Paul Craig Roberts: A Revolution Will Break Out In The USA In Two Months


The United States and its Constitution have two months left, after which the country will be covered by a wave of "color revolution", writes the famous American political и economic columnist Paul Craig Roberts on his personal blog.


One of the leading US investigative journalists and editor of The Washington Post, Bob Woodward, reported that former Pentagon chief General James Mattis and former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coates (both fired in 2019 by the US President) discussed "collective action" to remove Donald Trump from office.

Trump is dangerous. It is unusable

- said Mattis.

The same thing was once said in the Pentagon and the CIA about President John F. Kennedy. When they say the president is "dangerous," they mean that he is dangerous to their personal budget. By "unsuitability" they mean that he is not a supporter of war, and therefore will not increase spending on defense and security. They do not want this, since they serve in the interests of the military-industrial complex, and not for the good of their country.

Trump, like Kennedy, wants to normalize relations with Russia and bring back American troops that are involved in military operations overseas, increasing the profits of contractors. To stop Kennedy, they killed him. To stop Trump, they concocted a Rush Gate, full of wild, unsubstantiated and completely unsubstantiated charges, and then tried to organize impeachment. But this attempt was unsuccessful.

Now they decided to use the "color revolution" against Trump in the presidential elections in November 2020. We have reached the point in the collapse of our country that the mere statement of an obvious fact is no longer believed. The American and European media have long been under the control of the CIA. Newspapers, TV channels and websites are not suppliers of real News... They present events in the required “deep state” interpretation so that reality does not interfere with the agenda.

There are two CIAs. The first department is a well-known department that provides more or less objective information to politicians. The second is covert operations management, which kills people and overthrows intractable governments.

President Kennedy recognized the threat and said he was going to "tear the CIA into a thousand pieces," but they pushed ahead and killed him. The CIA could easily have killed Trump, but the lone assassin has been used too many times to be believed. So they decided to get rid of Trump in a different way.

After the CIA overthrows Trump, they will use the Antifa and Black Lives Matter movements to fuel racial war. After that, the population will completely submit to the CIA, because in the United States, liars are more trusted than those who tell the truth.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed oshЫbku Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

21 comment
Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.
I have an account? Sign in

  1. _AMUHb_ Offline
    _AMUHb_ (_AMUHb_) 15 September 2020 18: 54
    +4
    • 4
    • 0
    then piss off...
  2. beeper Offline
    beeper 15 September 2020 19: 34
    -3
    • 1
    • 4
    Something too exaggerated this Paul Craig Roberts, in whose interests he is doing this ?! what
    1. 123 Offline
      123 (123) 15 September 2020 19: 54
      10
      • 10
      • 0
      Not the fact that it thickens. Today I looked, a man came up to a police car, judging by his peculiar outfit (half-down pants) and a characteristic gait, apparently an Afronegro and fired a clip from a pistol into the window. Two police officers in the hospital, hit the man in the skull, took out the woman's jaw. And a herd of dark-skinned "sympathizers" gathered near the hospital, popularly explaining to the cordon why they would be shot one by one, wishing the wounded an early death and demanding their kidneys, well, other unpleasant things. There are more and more such cases, the situation in the country is heating up. Seattle's crime growth is + 500%, other cities are also trying to keep up.
      So let's see what happens in November, maybe the Great October? hi
      1. beeper Offline
        beeper 15 September 2020 22: 35
        +7
        • 7
        • 0
        hi We had this in 2014, when the Maidan extremists and other "Ukrainian" bandits, stunned by the many months of impunity for the murders of law enforcement officers in the "Euromaidan" Kiev, immediately after their "peremoga" began to shoot policemen throughout Ukraine (including those on duty at street in patrol cars!), grabbing their pistols and machine guns ...
        This is even before the start of the ATO in the Donbass! Then all this Banderonazi scum rushed there in pursuit of easy profit and engaging in fanaticism over peaceful fellow citizens, who were declared by the Kiev w / Bandera junta to be "unseen" and "separatists"!
        I did not know that in the US licentiousness niggas already to such brazen lawlessness Maidan and reached the vaunted American cops are no longer cope with the maintenance of law and order.
        Well, it will be interesting by look at the Maidan coup in the very den of "color revolutions" - Washington, as they say:

        your own lard, you mustache, Washington ladies and gentlemen!
        winked
        1. 123 Offline
          123 (123) 15 September 2020 22: 47
          +2
          • 3
          • 1
          It looks like they operate in the same way. The specialists work the same.
          And this is how their people have fun

  3. Nikolay Malyugin (Nikolai Malyugin) 15 September 2020 19: 59
    +3
    • 3
    • 0
    There is such a danger. Especially after the elections. And even the division into North and South.
  4. Alexzn Offline
    Alexzn (Alexander) 15 September 2020 20: 18
    -1
    • 2
    • 3
    Quote: 123
    so let's see what happens in November, maybe the Great October?

