It must be tempting for the puppet in the White House to opt for war in eastern Europe rather than admit that his war on Covid and his Build Back Better plans are rubbish. All politicians look to “save face” when big mistakes are made. Any attempt to support Ukraine’s stupid-ness (something the US democrats were highly involved with when Obama was leading things in 2014) would easily shift to an all out war involving Russia.
For the geographically challenged, NATO’s promise in the early 1990s has be repeatedly broken to the point where NATO is not on Russia’s doorstep.
Moon of Alabama has an article out that outlines the latest lie around Russian build-up on Ukraine’s borders.
There is fear in Russia that the U.S. is egging the Ukraine into a renewed active conflict with its renegade eastern Donbass region and thereby into a war with Russia.
…
The Biden administrations war mongering towards Russia may be seen to be free of cost. But it takes only one miscalculation in Kiev or some unforeseen incident in the Black Sea region and the situation could seriously escalate.
Moscow’s narrative is that the Western powers are deliberately fueling Ukraine’s revanchist instincts by arming it and encouraging President Volodymyr Zelensky, who is fighting for political survival, to believe that with Western support, a window of opportunity is opening to recapture the lost territories in Donbas and Crimea and thereby redeem his pledge to be his country’s savior.And second, as Moscow sees it, the rising tensions with Russia have become a convenient alibi to involve NATO directly in Ukraine’s security and make it a template of the West’s containment strategy against Russia.
It does seem similar to Bush II wanting to complete what Bush I did in Iraq, is being repeated now with Obama II (Biden) wanting to complete what Obama I did in the Ukraine in 2014.
Russia has stated that it would intervene in the Ukraine should Kiev decided to invade Donbass. It would be the end of the Ukraine Moscow has said. (Russia would likely end up with taking the majority Russian east and south of the Ukraine. The rest would end up as a landlocked agricultural Nazi infested enclave.)
The Kremlin has also multiple times complained about the ever increasing amount of NATO activities near its border. A U.S. study confirms those activities:
There were some 2,900 incidents between NATO and Russian forces between 2013 and 2020. The three-year moving average increased by more than 60 percent over this eight-year timespan.
Of course, NATO will accuse Russia of doing what they are in fact doing, that is what politicians do, time and again, which is why they always fail and war is always one stupid mistake away from reality.
Moon of Alabama outlines the lie below:
The U.S. for its part has claimed that Russia is assembling more troops at its borders with the Ukraine. The claim is false. The Ukrainian defense intelligence chief recently provided a map with a table which shows that Russia has current only 40 Battalion Tactical Groups (ATG) at the ready while during the last ‘Russia invades’ scare in April it had 53 BTGs ready to go. How 25% less troops at the ready are supposed to a new danger is not clear to me.
There is hope that Biden (Obama) will come to his senses and save face by choosing this off-ramp …
The Saker detects signs of secret negotiations between Washington and Moscow that may be at the core of the announced Putin-Biden summit:
Since a Presidential summit is only organized once both sides have already come to a general agreement, at least in principle, on at least some issues, if Putin and Biden do meet, that means that both sides have worked out at least the outlines of some kind important deal (not just empty statements, as was the case the first time around, at least officially).
In his recent speech Putin said “it is imperative to push for serious long-term guarantees that ensure Russia’s security in this area, because Russia cannot constantly be thinking about what could happen there tomorrow“. If Biden is willing to not only give guarantees (the Russians, understandably, have *zero* trust in western promises, written or oral) but also to actually take actions, probably mutual, coordinated and verifiable actions by both sides, then a war in Europe could be avoided, rather easily in fact.
Will Biden undo the total mess created by Obama and Trump and their Neocon handlers?
Maybe.
This is all blow-back of typical US intervention in places where it puts the American Empire’s nose .. seems that you can’t fix stupid.
I think most people understand that secession is a bad word, because the last time that was attempted in the US it was to keep slavery intact, at least that is what our school books say. Even our socialist Pledge of Allegiance implicitly says that “one nation, indivisible”, which is a lie. The US Constitution never suggested that. In fact, the Articles of Confederation actually said that it was to be a “perpetual union” and yet it was disposed of rather quickly in secret in Philadelphia in 1787 when the convention was intended to “tweak” the articles.
I have said before that some of the northern states thought seriously about secession from 1796 to 1814 (Danbury Convention) but after they became a more powerful region in the 1830s they quietly quit talking about it. The southern states talked nullification in the 1830s and by the 1860s it became talk of legal, peaceful secession.
