World War 3 incoming???
Recently we have seen tensions between the Vladimir Putin-led Russian federation and the western-backed Ukraine over the perceived threat of a Crimea-like annexation of the smaller nation.
As we have covered in the past, the American government and mainstream media have long been manufacturing consent for war with Russia. That is why Mitt Romney in his 2012 Presidential run declared Russia to be the biggest threat to the United States. It’s why Democrats and their followers for 4 years told lie after lie in an attempt to tie the election of Donald Trump to Russia, even though, as we know because of the indictments of the creators of the lies, they were just that: lies.
This is all part of the military industrial complex’s aim to create forever war. They took a big loss this year when Joe Biden decided to bring an end to their best money-maker and their biggest military disaster, that will significantly harm their bottom line for many years to come. So they are looking for the next big conflict, and there are two areas that they are looking at that they may well win in their effort to create a war. The first of those two is in China and Taiwan, and we will look more closely at that one, which is the more complicated of the two, at some other time. But, for now, we will look at Russia and the perceived threat they pose to Ukraine.
To understand fully, we need to go back to 2014, when Ukrainian rebels overthrew the Russian-backed government during the revolution of dignity. This did not please the Russians and as a result they annexed the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine, in a move widely seen as an act of aggression and a step towards an invasion of Ukraine. That is yet to happen. In response, they were kicked out of the G8, now the G7.
Obama gave hundreds of millions of dollars in weapons to Ukraine in an effort to protect the country from their enemies in the East, in a move that was very hostile towards the Russians. Think about that from their perspective. Their biggest foreign adversary is directly funding the country that borders their own.
This situation got even worse under Trump, as he not only increased the funding for the Ukrainian government, but he also piled up NATO troops on the Ukraine-Russia border. Now, for Russia, not only is their biggest foreign adversary funding the country on their border, but they are also piling troops up on the border. That is the clearest act of aggression possible.
In 2019 and 2020, Democrats made it clear that they didn’t think Trump was being aggressive enough, as they used a July ‘19 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to impeach President Trump. They claimed he was withholding aid from the Eastern European ally in an attempt to get dirt on his political enemy, Joe Biden. This was a ridiculous, purely built on their delusion that big bad Trump was a Russian agent and, thus, didn’t want to fund and fight on behalf of the nation on their border. This ignores the fact that, as we have already discussed, Trump increased the funding for Ukraine and piled NATO troops on the border.
This brings us to the current administration, which has attempted to continue the policies of the Trump administration, but hasn’t been helped by the concerns from the Russian point of view that the Americans wanted to bring Ukraine into NATO, effectively meaning that their country was right on the edge of Western-controlled land.
Again, this is totally understandable. We saw how the US reacted to this in the 60s. When a very small country not far from the mainland became part of the Soviet block, and then had nuclear weapons shipped out to it (not unlike how the US had nuclear weapons in Turkey), it was seen as the closest our planet has come to destruction. Imagine now if Russia put thousands upon thousands of troops in that small island (Cuba, for those who don’t know). Imagine the uproar about the ‘offensive moves’ from the Russians that we would be hearing about on a daily basis that threaten Americans way of life. Those reports, in that case, would be entirely justified. So why can’t we see that that’s how the Russians will see this?
The threat that Russia sees from Ukraine is that their neighbours may join NATO, giving their enemies a foothold right next to their border. Again, you can totally understand why they view this as a threat. We just need to go back to the Cuban missile crisis to understand this. Their biggest foreign threat extending right to their border isn’t good for them.
The Russians have confirmed that they will not invade Moscow if the United States confirms that Ukraine will not enter NATO. I cannot for the life of me understand why the Biden administration will not do that. It’s not a big thing to do that will avoid a potential hot nuclear war. It will also doubtless save countless Ukrainian lives because if there isn’t a big war, people don’t die, and surely if we are going to have a war over what’s best for Ukraine, we’d better actually consider what is best for them, not what’s best for the American military industrial complex.
That brings us to the last couple of weeks, in which all of Vice-President Kamala Harris, President Biden and his press secretary, Jen Psaki, have made multiple comments about the situation in Eastern Europe.
Let’s start with a statement from the press secretary on January 19, in which she said the following
President Biden has been clear with the Russian President: If any Russian military forces move across the Ukrainian border, that’s a renewed invasion, and it will be met with a swift, severe, and united response from the United States and our Allies. President Biden also knows from long experience that the Russians have an extensive playbook of aggression short of military action, including cyberattacks and paramilitary tactics. And he affirmed today that those acts of Russian aggression will be met with a decisive, reciprocal, and united response.
Jen, your boss could simply say “Ukraine will never be part of NATO,” and there would be no Russian military forces moving across the Ukrainian border.
Biden has also made his own comments about this matter. One such comment was that he was “not so sure that (Putin is certain what is he going to do,” although he added that “My guess is he will move in (on Ukraine).” Again, and I probably don’t need to say this again, if he simply promises that Ukraine won’t become part of NATO, Putin will not ‘move in’.
In another press conference, Biden was also asked about Russia, where he said:
I've been absolutely clear with President Putin. He has no misunderstanding. If any -- any -- assembled Russian units move across Ukrainian border, that is an invasion. But it will be met with severe and coordinated economic response that I've discussed in detail with our allies, as well as laid out very clearly for President Putin.