    Great October may not be in November. A-priory. Oxymoron.
    1. boriz Offline
      boriz (boriz) 15 September 2020 22: 40
      +1
      • 2
      • 1
      Which year are you?
      Great October was celebrated all the time on November 7. This is the catch.
      1. Alexzn Offline
        Alexzn (Alexander) 16 September 2020 07: 31
        +1
        • 1
        • 0
        What a joke! The October Revolution should be celebrated in October!
    2. Ashneur Offline
      Ashneur (Alexander) 16 September 2020 05: 51
      0
      • 0
      • 0
      In fact (for a new style) it is once again November))))
      1. Alexzn Offline
        Alexzn (Alexander) 16 September 2020 07: 35
        0
        • 0
        • 0
        Quote: Ashneur
        In fact (for a new style) it is once again November))))

        Are you serious? I understand when the victims of the EG think that October 25, according to the new style in November ... Think a little! According to the new style, October 25 is OCTOBER 12.
    3. 123 Offline
      123 (123) 17 September 2020 12: 42
      0
      • 0
      • 0
      Great October may not be in November. A-priory. Oxymoron.

      How can you yes There was such a Great October 7 November. This is exactly what I meant. Just a timing analogy begs laughing
      If I heard anything about the calendar. hi
  5. Cyril Offline
    Cyril (Kirill) 15 September 2020 20: 43
    +2
    • 4
    • 2
    Trump, like Kennedy, wants to normalize relations with Russia and bring back American troops that are involved in military operations overseas, increasing the profits of contractors. To stop Kennedy, they killed him.

    Who wrote this article? Kennedy did not want to normalize relations with the USSR. During his years in office, the Berlin and Caribbean crises occurred between the USSR and the United States, which had many chances to develop into a full-fledged war. It was under Kennedy that the intensification of US intervention in the war in Indochina began, under him the first regular units of the American Armed Forces were sent to Vietnam in 1961, by the end of his reign there were already about 16 American soldiers in Vietnam.
    1. boriz Offline
      boriz (boriz) 15 September 2020 23: 13
      +2
      • 3
      • 1
      Kennedy did not want to normalize relations with the USSR.

      But he did normalize them. Under his two predecessors, the Korean War was going on (for a minute, the third in the 20th century in terms of the number of victims). And, if not for the murder of Stalin, it is not known how it would have ended.
      Eisenhower ditched a small thaw with the ultra-arrogant U-2 flights, which sadly ended on May 1, 1960. These were flights over the territory of the USSR itself. And how many other flights there were! Little is remembered now. And the raid on the Soviet airfield "Sukhaya Rechka", also on the territory of the USSR!
      Compared to that, Kennedy is a dove of peace. His murder in our country has caused real indignation among the people and demonstrative official grief. The funeral was shown online on TV. I remember.
      Well, the missiles, as promised, removed. He proved himself to be an adequate and capable leader of the country. Plus he actually participated in WWII in hostilities. This also impressed me at the time.
      And the fact that they fought all over the world is a matter of everyday life. The main thing is not to touch the territories of the states themselves.
      The fact that he sent troops to Vietnam was for our people, perhaps a joy. I mean the military.
      Testing new weapons, Vietnam is the best friend, participation in the b.d. in personal matters, careers are fast-paced ...
      And the USA turned out sideways. And if an energetic, grasping leader had been in power, in the early 70s the United States would have had a khan. Without any war. But, concrete actions of the top to drain the USSR have already begun ...
      1. Cyril Offline
        Cyril (Kirill) 15 September 2020 23: 56
        -1
        • 0
        • 1
        But he did normalize them. Under his two predecessors, the Korean War was going on (for a minute, the third in the 20th century in terms of the number of victims).

        The Korean War took place in 1950-1953. Kennedy received the chair in 1961. 7 years before that, there were no particularly sharp confrontations between the USSR and the USA. But under Kennedy, the deployment of American nuclear missiles in Turkey happened, in response to which the USSR deployed missiles in Cuba.

        Compared to that, Kennedy is a dove of peace.

        The same American president, like everyone else. His official rhetoric about the USSR was soft, but his actions often diverged from this rhetoric.

        His murder in our country caused real indignation among the people and demonstrative official grief.

        Precisely that demonstrative. This has nothing to do with love for Kennedy.

