What are the motives behind alleging Russia of hacking US election?

In one of my recent posts I have stated that elections are engineered in third world countries but in the US election is engineered in an organized manner. After the victory of Donald Trump a debate has started in the US that Russia has hacked election. Accepting all my inadequacies the following points come to my mind. I request my reads, especially the think tanks from the United States and those in power in Russia to help the world in understanding the purpose behind this propaganda.

My first question is, has Russia attained power to rig election of a country that has defeated USSR in Afghanistan, which led to disintegration of the then second largest super power?

My second question, what is the motive behind this propaganda?

My third question, what are the motive behind maligning Russia or CIA and NSA?

My fourth question, why entry of Donald in White House is being denied?

My fifth question, who is the bigger war monger, Donald or mighty CIA, NSA and Pentagon?

My sixth question, is the media in the US also subservient to military might?

As I have accepted earlier my inadequacies, kindly have some patience to read my replies also.

My explanation to the first question is that there is a clear motive behind accusing Russia, killing two birds with the same stone. While the effort is aimed at maligning Russia, it is also exposing failures of CIA and NSA. I will abstain from raising finger at Russia, but tend to agree with those who have been saying that CIA/NSA and Pentagon have been acting on false information, the worst being presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

The reply to my second question may sound outrageous but I could not resist from saying it. Despite all the propaganda against Donald, Hillary lost the election. This is a defeat of those who could be termed non-state actors, the Zionists. May be they believe that establishing a link between Donald and Russia could stop his entry into the White House.

The reply to third question is that lately Russia has defeated the US on various fronts, specifically in Syria. This has happened despite the best efforts and tall claims of CIA and NSA. Those believing in maintaining status quo are not ready to accept their defeat. However, while accusing Russia they forget that they are also accepting failure of their intelligence agencies. In my views they are accepting the supremacy of Russia to seek more funds for CIA and NSA for their capacity building to open new war fronts around the globe, the next front is South China Sea.

The possible explanation of fourth question is the apprehension that Donald’s cordial relationship with Russia may lead to withdrawal of support for ISIS and closing of the front in Syria. This is being taken as a victory of Iran, which the Zionists don’t approve. Ironically, US military might, intelligence and ‘embedded journalists’, who have been counting days of Syrian President are not ready to accept their defeat.

To find reply to fifth question readers have to read my latest post, US war mania. Over the years I have been saying that US is the biggest arms supplier and to increase sale of arms it has to create new rebel groups, provide them funds and training to sell arms to the incumbent governments of these countries. Contrary to the impression created by dishonest western media, I have a feeling that Donald wishes to focus more on domestic issues, spend more funds on creation and improvisation of infrastructure for the benefit of masses rather than spending billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money on proxy wars. This policy of Donald is not approved by war mongers and owners of the armament factories of the US.

Lesson of the story is that the US citizens are so engrossed in ‘other’ activities that they even don’t have time to question why tax payers’ money is being spent on wars rather than on millions of US citizens still living below the poverty line. Groups having vested interest have been preaching ‘change of regime’ in countries around the world must also do the same at home.  

World must oppose US assaults in Syria and Iraq

I have repeatedly stated in my blogs that a proxy war is being fought in Syria. The objective is not as stated by the US, ‘change in regime in Syria’ but to continuously keep the neighboring Muslim countries in state of war.

The engagement on one hand forces these countries to buy more of ‘Made in USA armaments’ and on the other hand make them ‘war maniacs’ usually termed militants by the western media. Bulk of petrodollars are being spent on purchase of arms rather than on the welfare of people,

Ironically, western media, which once enjoyed the honor of being independent, can at best be termed ‘propagators of policies of hawks’. In the past some of the icons questioned policies of the then US president towards Vietnam, which left him with no option, but to step down, as against Bush and Obama have thrived on wars.

It seems that kind of critics have vanished or have been replaced by the cronies, constantly playing war mantra. The latest addition to the long list is Secretary of Defense; Ashton Carter who recently appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee to outline a new US military strategy for the Middle East.

The Secretary admitted the failure of the US “train and equip” program for rebels in Syria, but instead of taking the appropriate lessons from that failure and get out of the “regime change” obsession, he announced the opposite.

According to the Secretary the US military would for the first time become directly and overtly involved in combat in Syria and Iraq. Under this program the US would begin supporting capable partners in opportunistic attacks against ISIS or conducting such missions directly, either by strikes from the air or direct action on the ground.

Direct action on the ground means US boots on the ground, even though President Obama had ruled out that possibility when he launched air strikes against Iraq and Syria last year. But promises are made and broken to achieve the vested interests; no one can deny this harsh reality.

The entire world needs to condemn the US decision at attack Syria in the strongest words, the ill-advised US military escalation in the Middle East. Whoever concluded that it was a good idea to send US troops into an area already being bombed by Russian military forces must be relieved of his duty on ‘medical grounds’ for being completely devoid of rationale thinking.

The fact is those who run US foreign policy don’t have the courage to accept their clear defeat in almost every war. They are so obsessed with their regime change plan in Syria that they are willing to risk the lives of US soldiers and initiate another mega war in the region — or even beyond.

These hawks insist that Russian strikes against ISIS and al-Qaeda must be resisted, because these are seen as helping the Assad government remain in power, and the US administration is determined that Assad must go. Why can’t the US just walk out of the Arabian Peninsula, which is no longer a source of cheap oil?

I believe building heat in MENA is just to divert attention of the world from South China Sea, where the US has already started minor encounters with China. I am forced to reiterate my words ‘US is the biggest warmonger’, I deliberately avoided using the term ‘terrorist’ often used by Iran.