Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton surfaced this week to warn America “the Russians are still coming,” mainstream media is finding ways to blame the nation for all kinds of crazy things and the U.S.’s top military commander in the Middle East is looking to push Russia out of Syria for good. Americans, meanwhile, still have no idea why they’re supposed to hate Russia.
If you listen closely, or at all, to talk about Russia coming from America’s most politically connected citizens, then it’s becoming clear that the language is getting more warlike by the day.
Take Clinton’s Wednesday tweet criticizing President Donald Trump for not initiating full-on cyber war against Russia.
“I say this as a former Secretary of State and as an American: the Russians are still coming. Our intelligence professionals are imploring Trump to act. Will he continue to ignore & surrender, or protect our country?” she tweeted.
Clinton was responding to news of U.S. Cyber Command Chief Adm. Mike Rogers complaining to lawmakers that he doesn’t “have the day-to-day authority” to launch cyber attacks against Russia.
“What I see on the Cyber Command side leads me to believe that if we don’t change the dynamic here, that this is going to continue, and 2016 won’t be viewed as isolated,” Rogers told lawmakers. “This is something that will be sustained over time.”
The former Obama administration official claimed that he expects Russia to attempt to alter the outcome of the 2018 midterm elections if the U.S. doesn’t strike preemptively.
“[Russian President Vladimir Putin] has clearly come to the conclusion that ‘there’s little price to pay here and therefore I can continue this activity,’ ” Rogers said.
He added: “If we don’t change the dynamic here, this is going to continue.”
Following Roger’s testimony, Clinton was one of many on the left to criticize the Trump administration for not attacking Russia’s cyber capabilities.
“Essentially, we have not taken on the Russians yet,” Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said.
And over at CNN, political analyst and Democratic strategist Paul Begala told CIA asset Anderson Cooper that Trump is a “wuss and a wimp” when it comes to dealing with Russia.
“What do the Russians have on him? Maybe it’s nothing. Maybe it’s just there’s something about Mr. Putin that our president just worships and adores. But the evidence, the direct evidence is just catastrophic for him,” he said.
Bottom line is that these people want Trump to hit Russia hard.
Meanwhile, Middle East commander Army Gen. Joseph Votel told the House Armed Services Committee Tuesday that the U.S. needs to wrest Syria from Russian influence.
“Either Russia has to admit that it’s not capable, or it doesn’t want to play a role in ending the Syrian conflict,” Votel said. “I’m being very serious when I say they play the role of both arsonist and fireman—fueling tensions and then trying to resolve them in their favor.”
According to the general, Russia is manipulating Syria to preserve”their own influence and control over the outcome of the situation.”
“I think there certainly has to be more accountability and pressure put onto Russia to do what they said they were going to do,” he said.
So, let’s recap. America can’t surrender to Russia. Putin needs to pay a price for his alleged involvement in election meddling. We need to take on the Russians. And proxy war with Russia in Syria is on the Pentagon wish list.
Agathe Demarais, an analyst with The Economist’s Intelligence Unit, says all of the above mean we’re now on less stable terms with Russia than we were at the height of the Cold War.
“Should Russia feel aggressed or believe that its national interests are threatened, for instance, if a revolution similar to the one which happened in Ukraine in 2013/14 was to take place, Russia’s reaction could prove unpredictable, swift and massive,” Demarais said.
“In addition, Russia could increase its use of hybrid warfare tactics, such as cyberattacks or propaganda operations, to disrupt processes that it would see as a direct risk to its interests.”
Of course, that’s what the political establishment wants.