        Well, the missiles, as promised, removed. He proved himself to be an adequate and capable leader of the country. Plus he actually participated in WWII in hostilities. This also impressed me at the time.

        Certainly. But he first installed these missiles. And he removed it only after the USSR showed him that in the event of an attack, the United States would not remain without a response. The fact that Kennedy was an adequate and reasonable person does not make him a "supporter of detente from the USSR."
        1. boriz Offline
          boriz (boriz) 16 September 2020 01: 24
          +1
          • 2
          • 1
          The Korean War took place in 1950-1953. Kennedy received the chair in 1961.

          Do you really not understand, or you just do not want to understand the obvious things? I compared Kennedy and his two predecessors. What is not clear? Plus their flights over the USSR, despite the "thaw".

          Precisely that demonstrative. This has nothing to do with love for Kennedy.

          Again, do not want to understand what is written very clearly? "Demonstrative" is about the official position. And dissatisfaction with the murder of a sane president is about the people. And the last - including personal impressions. At that time I already understood and remembered something.

          But he first installed these missiles. And he removed it only after the USSR showed him that in the event of an attack, the United States would not remain without a response. The fact that Kennedy was an adequate and reasonable person does not make him a "supporter of detente from the USSR."
          Where in the post or in my comments is the speech about "detente"?

          The point is that Kennedy pushed aside the very real threat of nuclear war. Local wars don't count.

          In accordance with the agreement concluded between Turkey and the United States at the end of 1959, American medium-range missiles are deployed in Turkish territory. Khrushchev takes this as a personal insult.

          https://mgimo.ru/cuban50/timeline/index.html

          If it's not clear, then look at Wiki, when he became President Kennedy.
          Write anyhow that has nothing to do with the post and other people's comments.
          1. Cyril Offline
            Cyril (Kirill) 16 September 2020 02: 07
            -1
            • 0
            • 1
            Do you really not understand, or you just do not want to understand the obvious things? I compared Kennedy and his two predecessors. What is not clear? Plus their flights over the USSR, despite the "thaw".

            Well, if for you the placement of nuclear missiles under the belly of the USSR with the ability to reach the capital and all major cities in the Central region is a trifle compared to reconnaissance flights, then ok, no questions asked.

            And dissatisfaction with the murder of a sane president is about the people. And the last - including personal impressions. At that time I already understood and remembered something.

            You interviewed every citizen of the USSR to say yes, did you really sympathize?

            Where in the post or in my comments is the speech about "detente"?

            Do you need to quote your own words?) Okay:

            But he did normalize them.

            The point is that Kennedy pushed aside the very real threat of nuclear war.

            Only at the same time he "pushed it" by placing missiles in Turkey. And he removed the missiles only when the USSR showed that it can do that too. If it had not been for a potential response from the USSR, the missiles in Turkey would have remained, and no "peaceful Kennedy" would have removed them from there.

            Local wars don't count.

            You will decide whether you have local wars or not. Either you first started the Korean War as an example of the aggressiveness of the previous American presidents (despite the fact that the Korean War was not started by the United States), then suddenly a war in Vietnam of the same scale is "just a trifle, arms testing."

            If it's not clear, then look at Wiki, when he became President Kennedy.

            But the real deployment of missiles in Turkey took place only in 1961 - under Kennedy. And he did not move a finger to cancel it until the USSR gave an answer in Cuba.

            Again. Kennedy, for all his soft rhetoric, was no different from his predecessors and followers in terms of the toughness of his positions.
            1. boriz Offline
              boriz (boriz) 16 September 2020 02: 24
              +1
              • 2
              • 1
              The strategic plans of a US-level power do not change with each new president. Kennedy had a reason to remove the missiles - he removed them. And the Pentagon did not clap their hands about this.
              As for the level of Vietnam and Korea, compare the losses in both wars. Be surprised. It's not for nothing that I wrote about the third place. Or do you not consider the Chinese and Koreans as people?

              Well, if for you the placement of nuclear missiles under the belly of the USSR with the ability to reach the capital and all major cities in the Central region is a trifle compared to reconnaissance flights, then ok, no questions asked.

              Do not distort the thought. Placement began not under Kennedy and to force the Pentagon to drastically change its plans at once by 180 degrees at the snap of your fingers - it's just ridiculous. They killed him and for what he did.

              You interviewed every citizen of the USSR to say yes, did you really sympathize?

              What nonsense! I lived during this time and saw the attitude of adults towards Kennedy. And why should this attitude in Kaluga differ from Ryazan or Novosibirsk?
              Before making such statements - give arguments against. Have you interviewed every citizen of the USSR on this topic? If not, do not make such claims.

