'? I think Kissinger is one too. Anyway, I think the Ron and Rand Paul faction is also full of it and as many times as they and their supporters have been on RT....
I guess few will believe us until the Hammer-and-Sickle is flying over the White House, St. Peter's Basilica, and Buckingham Palace, for example.
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
I'm pretty "Right Wing".
I believe the Russians haven't changed a bit since the 1960s. The Soviet Union was nothing more than a construction to appear more powerful than it was.
See I was there when Reagan walked out Gorbachev at The ReykjavÃ*k Summit. I was present for the "Tear Down this Wall" Speech (Not physically on either site, but I was involved in the back ground of both the Summit and the speech, I was at a different site in both cases.) But we were involved and I was there through the years the Soviet Union fell.
I never trusted the Russians. Reagan said "Trust, but verify" in regards to the SALT talks and nukes and he is RIGHT. Take their word, but VERIFY WHAT THEY SAY.
That was one of his most diplomatic statements ever made. Because if you say "Sorry we can't trust you" you can't ever make headway in communications.
But if you VERIFY what they are saying, you can BUILD trust.
The Russians NEVER, EVER wanted to do that and to this day they will test us, and check us, but won't give us the same respect.
Re: "Golitsyn Thesis" 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by
American Patriot
I'm pretty "Right Wing".
I believe the Russians haven't changed a bit since the 1960s. The Soviet Union was nothing more than a construction to appear more powerful than it was.
See I was there when Reagan walked out Gorbachev at The ReykjavÃ*k Summit. I was present for the "Tear Down this Wall" Speech (Not physically on either site, but I was involved in the back ground of both the Summit and the speech, I was at a different site in both cases.) But we were involved and I was there through the years the Soviet Union fell.
I never trusted the Russians. Reagan said "Trust, but verify" in regards to the SALT talks and nukes and he is RIGHT. Take their word, but VERIFY WHAT THEY SAY.
That was one of his most diplomatic statements ever made. Because if you say "Sorry we can't trust you" you can't ever make headway in communications.
But if you VERIFY what they are saying, you can BUILD trust.
The Russians NEVER, EVER wanted to do that and to this day they will test us, and check us, but won't give us the same respect.
BOTH sides have to have strong leaders. With Obama, I know we don't, and with Putin he may be a strong leader for Russia, but a poor one for the world at large, I don't know. He is still a riddle in many ways, which is what he prefers, i'm sure.