Do note, according to Lincoln’s first inaugural address in 1861 he outlined that as long as the southern states continued to pay tariffs (taxes), that nothing would happen. Lincoln also used the Corwin Amendment bait to tempt the 7 southern states to reenter the union to gain protection of their domestic institutions (slavery) forever, guaranteed by a new 13th amendment to the US Constitution that was already getting support in Congress consisting of the states that were still in the union at that time.
Legally is the way the southern gentlemen approached secession, as outlined by what was mentioned in the secession documents and what was not there. What was there was insecurity about their domestic institutions (which is why Lincoln, in a Trump like move, called them out on). What wasn’t there was the elephant in the room, the fact that a majority of collected tariffs, what the general (federal) government had for operating income (tax revenue), came from southern ports. Since the 1830s the northern dominated Congress had squeezed that income to fund its internal improvements, a majority of such took place in the northern states. Income redistribution was already a thing! However, this complaint is more difficult to prove in “divorce hearings”, so slavery, an issue that the abolitionists had been harping on for over a decade, would do. Data was easy to come by to prove their point.
Secession itself did NOT start the war between the states. Non-payment of tariffs was the trigger as promised by Lincoln in his early MAR1861 address. Note that in the weeks following Lincoln’s offer, the economics drove the fear and war-talk:
.. the VERY day after the Confederate Congress set their tariff rate at 2% to effectively become a free trade zone, Lincoln’s Congress UPPED their tariff to even 60% on some items ..
It was Lincoln’s REACTION to tariff non-payment that ended up being worse than the exit of seven southern states would have been if it could have remained peaceful.
.. Lincoln called up 75,000 troops WELL before he called Congress into secession on July 4th, 1861 to put down the “insurrection” as Lincoln never admitted that these states had legally seceded ..
Who would think that government REACTION to a perceived threat (Covid-19) could be worse than the disease itself. But I digress …
For years, decades and over a century has passed and the scars of keeping the “spouse” in an abusive marriage has taken its toll, not to mention the 750,000 young men dead, the economic destruction of the south and the war debt that resulted. Reconstruction following the war helped to set the stage for intense hatred that is used by political types ever since to stoke race wars.
The GOP run Union also introduced “total war” domestically before they did a road show (WWII Dresden, Japan & Korea & Vietnam & Iraq, etc)
List of towns burnt or pillaged by Confederate forces:
ZERO
List of towns burnt or pillaged by Union forces:
Osceola, Missouri, burned to the ground, September 24, 1861 – The town of 3,000 people was plundered and burned to the ground, 200 slaves were freed and nine local citizens were executed.
Platte City – December 16, 1861 – “Colonel W. James Morgan marches from St. Joseph to Platte City. Once there, Morgan burns the city and takes three prisoners — all furloughed or discharged Confederate soldiers. Morgan leads the prisoners to Bee Creek, where one is shot and a second is bayonetted, while the third is released. ”
Dayton, Missouri, burned, January 1 to 3, 1862
Columbus, Missouri, burned, reported on January 13, 1862
Bentonville, Arkansas, partly burned, February 23, 1862 – a Federal search party set fire to the town after finding a dead Union soldier, burning most of it to the ground
Winton, North Carolina, burned, reported on February 21, 1862 – first NC town burned by the Union, and completely burned to the ground
Bledsoe’s Landing, Arkansas, burned, October 21, 1862
Hamblin’s, Arkansas, burned, October 21, 1862
Donaldsonville, Louisiana, partly burned, August 10, 1862
Athens, Alabama, partly burned, August 30, 1862
Randolph, Tennessee, burned, September 26, 1862
Elm Grove and Hopefield, Arkansas, burned, October 18, 1862
Fredericksburg December 11–15, 1862 – town not destroyed, but the Union army threw shells into a town full of civilians
Napoleon, Arkansas, partly burned, January 17, 1863
Mound City, Arkansas, partly burned, January 13, 1863
Hopefield, Arkansas, burned, February 21, 1863 – “Captain Lemon allowed residents one hour to remove personal items, and the men then burned every house in the village.”
Eunice, Arkansas, burned, June 14, 1863
Gaines Landing, Arkansas, burned, June 15, 1863
Bluffton, South Carolina, burned, reported June 6, 1863 – ”
Union troops, about 1,000 strong, crossed Calibogue Sound and eased up the May River in the pre-dawn fog, surprising ineffective pickets and having their way in an unoccupied village. Rebel troops put up a bit of a fight, but gunboats blasted away as two-thirds of the town was burned in less than four hours. After the Yankees looted furniture and left, about two-thirds of the town’s 60 homes were destroyed.”