              But the real deployment of missiles in Turkey took place only in 1961 - under Kennedy.

              What event from the missile deployment process happened in 1961 and when exactly. Link.
              1. Cyril Offline
                Cyril (Kirill) 16 September 2020 04: 01
                -1
                • 0
                • 1
                The strategic plans of a US-level power do not change with each new president.

                Bingo. Therefore, in foreign policy, their presidents are the same.

                Kennedy had a reason to remove the missiles - he removed them

                Of course I did. When he was shown that if something happens, the United States will also get it.

                And the Pentagon did not clap their hands about this.

                Actually, along with Kennedy, the head of the Pentagon McNamara played an important role in resolving the crisis on the part of the Americans. He was a staunch supporter of the blockade, not the hard missile option, and helped persuade the Joint Chiefs of Staff to agree to the blockade, which helped to avoid casualties on both sides.

                Moreover, the US military took the order to withdraw missiles from Turkey relatively calmly, because at that time they were no longer interested in these same Jupiter missiles, since the concept of nuclear deterrence and intimidation of the USSR was made possible by the Polaris missiles deployed on submarines.

                As for the level of Vietnam and Korea, compare the losses in both wars. Be surprised. It's not for nothing that I wrote about the third place. Or do you not consider the Chinese and Koreans as people?

                We are watching about the Korean War. First, the forces of the parties:

                - The international coalition led by the United States - only about 1,1 million personnel.
                - North Korean forces (including volunteers from China and soldiers of the USSR) - 1,06 million.

                Now the same indicator for the Vietnam War (taking into account the allies of both sides):

                - on the side of the United States and South Vietnam, a total of about 1,4 million people fought.
                - about 860 thousand people fought on the side of North Vietnam. (only 120-130 thousand people less)

                And now for the losses. In the Korean War, they were (excluding civilians):

                - about 83 845 deaths from South Korea and the international coalition
                - about 880 dead Koreans and Chinese.

                And in the Vietnam War, this figure was (excluding civilians):

                - 318-568 people from the United States and the Allies
                - 850 people from North Vietnam and its allies.

                The total death toll in the Vietnam War was about 4 dead and dead (including civilians). In the Korean War, the total number of deaths and deaths (including civilians) is about 211 million.

                They killed him and for what he did.

                Do you have irrefutable evidence to support this?

                What nonsense! I lived during this time and saw the attitude of adults towards Kennedy. And why should this attitude in Kaluga differ from Ryazan or Novosibirsk?

                Do you understand that it is unscientific to extrapolate your (and a limited circle of your acquaintances) attitude towards the personality and death of Kennedy to the whole country? And yes, the opinion of the residents of Kaluga and, say, Novosibirsk will differ significantly, given that Novosibirsk at that time was a remote place, where news, taking into account the development of communications at that time, reached, to put it mildly, for a long time, not and not in full. And the reindeer breeders of Yakutia and the semi-literate population of the republics of Central Asia in general, Kennedy's assassination did not care.

                Before making such statements - give arguments against. Have you interviewed every citizen of the USSR on this topic?

                Firstly, it was you who argued for the entire population of the USSR, not me. Therefore - it is you who must support your opinion with arguments (your personal experience is not). Secondly, in sociology, when polling public opinion, especially in such huge countries as Russia (especially the USSR), mathematical formulas are used for a reason to calculate a representative sample.

                What event from the missile deployment process happened in 1961 and when exactly. Link.

                https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/PGM-19 - ссылка. Цитата из нее:

                "The Turkish government, fearing Soviet claims to the straits, supported the American initiative to deploy US nuclear weapons in the country. 15 missiles were located in 5 positions around Izmir in 1961.

                And the President of the United States Kennedy became 20th of January 1961
  6. Natan bruk Offline
    Natan bruk (Natan Bruk) 16 September 2020 04: 21
    -1
    • 0
    • 1
    I remember, I remember how, after Obama's re-election for a second term, this circus began with the "branch of Texas" and other states. The same Paul Craig also crowed about the "collapse of the United States", and Russian political scientists were very excited and wrote on serious place of the United States, gave them names and my mother swore that in the very near future all this would happen. Now there is again a surge of hope. And again there will be another disappointment. Better to count on Yellowstone :)))
  7. ***
    You're a bastard, Colombus, -
    I will say in honor.
    As for me,
    then i would
    in person -
    I would have closed America
    lightly brushed
    and then
    opened again -
    secondarily.

    ---
    1925
    Vladimir Mayakovsky.
    ***