Media hysteria over ‘Russian spy ship’ off US coast, but ignores provocations against Russia

CNN recently reported on a Russian spy ship 100 miles off the coast of the Carolinas with all the fearmongering and hysteria you’ve come to expect.

“Outfitted with a variety of high-tech spy equipment and designed to intercept communications signals, the Viktor Leonov was observed operating in the Caribbean last week, a US defense official told CNN…The Russian ship routinely performs this mission. The ship sailed along the east coast of the United States in February and March of last year, lingering in international waters just off the coast of US naval installations.” The report said

After noting the ship has a history of sailing in the vicinity of Naval installations, CNN goes on to assure readers that:

“Two US military officials said the Russian ship is being tracked by the destroyer USS Cole and other naval assets”

Already one can infer from the report it was intended to convey two things:

1. That Russians regularly sail dangerous spy ships in US waters. Even though the report admits the ship was in international waters, it quickly brushes over that crucial detail, showing that the message is to propagate the idea that Russians are endangering US shores.
2. To assure readers of US strength (even if Russia has no intentions of threatening the US).

These agendas work in tandem: “Look at the big scary Russians! Don’t worry, we are really tough! We spend more on our military (while lagging behind in unimportant issues such as education) than the top ten countries put together! But our military is STILL underfunded! Remember to support your Neo-Con candidates…because we don’t have enough wars, and there are enemies everywhere!”

The report relies on the condition that most Americans are too stupid to read alternative media, or to pay attention to the military adventurism and provocative moves of their own state, let alone possess the critical thinking skills to question why the US has an unprecedented hundreds of military bases around the world, and if that could cause other powers to feel threatened.

As a matter of fact, the entire Mainstream Media relies on the assumption that the following statement is true.

This is because the moment one begins questioning the narratives presented to them, as well as their own biases, and begins to see the world from the perspective of another nation, they immediately inhale a massive Redpill which opens their eyes to reality.

The reality is the presence of Russia spy ships is precipitated by the vastly superior capacity and gleeful sabre-rattling for aggression the US arrays against Russia on a daily basis.

Before we even begin to discuss the ways the US passive-aggressively has threatened Russia, let’s realize the massive difference in military budgets the two countries have.

If one does their own research i.e. simply google “US military budget vs the World”, they can find the US has been consistently dwarfing not only Russia, but indeed the rest of the WORLD in military spending.

The US is actually more threatening to Russia if it performs a certain provocative action, than Russia would be to the US if she performed the exact same action. The reason for that is not a double standard, but entirely based on the massive disparity in the Military budget; when a nation has such a massive budget, any threat they make is magnified by the difference in the budget. For example, if China were to threaten Buhtan, that threat would be a lot more dangerous to Buhtan than it would be to China if Buhtan had made the same threat. While Russia is a superpower, the US outspends the world on weapons, and that disparity is a potential threat in and of itself.

While spending does not directly equal strength, and Russia is more than capable of defending the Motherland, one can already see the narrative that the US has an underfunded military and that Russia and China are dangerous to them doesn’t hold water.

If Russia is truly threatening the US with their budget far more than thrice as small, then the US needs to rethink what they are spending that budget on. The buttom line is Russia can not expected to react to provications from such a massive war machine laying down. Russia means no threat to anyone, she merely disires to protect herself.

One of the many ways they waste money is the maintenance of over 800 foreign military installations which house their war machine, as they cry they aren’t protected enough. Along with a fraction of the budget, who wants to guess how many bases Russia has on foreign soil.

Nine; Russia has a grand total of nine bases outside the countries borders, and they’re all located in the near abroad. The distance between the massive Russian borders and these bases almost entirely located within the former Soviet Union is a fraction of the distance between the US and its foreign bases.

One can also infer simply from that fact, that if the Soviet Union was thousands of kilometers from US soil (excluding Alaska), then these Russian bases in the former Soviet Union are also thousands of kilometers from US soil. The same can not be said for the US bases, many of which are located within striking distance of Russia. It is from these bases the US regularly deploys their military in provocative actions against Russia.