Sibley, Missouri, burned June 28, 1863
Hernando, Mississippi, partly burned, April 21, 1863
Austin, Mississippi, burned, May 24, 1863 – “On May 24, a detachment of Union marines landed near Austin. They quickly marched to the town, ordered all of the townpeople out and burned down the town.”
Columbus, Tennessee, burned, reported February 10, 1864
Meridian, Mississippi, destroyed, February 3 to March 6, 1864 (burned multiple times)
Washington, North Carolina, sacked and burned, April 20, 1864
Hallowell’s Landing, Alabama, burned, reported May 14, 1864
Newtown, Virginia, May 30, 1864
Rome, Georgia, partly burned, November 11, 1864 – “Union soldiers were told to burn buildings the Confederacy could use in its war effort: railroad depots, storehouses, mills, foundries, factories and bridges. Despite orders to respect private property, some soldiers had their own idea. They ran through the city bearing firebrands, setting fire to what George M. Battey Jr. called harmless places.”
Atlanta, Georgia, burned, November 15, 1864
Camden Point, Missouri, burned, July 14, 1864 –
Kendal’s Grist-Mill, Arkansas, burned, September 3, 1864
Shenandoah Valley, devastated, reported October 1, 1864 by Sheridan. Washington College was sacked and burned during this campaign.
Griswoldville, Georgia, burned, November 21, 1864
Somerville, Alabama, burned, January 17, 1865
McPhersonville, South Carolina, burned, January 30, 1865
Barnwell, South Carolina, burned, reported February 9, 1865
Columbia, South Carolina, burned, reported February 17, 1865
Winnsborough, South Carolina, pillaged and partly burned, February 21, 1865
Tuscaloosa, Alabama, burned, April 4, 1865
You wonder why the south remembers? Like ISIS only different, right? There are many nations in this world that remember the last time the USA tried to bring “democracy” to them!
So since the US government has now educated generations of Americans to believe somehow that secession in 1776 from the British Empire was honorable but that secession in 1861 from the Northern and Western united States was not, there seems to be no option in 2020 for secession, only nationalism or globalism.
This is extremely sad for future generations of Americans. Somehow, we are so “exceptional” that we can’t even achieve what the USSR did in 1991, to split into 15 republics PEACEFULLY!
The US just can’t do this, give up empire and lose the 5th largest economy (California alone) in the world when in 1861 it could not give up 70% of the federal government’s tax revenue. Plus, giving up the west coast means all those ports for US fleets, and you know Hawaii would go with California, Oregon and Washington State. The US has a character flaw.
The ramp-up on sanctions against Russia and China has been in preparation for this moment in the American Empire’s timeline to cover the excessive debt needed just to survive Covid-19, not to mention expanding the US Navy from 300 ships to 500 ships to meet the “threat” in the South China Sea. (Don’t ask me how this threatens Americans in the 50 states, because it doesn’t)
This kind of looks like the NATO encroachment on Russia the last 25 years:
Who is the aggressor here? But I guess empires are like that and we better get used to this kind of talk. The only talk anyone will NOT speak of is SECESSION apparently. No one really wants peace, except the people, who are but pawns in this game the oligarchs have going on.
I prefer federalism as perceived by Lincoln (in 1846, well before he flipped on that issue when he was president):
“Any people, anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right, a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, may revolutionize, and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit. More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority, intermingled with, or near about them, who may oppose their movements.” ~ Lincoln January 12 1848, expressing the near-universally held Jeffersonian principle
I prefer Jefferson’s thoughts as well:
“Whether we remain in one confederacy, or form into Atlantic and Mississippi confederacies, I believe not very important to the happiness of either part. Those of the western confederacy will be as much our children & descendants as those of the eastern, and I feel myself as much identified with that country, in future time, as with this; and did I now foresee a separation at some future day, yet I should feel the duty & the desire to promote the western interests as zealously as the eastern, doing all the good for both portions of our future family which should fall within my power.” ~ Letter from President Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Joseph Priestly, Jan. 29, 1804
These thoughts have been lost now that nationalism and globalism reign. We and our kids and grand-kids have lost much in 200 years.
