America expanded NATO and rearmed Germany a country that and invaded and nearly destroyed Russia twice in that century. We didn't keep to our treaties and we rarely ever do.

Russia was a weak superpower in the Cold War actually, they had been under rapid industrialization but were basically moving from being mostly farmland so it was superficial. The amount of power they had was greatly exaggerated. The thing is when you have the two LARGEST propaganda systems on Earth saying that Russia is indeed a very significant threat and that they are Socialist you can't really fight that with facts because people are too emotional about the situation.

If history says anything we will likely overstate Russias power and influence. Our "Containment" of them will really be more of a power grab to increase our influence all over the world.

What's interesting is the American public is kind of sick of this shit. You see the media and the administration and tons of people on the Hill talking about how awful Putin and Russia is. How they're going to take over places bit by bit and everything is going to hell, how terrible this is, but many in the public don't believe them and don't give a shit. We're sick of this lying crap, we don't believe the President when he says we have to invade a new place anymore and he looks like an idiot when everyone shuts him down.

So my prediction is the media will do more screaming, more wringing of hands and yelling at people about why don't they care about this or that. They'll make things up, sensationalize conflicts and basically use propaganda all while ignoring our crimes and situations we're responsible for.

This was long and pointless with no citations but I've decided I don't care, take this as my opinion and shove a salt lick down your throat.

"I know shit is very complicated and the answers aren't easy, but we can EASILY do better than this."

Sigh.

And who, now, tell me, are the "good guys" in Syria? We can't even get aid into the country; when we do, where is it going? Is it being diverted? Into whose hands? Is it feeding the troops, on either or both sides, who, rejuvenated by supplies, rally to fight and make it worse for everyone else?

The collapse of the Cold War has let the repressed sectarian and religious hatreds of a hundred years or more (the Serbians still fixate on a glorious defeat that happened in 1389...I'm not kidding) boil over across the planet...

This and the Norwegian bus stop advertisement for Syrian aid are amazing pieces---and I applaud them...

Two random factoids I can't quite resolve in my head:
1) American's think we spend 25% of our national budget on foreign; we actually spend somewhere between 1.5% and under 1 % depending on how you include certain payments (the Nordic countries embarrass us by spending 2-3X as much as us as percentage of GDP)...and

2) It is pretty much a demonstrable fact that we are now living in the most peaceful time in human history. How horrifying it must have been to live in any other time---
http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violence

sanctions could only bring a new cold war like state of affairs, not a resolution of this crisis. I believe Putin won't recall troops from Crimea until he plays that card at the negotiating table, probably demanding Ukraine abstains itself from any alliance with NATO or some shit like that ...

"Above all my heart goes out to the Ukrainian people, who are now wedged as pawns in the middle of a global power chess game. They're the real losers here.

'All we can do now is hope for a peaceful outcome for a terrible situation and prevent another full-blown Cold War between multiple superpowers.

'Until then, I'll keep telling the truth as I see it.'-from rant transcript

It gets weirder! In his last monthly newsletter, crypto-gram, he mentioned that people with clearance have asked him not to repeat the Snowdon leaks, because they will be forbidden to read his newsletter/blog!

A U.S. government employee e-mailed me, asking me not to post these on my blog. The government has a weird policy that exposed secrets are still secret, and government employees without clearances are prohibited from reading the classified paragraphs. I've heard this before. Basically, before exposure only people with a TOP SECRET clearance could read these paragraphs. After exposure, only people without any clearance at all can read these paragraphs. No, it doesn't make any sense.

The solution will be that someone will come up with better encryption/ways to confuse/overload the servers that classify all this shit they are piling up etc. It's a new cold war between freedom and control except it's not nation vs nation, it's the people vs their governments...

I'm not sure why anyone is surprised...

The US has a long storied history of destroying freedom. The prohibition, the Cold War years, post 911 etc. The fact that a lot of people still buy in to the comfortable lie that they live in the "land of the free" is because admitting they are meat puppets for a corrupt government is too bitter a pill too swallow + the US national sense of superiority to places like China because they do things better than those totalitarians...

This will not change. There is no analogous period in history to compare to. The participants of the French revolution or the American war of independance didn't have facebook or twitter to sit around whining on and feeling like they were making a difference. They got off their asses and rose up because the only alternative was to be ploughed under.

Online slacktivism is an acceptable panacea for the discontented masses, they have an outlet to complain while easily identifying themselves as 'persons of interest'.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'F106' to 'F106, delta dart, interceptor, fighter jet, cold war, flat spin' - edited by calvados

@enoch, if I sound evangelical, it's because I have an allergic reaction to misinformation and a deep aversion to disinformation...

Here are my comments, interspersed:

> and how come all your examples are the european countries that got fucked
> in the ass by corrupt currency and derivative speculators?"

By corrupt currency, do you mean the Euro? These are a big percentage of the so-called "1st world countries."

> are you working for goldman sachs?
> whats the deal man?

Are these borderline ad hominem, or did I miss something...

> denmark? finland?

Is that it, do you want to limit the evidence to the scandinavian countries? Fine, list for me the countries you want me to address and compare to the US or more free market economies and we will proceed from there.

> but its apparent you dont know shit about socialism.
> socialism-communism=not the same.

Personal attacks aside, communism is a type of socialism in the Marxist sense. But to clarify, please define 'socialism' as you think it should be defined, if something other than public control over the means of production.

> and no free market carny barker never seems to want to talk about.