In the photo above, US soldiers in Estonia display an American flag literally a stone throw away from the Russian border, with the medieval Russian fortress of Ivangorod behind them in Russia. Imagine the outrage if Russian soldiers stood at the US-Mexican border with a Russian flag.

This is merely a microcosm of how the US behaves towards Russia. While American patriots may be understandably upset to find an alleged foreign spycraft in their waters, they must take an honest look at how their country behaves towards others.

As a matter of fact, the Journal of Strategic Culture has already reported on American naval provocations in Russian territorial waters, using warships far more dangerous than a “spy ship”.

The Navy Times argues that “While President Trump has expressed interest in repairing US relations with Russia, some analysts say the U.S. must step up its aerial and maritime patrols in response to Russia’s own increase of deployed naval forces in the Black Sea. The increasing prevalence of tension and danger in the area signal that it might be time to get tough.”

So the Pentagon is getting tough and records that since the middle of last year the guided missile destroyers USS Carney and USS Porter conducted five “maritime security operations” in the Black Sea, and the guided missile cruiser USS Huế City held exercises with the Ukrainian navy ship Balta.

According to the US Navy the USS Carney “is equipped with the world’s most sophisticated weaponry systems. She is fitted with missiles that reach extended ranges. Land attack cruise missile strike capability is provided by Tomahawk missiles, which are launched from the MK 41 Vertical Launching System. Additionally, Carney has Harpoon anti-surface missiles.” It’s just the sort of warship that contributes to an atmosphere of stability and security.

It has escaped the notice of the Pentagon and its sub-office in Brussels that Russia has a Black Sea coastline of 800 kilometres, excluding Crimea, and has every right to regard that area as home waters — just as it has every right to sail in and fly over the Baltic.

The USS Carney has also been spotted off Russia’s Baltic coast, near Saint Petersburg, Putin’s hometown and the former capital of the Russian Empire. Russia will only naturally begin reacting with reciprocal actions if US ships keep sailing so obviously into her waters. The report raises a good reminder that one must consider context…the black sea is in Russia’s backyard, whereas the US is at the other end of the world. The report also shows the arrogance and bias of the Mainstream Media’s cheerleading department, based on how they frame the actions of US ships compared to Russian ones.

“US destroyer races to Russia-dominated Black Sea to ‘ensure security and stability’.” The US Navy Times joined in by announcing that “US Navy ruffles Russian feathers in the Black Sea” and Stars and Stripes reported the US 6th Fleet’s Captain Tate Westbrook as saying that “US ships will continue to enter the Black Sea and work with our allies and partners to ensure maritime security and stability,” but nobody gave an example of insecurity.

So Russians are expected to view the encroachment upon their waters of a country which dwarfs the world in military spending, which has been openly hostile towards Russia for the past several decades, as a peacekeeping mission. NATO expanded eastward since the fall of the Soviet Union, whereas the Russian borders if anything shrunk; NATO has been involved in brutal wars in the Middle East and Yugoslavia, and Russia is supposed to view this expansion as security? How would you feel if an old enemy who constantly threatened you years ago, began approaching you with heavy artillery and machine guns, and protested against your defensive posturing by claiming you were both now friends. This is what NATO encroachment feels like for Russia.

The current US defense secretary Mad-Dog Mattis once claimed: “It’s fun to shoot some people. I’ll be right up there with you. I like brawling.” and yet Russia is expected to view the US as peaceful responsible partners, and the world is expected to see Russia as a violent dangerous state.

There is a massive double standard here. If US ships are in Russian waters, they must be doing good deeds out there, keeping everyone safe, certainly posing no threat to Russia, or even more arrogantly, they are there to make sure the Russians don’t dare threaten their neighbors, whereas the presence of Russian ships near the US waters is a clear sign of aggression and dastardly deeds.

One can only hope the double standard is obvious at this point.