If anyone bothered to observe the news other than Covid-19 this week, there was a tense situation in and around the Idlib province of Syria that had the potential for bringing in NATO on the side of Turkey and Russian ships and troops on the side of Syria. The obvious question for me was, WHY would NATO consider joining Turkish forces IN Syria? But then I remembered, the US Empires troops are STILL on Syrian soil .. so the big empire models how to act ABOVE THE LAW to the little empire.
Scott Ritter’s article in Ron Paul’s Institute for Peace and Prosperity places what Russia accomplished this week in proper perspective:
This week’s meeting between Presidents Putin and Erdogan in Moscow was cast as preventing a war between Russia and Turkey in Syria. War, however, was never on the horizon. Putin called Erdogan’s bluff, and the Turk folded.
One has to admit that since Russia’s invite by Syria in 2015 to directly assist in repelling the ISIS and other radical militia incursion, financed and backed by US/UK/SaudiArabia/Israel coalition, Putin has played it all very cool and extremely patient. Many times there was open second guessing going on within Russia and Syria as to the strategic approach to this intervention that the US had openly hoped would result in “regime change” so that the US (actually Israel, the US Empire’s other little brother) could benefit with Assad out of the way.
Here we are five YEARS later as Russia negotiates a slow and methodical way to return Syria to Syrians while keeping the US Empire and NATO only marginally involved. One has to wonder how many weapons that the Syrian and Russian armies have found US serial numbers on. I am pretty sure there is a database somewhere with all that information for a special time in the future.
Scott Ritter goes on to explain:
Over the course of a week, from February 27 through March 5, Syria’s Idlib province transitioned from being ground zero for a war between the Syrian army and allied forces, and heavily armed groups opposed to the rule of Syrian President Bashar Assad, into a geopolitical powder keg that threatened to pull the Turkish and Russian militaries into direct conflict with one another. On March 1, Turkey, following up on threats previously made by President Erdogan to drive the Syrian Army and its allies back to the line of demarcation set forth in the original Sochi Agreement, unleashed a major offensive, dubbed “Operation Spring Shield” and involving thousands of Turkish troops fighting alongside anti-Assad formations.
Erdogan also inserted himself into the Syrian civil war (thanks Hillary, Obama and McCain for your “service”, I am sure the people of Libya love y’all and love ‘Merica as a result you dirt-bags) and has been attempting to play off the US Empire / NATO against Russia. Finally, Russia, as a “partner” enlightened Erdogen as to the errors of his ways in a way that allowed Turkey to save face as they retreated. (The US Empire has yet to understand their 2nd, let alone the 3rd and 4th effects of their approach to squashing a powder-keg, as brute force seems to be their motto.)
While the Putin orchestrated agreement is only a placeholder for lasting peace, it is a step in the right direction:
While couched as a ceasefire agreement, the additional protocol produced by the Moscow summit between Putin and Erdogan on Thursday is a thinly disguised instrument of surrender. The Syrian government got everything it was looking for by launching its offensive, and the Turks and their anti-Assad allies were left licking their wounds in a much-reduced Idlib pocket. Beyond preventing direct conflict between Turkey and Russia, the additional protocol achieves little that changes the situation on the ground. Turkey is still faced with the task of disarming the HTS fighters it currently embraces as allies, and the humanitarian crisis triggered by hundreds of thousands of refugees displaced by the earlier fighting remains. In many ways, the additional protocol, like its antecedent, the Sochi Agreement, is an arrangement designed to fail, because by succeeding it only perpetuates an unsustainable reality that will only be resolved when the totality of Syrian territory is restored to the control of the Syrian government.
So with the Russian “non-empire” strategy in mind, let’s take a look at how the US Empire’s fight (remember the “brute force” MO?) against militias that had nothing to do with 9/11 has panned out after 18.5 years, where instead of surgically targeting the 200 or so AlQ groups that “might” have been linked to 9/11, the US military decided to invade the whole country.(graphic below)
There is no end in sight for this in spite of the bogus Trump peace proposal that depends on the WORD of the US Empire to be believed. Sorry Trump .. from the American Indians to all the broken treaties the US government has bullied its way forward in time to 2020, there is no one on earth that ever believes what the US government says .. EXCEPT the domestic sheep that worship America as their lord and savior.
Sanctions, embargoes and tariffs might not enough for the DC Elite to be convinced that Russia is not a threat to the US Empire’s future. It seems that China, which owns a substantial chunk of US debt, has been marginalized, either by design or by coincidence.
