• Talking Arms Proliferation on Chinese Television

    March 28, 2015

    Tags: ,
    Posted in: Afghanistan, Embassy/State, Iraq, Military

    So how’s that war on terror going? Well, it may not be very successful in actually stopping any terrorism, but it sure as hell has been profitable for America’s arms manufacturers. I was on Chinese CCTV recently to discuss the issue.

    Part I

    Part II

    Related Articles:

    Copyright © 2020. All rights reserved. The views expressed here are solely those of the author(s) in their private capacity.

  • Recent Comments

    • chuck nasmith said...


      War Is A Racket …

      03/28/15 1:44 PM | Comment Link

    • John Poole said...


      The Pentagon with its beribboned gangsters has a tax payer funded shakedown scheme. They run a faux protection racket. The old gangsters would threaten to burn your business unless you paid for their “protection” and would indeed burn a few shops to make their point. The pentagon constantly creates new harm possibilities to guarantee you’ll always pay.

      03/28/15 3:12 PM | Comment Link

    • Kyzl Orda said...


      Thank you, Peter, it is always enjoyable listening to or watching your interviews. It’s great to actually learn something new that is factual, and come away with new information to reflect on I had not considered before.

      In the face of a strong-military industrial culture driving our policies at the present moment, what if any prospects are there for a bolstered foreign service and adding alternate views to how these conflicts are to be conducted and handled? It seems like around 2003, the foreign service has had its wings further clipped by the anti-government-hating conservatives, and the Clinton team did ZERO to reform that mess preferring to keep the status quo instead while writing letters in praise of Kissinger and stifling in-house discussion on Iraq and efforts to address and reform how our aid and diplomacy were being (mis)used

      The Washington Post had some great inside stories on the policy differences among the various institutions leading up to the Iraq invasion and now, of course, it’s silence and cricket chirps

      03/28/15 4:54 PM | Comment Link

    • John Poole said...


      Ike -if given a chance from the great beyond to update his prescient acronym might add another C to make it the MICC (Military Industrial Congressional Complex).

      03/28/15 5:03 PM | Comment Link

    • bloodypitchfork said...


      Yeah, well I’d add the prefix S.. for Stinking…ie..SMICC.

      03/28/15 6:07 PM | Comment Link

    • bloodypitchfork said...


      Peter, nice to see a discussion on the MIC. However, by the time it was over, I wanted to throw my shoe at that guy every time he said..”the fact of the matter is…”


      03/28/15 6:31 PM | Comment Link

    • teri said...


      Thank God there is one person who can speak the truth and speak it well. Just watch your back, Peter. Here there be dragons.

      03/28/15 9:46 PM | Comment Link

    • bloodypitchfork said...


      teri said…

      “Thank God there is one person who can speak the truth and speak it well. Just watch your back, Peter. Here there be dragons.”

      Indeed. The lesions of the perennial abscess on the ass of mankind are everywhere.

      03/29/15 12:42 AM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      Keep this up and the War Party Google Nazis will be attacking your website.


      03/30/15 11:39 AM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      Hey, Google, when are you going to shutdown ads for these “hateful” publications?

      On Thursday, the New York Times printed an op-ed that urged the bombing of Iran as an alternative to reaching a diplomatic agreement that would sharply curtail Iran’s nuclear program and ensure that it was used only for peaceful purposes. The Post published a similar “we-must-bomb-Iran” op-ed two weeks ago.

      The Times’ article by John Bolton, a neocon scholar from the American Enterprise Institute, was entitled “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran.” It followed the Post’s op-ed by Joshua Muravchik, formerly at AEI and now a fellow at the neocon-dominated School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins. [For more on that piece, see Consortiumnews.com’s “Neocon Admits Plan to Bomb Iran.”]

      Both articles called on the United States to mount a sustained bombing campaign against Iran to destroy its nuclear facilities and to promote “regime change” in Tehran. Ironically, these “scholars” rationalized their calls for unprovoked aggression against Iran under the theory that Iran is an aggressive state, although Iran has not invaded another country for centuries.

      03/30/15 2:32 PM | Comment Link

    Leave A Comment

    Mail (will not be published) (required)