Now, and this is worth mentioning, a ‘severe and coordinated economic response’ probably will not impact Vladimir Putin and his government too much. They haven’t hurt the leaders in North Korea, Cuba, Iran, Syria and Venezuela and Afghanistan. They haven’t really hurt the targets in the more targeted sanctions. They have, however, caused massive suffering for all the people of those nations. The leaders haven’t changed (unless they died or retired by choice), but they have massively hurt the people in those countries. For example, as a result of the severe tensions in Afghanistan currently in Biden’s attempt to look ‘tough of terror’, 23 million people in the country are starving to death. Like it or not, 23 million Afghans are not terrorists, but they are starving because Joe Biden tried to punish the Taliban. The Taliban are doing the best they’ve done in 21 years. This is all part of me trying to say that a severe economic response probably won’t impact Putin, but it will hurt the Russian people who had nothing to do with any decision to invade.
Then, Kamala Harris felt that her opinion was needed, which, much like just about everyone else in the Democratic Party, it just isn’t. Anyways, she added that “If Putin takes aggressive action, we are prepared to levy serious and severe costs.”
Do I need to repeat that any aggressive action from Putin would be stopped if Biden just pledges that Ukraine won’t join NATO? I didn’t think so.
Let’s also look at the biggest factor pushing for American war in Ukraine and Russia: the mainstream media.
We should look at some recent headlines from the media sources which these politicians look at as the views of everyday Americans.
For example, The Economist came out with the beauty “Momentum is building for war in Ukraine.” This is clearly trying to push the Biden administration towards more war by making them think that more and more people just want the war.
The BBC came out with “Ukraine tension: Urgent US-Russia talks in Geneva as invasion fears grow,” clearly portraying Russia as the sole aggressor here, which they sure as hell are not.
The Financial Times, which is probably the most popular news source among the Washington elite, decided to focus on how this is all Russia’s fault, saying “Russia raises pressure by sending more troops to Ukraine border,” ignoring how, in their minds, this is probably all defensive.
Finally, The Guardian came out with “Biden lays bare Nato divide over Russian aggression against Ukraine,” which suffers the same problems as all these other ones.
It has also been very interesting over the last few days to see what everyone who got everything about Russiagate wrong has been saying. I’m talking about people such as Natasha Bertrand, who last week tweeted…
This is how you know that they are repeating lies. They never name a source. They never told you where they got the information from. They just say ‘a US official’, or something to that effect. It’s what they did all through Russiagate, and they were wrong about everything. It’s what they did all through the Iraq war, and they were wrong about everything. It’s what they did all through the Afghanistan war, and they were wrong about everything. It’s what they did all through the Vietnam war, and they were wrong about everything.
This is how they manufacture consent for war. US intelligence operatives, all of whom have a financial incentive for war, mostly either through stock ownership of defense contractor companies, job offers at those very companies or through careerist ambitions to get promoted, tell lies to the media in an effort to start these wars. Because these media companies act as little more than stenographers for these companies, these lies get repeated over and over and over until they are just accepted as true by the Washington elite, and, as much as the Washington elite don’t represent the views of most Americans, unfortunately they have the power to decide what happens as a result.
Now, we need to think about what happens if Russia does move into Ukraine. I would suggest that this is unlikely, because they sure as hell don’t want a hot war with the world’s biggest superpower. However, it remains a distinct possibility that they do decide to encroach upon the Eastern European nation.
What is likely to happen in that case is that the 150,000 or so Ukrainian forces massively fight back against the Russians, alongside hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of NATO soldiers, who will fight against the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Russians. There will be drones, tanks and countless other highly advanced weapons that will, without doubt, kill countless soldiers and Ukrainian civilians.
It could even get to the point where the world’s 2 biggest nuclear superpowers are in a direct, violent conflict with each other. It could even get to the point where one of the two sides consider using these nuclear weapons against the other. If that happens, we all die. Nuclear war would end our planet as it is.
And many in Washington want just that. For example, Republican Senator Roger Wicker, who sits on the Committee on Armed Services and the Commission on Security Security and Cooperation in Europe, also known as the US Helsinki Commission, a man with a whole lot of power in this field, said the following in a Fox News interview just a couple of months ago.
We don't rule out first-use nuclear action, we don't think it will happen but there are certain things in negotiations, if you are going to be tough, that you don't take off the table. I think the president should say that everything is on the table. Frankly, to the extent that you had Democrats on the show before me saying we need to be tougher, I support that and appreciate that. I think they represent the fear that we have, the realization that we have in Congress. That losing a free democratic Ukraine to Russian invasion would be a gamechanger for a free Europe.
“We don’t rule out first-use nuclear action.” This dude is on a fucking suicide mission for himself, his country and his planet. Nuclear action is a disaster for all of us.
On the other hand, we need to have a look at what happens if Joe Biden promises no action on Russia no matter what they do.
It’s quite simple. They probably invade Ukraine, because they are an imperialist nation and view Ukraine as their rightful territory. It is probably better than all-out war, but it is not a solution to this situation.
The solution here is to strike a deal, in which the United States and Ukraine promise that the latter country will never be part of NATO, and that NATO troops will withdraw from the Russia-Ukraine border. They will also decrease the weapons funding to Ukraine. In return, Russia leave a maximum of 30,000 troops on the border, and promise that, at no point will they so much as enter Ukraine without permission. If they do, NATO and Ukraine will stop following their part of the deal.
That is an agreement that probably suits all sides to a decent degree. Nobody in any of the 3 countries involved wants a war, and this way we avoid that result. Obviously, no one gets exactly what they want out of that circumstance, as Russia doesn’t add to its territory and Ukraine doesn’t join NATO, but that is all worth it from both perspectives to avoid millions of Russian, Ukrainian and Americans from dying. And that is something that we should all strive to avoid.