Russians believe that the rouble was sunk by Americans. Ukrainians also believe that the rouble was sunk by Americans. There are insistent rumors coming from Ukraine that this was promised to Ukrainians back in the spring.
Originally, I’m not inclined to believe this. Oil prices drop, why should we look for a conspiracy behind this? Russians and Ukrainians alike have a need to believe that Americans are behind the rouble ‘ s travails and that is blinding them.
But then the reestablishment of the relations with Cuba happens. And it happens hours after the Russians have the scare of their lives as they see the rouble plummet to 80 per dollar (it went back to the still horrible 60 shortly thereafter). And two days after the Ukrainian bill passes Congress.
The rapprochement with Cuba has been in the works for months. Ever since. . .?
This is such a seductive possibility: this was all planned! The rouble, the Cuban thing, the bill, and who knows what else. All planned to coincide in time. Wouldn’t that be the best thing ever?
Oh, I want to believe. I want to believe there was a strategy all along. Is that too optimistic, though?
Clarissa's Blog 
Conspiracy theorists are idiots. The Americans even have problems with their own currency, how could they “sink” the currency of another state? It’s the good old scapegoat effect AGAIN.
LikeLike
“The Americans even have problems with their own currency”
” how could they “sink” the currency of another state?”
LikeLike
I’m not saying I’m convinced either but many (smart) analysts say this is how Obama operates: quietly, behind the scenes, but effectively,
LikeLike
If it is true, I take back everything negative I ever said about his foreign policy. I believe we will find out soon if we follow the events closely.
LikeLike
“I take back everything negative I ever said about his foreign policy”
I don’t. Not yet at any rate. This is one very good foreign policy move in …. how many years?
LikeLike
I can’t really be expected to give as much importance to any other situation as I do to this one.
I believe that the broad foreign policy of the US always remains the same irrespective of the specific president. Remember the Romney/Obama debates? They didn’t find much to disagree on foreign policy.
My main complaint about the post-1991 foreign policy of the US was always that it didn’t seem to be based on a specific doctrine. I hate the very idea of a reactive foreign policy for such an enormous country. However, now I’m starting to wonder: what if it only looks reactive to me because I lack knowledge? What if there is a doctrine that I simply don’t know about?
I’m not insisting this is true. At this point, I’m just wondering. I will keep reading and getting informed, so prepare for interesting debates on this blog! (This is my attempt at self-promotion).
LikeLike
The conventional wisdom is that the neocons have had US foreign policy in their kack-covered hands for the last twenty years or so leading the country into an unprecedented string of disasters.
And their failures don’t seem to be held against them by any administration…..
LikeLike
“The conventional wisdom is that the neocons have had US foreign policy in their kack-covered hands for the last twenty years or so leading the country into an unprecedented string of disasters.”
LikeLike
I wonder the same.
LikeLike
“I wonder the same.”
LikeLike
However, now I’m starting to wonder: what if it only looks reactive to me because I lack knowledge? What if there is a doctrine that I simply don’t know about?
LikeLike
I wander lonely as a cloud.
LikeLike
Surely you jest. Obama is the most ineffective president since Carter…oh, hell, even more than him.
LikeLike
“Surely you jest. Obama is the most ineffective president since Carter”
LikeLike
LOL, well, you are a true believer, I’ll give you that ;-D
LikeLike
“LOL, well, you are a true believer, I’ll give you that”
LikeLike
There’s no “math” and there are no “airplanes”.
LikeLike
Why exactly do you think Obama is ineffective? He was handed a mess when he began his presidency. I won’t list what I think he has done effectively (I happen to think he’s accomplished quite a bit and his very good president.) But I am curious to hear what you think has been _in_effective. Again, keep in mind that the president before him was a disaster in every single sense of the word (I think you said that are Canadian. So myabe you don’t know how terrible our previous president was. Truly disastrous…..)
LikeLike
“Why exactly do you think Obama is ineffective?”
LikeLike
No, he is a coward. This is not a matter of being left or right, your leader must confidently do the correct programs to provide faith to those losing hope.
LikeLike
“This is not a matter of being left or right, your leader must confidently do the correct programs to provide faith to those losing hope.”
LikeLike
He’s been very effective, especially considering all the obstruction he has had to deal with. This is not to say I agree with his politics, but one can hardly say he hasn’t been working, hasn’t been effective, hasn’t gotten a lot done and a lot of it good or at least better than many alternatives. I am most appreciative of him for the general atmosphere of the country — despite all the rabid attacks on him, people have seemed a lot less rabid themselves than when we were under that abuser Bush. Also, as a side note, I think Michelle’s childhood obesity and physical fitness program is somehow working — people look healthier.