Are you getting upset about something, or are you not calling me a "free market carny barker"?

> 1.how do you fix the currency issue with its pyramid scheme?

What is the currency issue? The central bank's monopoly in currency? You get rid of legal tender laws and let people decide what currency they want to use and accept.

> 2.how do create a level playing field for the wage slave? or debt slave?

You have to be more specific as to what "level playing field means in practice" so that I can answer this.

> 3.or can you outright buy people?

Do you mean slaves? No, that goes against free-market non-aggression and self-ownership principles.

> 4.since nothing is communal and there is no regulation.is there anything that
> cannot be commodified?

Again, please be more specific about what you mean by "commodified." Do you mean are you free to buy and sell anything as long as you don't violate self and property rights? Not clear what you mean here but I'm sure with some clarification I can address it.

> look man.i get it.lots of good things can happen with a free market. but so can
> a lot of bad. eyes open my man.

Sure, but please tell me, what specifically bad can happen in a free market that cannot happen as bad or worse in a non-free market?

> reminds me of the scientist who came up with game theory.
> from the rand institute i think. the whole cold war was set up on this dudes
> principles of self-interest. did a bunch of testing on dudes and the data
> seemed conclusive...until he did the same experiment with secretaries. turns
> but they were unwilling to dick each other over and were more prone to co-
> operate with each other.

How is this relevant? People like to cooperate. That's the basis for the voluntary free market and why it works.

> well how about them apples.co-operation as a way on interacting. ya dont
> say? very interesting.

I agree. Voluntary interaction equals cooperation. That is the free market. Coercion is the non-free market. Is there disagreement here, because I don't see it.

> i know we both agree that what we have now is a clusterfuck.
> and i agree that the free market should have a place,that its even vital. but
> unrestricted free markets? naw..no thanks.

I still don't know the specifics of how exactly you want to "restrict it" and how specifically you want to restrict it. You must forgive me if I don't think you are as competent to restrict me and my life and my business and I myself am. The same with your life and business, I am not qualified to restrict it.
Who is then? Specifically, "who" do you want to restrict you, and your freedom to engage in free trade?

@Trancecoach
you are starting to sound damn near evangelical about this free market lovefest you are having.
and this:
"Socialism promotes equality: "it's only virtue is equal misery for all" (with the exception of the rulers, of course)"

thats a beaut.

and how come all your examples are the european countries that got fucked in the ass by corrupt currency and derivative speculators? are you working for goldman sachs?
whats the deal man?

how about throwing out some countries are doing pretty damn ok?
denmark?finland?

ill give ya props for knowing capitalism and all the positive bennies that can go with it but its apparent you dont know shit about socialism.
socialism-communism=not the same.

so while we are at it lets discuss some things that are from the dark side of capitalism and no free market carny barker never seems to want to talk about.

1.how do you fix the currency issue with its pyramid scheme?
2.how do create a level playing field for the wage slave? or debt slave?
3.or can you outright buy people?
4.since nothing is communal and there is no regulation.is there anything that cannot be commodified?

look man.i get it.lots of good things can happen with a free market.
but so can a lot of bad.
eyes open my man.

reminds me of the scientist who came up with game theory.
from the rand institute i think.
the whole cold war was set up on this dudes principles of self-interest.
did a bunch of testing on dudes and the data seemed conclusive...
until he did the same experiment with secretaries.
turns out they were unwilling to dick each other over and were more prone to co-operate with each other.

well how about them apples.co-operation as a way on interacting.
ya dont say?
very interesting.

the scientist later recanted and dismissed his own study(years later though).

i know we both agree that what we have now is a clusterfuck.
and i agree that the free market should have a place,that its even vital.
but unrestricted free markets?
naw..no thanks.

The gentleman starting at 00:30 and the lady starting at 00:47 are the ones that make most sense by pointing out the obvious:
* Its is communism that has imploded, not capitalism. The USSR is dead, and China is essentially capitalistic.
* Since the end of the cold war, an astonishing two billion people have left poverty or extreme poverty (and not to mention the increase in the number of democracies since the end of communism). 'The West' might have stagnated, but humanity as a whole is much better off.

If the USA threatened Russia in any way Russia could join the EU or gang up with China. No cold war this time. Plus too much communication these days.

More about this ultimate snow fort: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Iceworm

"Project Iceworm was the code name for a top secret US Army program during the Cold War to build a network of mobile nuclear missile launch sites under the Greenland ice sheet. The ultimate objective of placing medium-range missiles under the ice - close enough to Moscow to strike targets within the Soviet Union - was kept secret from the Danish government. To study the feasibility of working under the ice, a highly publicized "cover" project, known as "Camp Century" was launched in 1960. However, unsteady ice conditions within the ice sheet caused the project to be cancelled in 1966."

Aren't we all glad that the Cold War is over and 100 nukes weren't sent all over the world due to the possibility of being mistaken that this was a hostile attack?

You're assuming a reasonable person. A suicide bomber is not reasonable. Maybe this person's family is already dead to american drone attacks (or whatnot), which set him on the path of wanting to destroy america. My point is, you can't assume these kinds of people act in a reasonable way, or that they even know that everyone has weapons. Avoiding nuclear disaster from the cold war was only done because people were smart and cautious; if it had been George W instead of JFK at the cuba crisis, would the same thing have happened? Maybe, maybe not - it doesn't take much for it all to come crashing down. What if it had been Saddam Hussein instead of JFK?