What is the source of this paranoia? Is it that the Russians embarrassed the US by really defeating ISIS? Maybe it was what the Russians found in Syria after ISIS retreated that had the US Empire’s fingerprints all over it. Maybe it is because Russia has done fairly well in spite of the embargoes by trading with other nations, getting off the USD petro-dollar and securing Crimea? Is it because Putin pulled levers to get Trump elected? (Don’t make me laugh)
The MIC / Deep State does need a war soon to keep the defense industry humming and keep those DC lobbyists busy with a majority of Congress in lining their pocketbooks. The Israel-First policy has been a great program for two intense decades (preceded by a couple of decades of US-centric support) ..
.. but that program might be plateauing a bit now that Iraq is pushing for independence from the US orbit, thanks to Trump’s assassination of Iran’s 2nd in command on Iraqi soil. Israel will keep crying that it needs the Golan Heights, more Palestinian soil to settle on and protection from Iraqi missiles.
So to move on and ratchet up some war or preparation for war somewhere on this globe, the US has to focus on Russia. I mean, look at the way Russia has encroached on NATO since 1990:
Oops, I guess NATO has been in expansion mode. Oh well, the narrative pays little attention to facts.
Paul Craig Robert’s article caught my eye this week as he sensed that Russia should be alert to what the US Empire is up to. It seems from this article, that the Russian people don’t see the US as an enemy:
“Only 3% of Russian respondents said they see the West as Russia’s enemy, Levada said. Another 16% said they view the West as a rival.
“Two-thirds of Levada’s respondents (67%) said Russia should treat the West as a “partner,” while 11% said Russia should treat the West as a “friend,” according to the Kommersant business daily’s breakdown of the data.”
Roberts is concerned that the reality of the US Empire’s hate on Russia is a struggle that should be more apparent and real.
Consider the expense (and debt) that the US has expended only to be shown up by Russia’s new hyper-sonic missiles and other emerging technologies.
Examples of the technological lag were made public almost two years ago:
– Mach 20 allows supersonic missile delivery system that can quote “deliver missiles to the needed point in just a matter of the seconds
– A cruise missile with a nuclear engine
– The 200 ton SARMAT ballistic missile that circles around the Earth and again come to the other continents from a surprisingly weird angles
There are a couple more, but I think you get the picture.
With a 1/10th of the US Empire budget (not including the black budgets and other military agencies that do not figure into the DoD official budget), Russia has been 10x more innovative in an attempt to defend itself. I contend that only these new systems that have come of age in the last 5 years helps to deter the US from attempting regime change on Russia itself .. again.
While Roberts thinks that Russia’s military understands the latest war-game that NATO is amassing near Russia’s borders, he contends that the government is failing their people in getting them to understand this reality. Maybe Russia understands that a distracted population is not an innovative or productive one, I guess that would be my own take. In either case, Roberts then says:
How can the Russian people, humiliated by American sanctions and endless denunciations of their elected president, who led them out of American captivity, and threatened by Washington’s nuclear missiles on their border, possiblly(sic) believe in friendship and partnership with Washington?
If the polls are correct, and the Russian people do not understand Washington’s hegemonic impulse, Russian sovereignty is not a sure thing.
I contend that psychologically, having the people surprised by an overt act of aggression on the part of the US Empire would kindle a defensive posture more than warning them day after day that the evil empire (US) is poised to strike at any minute. That is something only the US government would do to justify expensive military interventions around the globe as well as a massive debt.
I stand impressed to date of Russia’s attitude on the world stage, patient with countries like Turkey that vacillate between Russian and US circles while providing true relieve to the people of Syria that is still reeling from Obama’s and Hillary’s induced “civil war’ there using ISIS as their weapon of choice.
Things sure have changed in 40 years, from crazy Ivan to reasonable Putin while the US’s collateral damage was JFK on their way to having crazy Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, Obama and now Trump manning the wheel.
It would be entertaining if it were not so sad and dangerous. Our political class, enables by the elites, scurry around pointing fingers at people assuming that no one can remember the past few years, let alone the past few decades.
Remember Democrats, the “peace” party? Well, they identify as the “war” party now. That transition was amazingly fast and all the sheep that identify with their blue sticker stayed true to blue.
Apparently, Moon of Alabama (MoA) has been following the impeachment hearings, something that I would not waste my own time on, and noted some points of hypocrisy that only comes out when politicians open their mouths.