LikeLike
Obama had one good opportunity to give your nation hope and change, to stop the dangerous polarization….but he lacked the guts to stand his ground.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/659dkrod.asp
LikeLike
BG. You haven’t said one concrete thing. Obama’s “cowardice” or missing an opportunity “to stop dangerous polarization” are not concrete things.
I can point to concrete things that he’s done: passed legislation to lower monthly student loan repayments. established the Consumer Protection Bureau (which I think will prevent future financial melt downs), the Affordable Health Care Act, repealing DOMA. These are all very concrete things that will benefit many people. I can also point to concrete things I don’t like: Race to the Top Education Plan, failing to close Gitmo.
In many ways, as Z indicates above, this have been an incredibly productive presidency (for better or worse.) So can you point to something concrete things that suggest his “ineffectiveness?”
LikeLike
Please read my link, all of it. and then think about it. There was only x dollars available for stimulus. Keynesian economic theory is based upon increasing demand, and depends upon a multiplier factor in not just personnel but materials. Your construction infrastructure could have had one so by building roads and bridges, creating jobs not only in those workers but the people supporting those workers, Instead Obama bought into the human infrastructure feminist horseshit. Yes, that created another half million jobs largely for women in health, education, and government…but where were the multipliers?
Look at FDR’s stimulus and then look at Obama’s nonsense. Obama was truly a gutless wonder when his nation needed him
LikeLike
Obama wanted to expand the stimulus package but was blocked by congress. (I agree. The stimulus should have been gigantic.) The USA desperately needs massive infrastructure spending, I agree. But that can’t happen while we have conservative leadership at the state level. My governor for instance RETURNED stimulus money to the federal government in some bizarre political maneuver. The president is not a king. Obama couldn’t force infrastructure spending.
LikeLike
“http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/659dkrod.asp”
LikeLike
LOL, not everything…but quite a bit seems to be wishful hoping ;-D
LikeLike
The truth is out there
People love coherent narratives in world events even if it’s a stupid narrative. Disconnected events confuse and annoy. Meanwhile out in the open conspiracies elicit yawns.
I don’t know what Saudi Arabia’s interest would be in making oil dirt cheap. I rather thought it was to make fracking unprofitable for the companies in the US thus preserving Saudi Arabia’s market advantage in the medium run.
LikeLike
D’oh. Forgot to close an html tag: The OPEC decided not to cut back production of oil for six months
LikeLike
And I think, of course, the Cuba announcement was timed to distract US from the torture report.
In general, I would point out that there is a difference between nutjob conspiracy theories, the kinds of planning and scheming that actually happen, and overdetermination (X had to happen because with A, B, C, and D factors, it was a result that could hardly be avoided).
LikeLike
I also think that multiple narratives can work together: softening the horror of the torture report, sending a message to Putin, making the Keystone pipeline less attractive, dumb luck. I am sure that there are a myriad of reasons that influence political decisions/ timing of annoucements. I doubt it’s an either/or thing.
LikeLike
Right.
LikeLike
If that were the case, Stephen Harper is gonna murder Obama, cuz Canada is also a gas-station of an economy (not to the same extent as Russia and Saudi Arabia, but still) and the oil prices are the talk of the town, especially since that’s causing people who were previously gun-ho about it to reconsider the Keystone XL Pipeline.
LikeLike
You just gave some of us green goons, who are gung ho about high energy prices, something to think about. Thank you kindly.
LikeLike
My vision of Harper is as a lot more impotent than that but I confess that I haven’t been following Canadian politics very carefully.
LikeLike
I offer a not-so-rhetorical question: why would Iran also refuse to reduce its production volumes along with the Saudis and Americans?
The Americans have an excuse: shale oil recovery investments typically play out on a much shorter cycle, sometimes as short as a single year.
The Saudis have an excuse, at least in polite public: the “petrodollar” agreements mean that the Saudis have to follow American cues.
What’s Iran’s excuse?
LikeLike
\ What’s Iran’s excuse?
Unlike democratic America, Iran doesn’t need excuses. Its leader knows what is the best for Iranian people and does it.
/ joke
LikeLike
Iran is starving. What else do they have left?
LikeLike
Somehow I doubt the world’s largest producer of pistachios is actually starving …
LikeLike
Putin’s revenge is coming:
Russia invites Kim Jong-un for visit
North Korean leader’s visit would be his first official foreign trip since taking over power three years ago
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11298223/Russia-invites-Kim-Jong-un-for-visit.html
LikeLike
“Putin’s revenge is coming:
Russia invites Kim Jong-un for visit
North Korean leader’s visit would be his first official foreign trip since taking over power three years ago”
LikeLike
Can we put our hands together and send Putin a bootleg copy of “The Interview”?
Maybe some Russian hackers already have a copy. 🙂
LikeLike
\ My predictions never fail. Unfortunately.
Which predictions?
LikeLike
What can North Korea do? Yes, it has the bomb, but do you think it can threaten the West (which also has such bombs) into … what exactly?
LikeLike
The FBI took Korea ‘ s threat of terrorism seriously enough to cancel a movie that Koreans didn’t like. Plus, the Koreans are sophisticated enough to hack Sony. And now if Putin feeds them, they might go far.
LikeLike
Is it odd that I find physical threats to movie theaters to be farcical [from North Korea], but the actual hacking of the servers isn’t and wasn’t? Maybe it’s all the news stories of random men “snapping” and shooting people in movie theaters. I don’t know. The scariest boogeyman of the last 14 years (for most Americans) was decidedly not connected to any one state and was not state sponsored terrorism.
As someone whose family ties necessitate flying, I can only roll my eyes at this response from Sony and Paramount. The State Department ok’ed certain scenes in The Interview but now we’re supposed to believe they’re afraid of physical threats from North Korea? Please.
LikeLike
“The scariest boogeyman of the last 14 years (for most Americans) was decidedly not connected to any one state and was not state sponsored terrorism.”
“The State Department ok’ed certain scenes in The Interview but now we’re supposed to believe they’re afraid of physical threats from North Korea? Please.”
LikeLike
Liquid terrorism has arisen to match the liquid state. However, this doesn’t mean that nuclear-capacity states have become less dangerous. If I were planning to see the movie (which, knowing me, is already a funny image), I wouldn’t go after the threats. Who would have thought North Korea was capable of hacking Sony so effectively before they did it? Honestly, if I had written that North Korea was a major cyberwar threat 3 weeks ago, would anybody have taken me seriously?
Of course liquid terrorism doesn’t make nuclear capacity states go away. But nobody in the United States under the age of 40 seriously is frightened of a nuclear attack. The “nuclear school drill” is something maybe Boomers and late Silents grew up with. The United States still has the biggest nuclear capacity on the planet. As for North Korea’s hackers, they went after a company known to have security issues and not official government servers. You really don’t need much to launch a cyber attack. Plus North Korea’s main trading partner is China, and China is also a credible nuclear threat.
LikeLike
—Honestly, if I had written that North Korea was a major cyberwar threat 3 weeks ago, would anybody have taken me seriously?
They were actually known to be good at cyber warfare long before this Sony debacle. Computers are cheap, even for North Korea.
LikeLike
\ And now if Putin feeds them, they might go far.
I am glad about one thing only in this situation (but am very glad about it) – nobody can blame this on Israel, which some love to present as THE source of instability in the Middle East and even in the entire world.
// The FBI took Korea ‘ s threat of terrorism seriously enough
Was it the FBI or only the Sony executives? Now Obama says:
President Barack Obama said Friday that Sony Pictures Entertainment “made a mistake” in deciding to shelve a film […] “I wish they had spoken to me first,” Obama said of Sony executives at a year-end news conference in which he said, “we cannot have a society in which some dictatorship someplace can start imposing censorship …”
http://6abc.com/news/obama-sony-decision-to-cancel-movie-a-mistake/443614/
LikeLike
“I am glad about one thing only in this situation (but am very glad about it) – nobody can blame this on Israel, which some love to present as THE source of instability in the Middle East and even in the entire world.”
LikeLike
\\ Sweetheart, I adore you, but only you can somehow find a way to mention Israel in this context. :-))))))))))))))))))))
I learned it from people who blamed ISIS on Israel (on the English-Israeli news site too!) 🙂
Btw, I googled and turns out Israel has a dog in this fight:
“despite the distance separating it from our region, the Stalinist realm has become increasingly involved in the Middle East […] during Operation Protective Edge, the UK Daily Telegraph reported that North Korea was negotiating with Hamas to rearm the terrorist group with missiles and other ammunition for use against the Jewish state. And there have been persistent reports that North Korean troops have come to the aid of Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria’s ongoing civil war.”
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Fundamentally-Freund-When-Israel-fought-North-Korea-378346
LikeLike
And then this person criticizes me for always seeing the nation-state in everything. 🙂
LikeLike
Improve your mental health by becoming a ‘conspiracy theorist’:
Veterans Today (US) —
“New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane; government dupes crazy, hostile”:
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/07/14/whatabout7/
“In short, the new study by Wood and Douglas suggests that the negative stereotype of the conspiracy theorist – a hostile fanatic wedded to the truth of his own fringe theory – accurately describes the people who defend the official account of 9/11, not those who dispute it.”
Yes, you want to believe, it’s healthier for you. 🙂
LikeLike