“It is clearly in our national interest to deter further Russian aggression,” Taylor, the acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine and a decorated Vietnam War veteran, said in explaining why Trump’s decision to withhold congressionally appropriated aid to the most immediate target of Russian expansionism didn’t align with U.S. policy.
But at a time when Democrats are simultaneously eager to influence public opinion in favor of ousting the president and quietly apprehensive that their hearings could stall or backfire, the first round felt more like the dress rehearsal for a serious one-act play than the opening night of a hit Broadway musical.
“In direct contravention of U.S. interests” says the NBC and quotes a member of the permanent state who declares “it is clearly in our national interest” to give weapons to Ukraine.
But is that really in the national U.S. interest? Who defined it as such?
President Obama was against giving weapons to Ukraine and never transferred any to Ukraine despite pressure from certain circles. Was Obama’s decision against U.S. national interest? Where are the Democrats or deep state members accusing him of that?
Russian aggression can be summed up in the following map:
Oh crap … wrong map? No, correct map, just a member of the permanent state talking BS .. “Russian aggression” .. pleeeeaaaasssseee.
MoA also points out who gets to set national foreign policy:
The U.S. constitution “empowers the President of the United States to propose and chiefly negotiate agreements between the United States and other countries.”
The constitution does not empower the “U.S. government policy community”, nor “the administration”, nor the “consensus view of the interagency” and certainly not one Lt.Col. Vindman to define the strategic interests of the United States and its foreign policy. It is the duly elected president who does that
The president does not like how the ‘American policy’ on Russia was built. He rightly believes that he was elected to change it. He had stated his opinion on Russia during his campaign and won the election. It is not ‘malign influence’ that makes him try to have good relations with Russia. It is his own conviction and legitimized by the voters.
…
[I]t is the president who sets the policies. The drones around him who serve “at his pleasure” are there to implement them.
Just as Thomas Jefferson changed course when he came into office after John Adams, so too can Trump after Obama, BUT WAIT .. is what Trump doing so different than Obama?:
President Obama was against giving weapons to Ukraine and never transferred any to Ukraine despite pressure from certain circles.
Oh really now. But something changed that got the Democrat’s dander up .. I am thinking they are courting the Military Industrial Complex more and more because all that lobbying money talks!
Finally, there seems to be some people in this world (much less than 5% for sure) that have thought things through .. and this Ukrainian businessman has been doing some thinkin’:
It is not in the interest of Ukraine to be a proxy for U.S. deep state antagonism towards Russia. Robber baron Igor Kolomoisky, who after the Maidan coup had financed the west-Ukrainian fascists who fought against east-Ukraine, says so directly in his recent NYT interview:
Mr. Kolomoisky, widely seen as Ukraine’s most powerful figure outside government, given his role as the patron of the recently elected President Volodymyr Zelensky, has experienced a remarkable change of heart: It is time, he said, for Ukraine to give up on the West and turn back toward Russia.“They’re stronger anyway. We have to improve our relations,” he said, comparing Russia’s power to that of Ukraine. “People want peace, a good life, they don’t want to be at war. And you” — America — “are forcing us to be at war, and not even giving us the money for it.”
…
Mr. Kolomoisky [..] told The Times in a profanity-laced discussion, the West has failed Ukraine, not providing enough money or sufficiently opening its markets.
Instead, he said, the United States is simply using Ukraine to try to weaken its geopolitical rival. “War against Russia,” he said, “to the last Ukrainian.” Rebuilding ties with Russia has become necessary for Ukraine’s economic survival, Mr. Kolomoisky argued. He predicted that the trauma of war will pass.
…
Mr. Kolomoisky said he was feverishly working out how to end the war, but he refused to divulge details because the Americans “will mess it up and get in the way.”
Yes, the US was just USING the Ukraine, that is why the color revolution under the Obama administration, just to undermine Russia.
Unfortunately, Trump has gone along with the economic war with Russia, but as it turns out, what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger, so Russia of 2019 is a lot stronger than Russia of 2014. Maybe this is the 3D/4D/8D chess that Trump has been playing all along?
The bottom line? Well I agree with Bionic Mosquito on this one:
… he [Trump] was voted in based on his most basic attacks against the system: war and empire, central banking, Hillary is a crook and should be in prison, fix immigration.
On at least one of these – war and empire – I offer two thoughts: first he hasn’t started a meaningful new war; second, he is doing a great job of accelerating the rest of the world’s movement away from the American empire. Both are tremendous libertarian victories as far as I am concerned.
