HOW TO SELL NAZIS, INSURRECTIONISTS & A MURDEROUS COUP TO THE WORLD

HOW TO SELL NAZIS, INSURRECTIONISTS & A MURDEROUS COUP TO THE WORLD

At first sight you might think this was a difficult task. Perhaps even impossible. Yet it was done. It was accomplished because every tool necessary to do it was available in our modern world to do so.

The advent of public relations, using the tools provided by an approach incorporating human psychology, began the process that would lead to the selling of almost anything.

It is Edward Louis Bernays who is credited with being the father of modern public relations. Using what he knew of his uncle Sigmund Freud’s studies he crafted a very successful business model helping U.S. companies to sell more of their products.

‘ Edward Louis Bernays was an American pioneer in the field of public relations and propaganda, and referred to in his obituary as "the father of public relations". His best-known campaigns include a 1929 effort to promote female smoking by branding cigarettes as feminist "Torches of Freedom", and his work for the United Fruit Company in the 1950s, connected with the CIA-orchestrated overthrow of the democratically elected Guatemalan government in 1954. He worked for dozens of major American corporations, including Procter & Gamble and General Electric, and for government agencies, politicians, and nonprofit organizations.’ (Wikipedia)

The period when this newly acquired art of public relations arrived most significantly in the political world was in the early Eighties in both the UK and USA. Margaret Thatcher was newly elected and installed as prime minister in Britain. Ronald Reagan became U.S. president in 1981. The election of these two brought an entirely new approach to the selling of politicians to the general public into being. Prior to Thatcher and Reagan substance counted. It was vital to deliver a good speech that communicated your future plans and such speeches were normally delivered live. Television played a much lesser role and in general people read their news rather than watched it. Television was a relatively simple point and shoot medium with a minimum of commentary.

All this was to change radically through the Eighties. Production values rose and the presentation of politicians grew slicker. Attention to appearance became a high priority. A groomed appearance and especially, a well-tended/coiffured hair was essential. Steadily, appearance began to far outweigh substance. Politicians were cosmetically tended to in similar style to film stars, every aspect of their look was honed to appeal to whatever sector of the population garnered most votes. Focus groups began to be run to see what people most wanted to hear. The most pressing concerns, prejudices, areas of interest and desires were then fed back to the populace at large. Public relations began to take over from anything approaching in-depth political issues. Facts began to become malleable, adjusted to whatever reality was convenient and/or helpful for the occasion and desired narrative.

As Thatcher approached the end of her first term in office she was languishing badly in the polls. It appeared certain that she would fail in the upcoming general election. However, the day was saved for Margaret Thatcher by a certain General Leopoldo Galtieri, then acting president of Argentina. He had decided that the British had occupied the Falkland Islands (The Malvinas) off the Argentine coast long enough and decided to take them back for Argentina by force. The subsequent short war by Britain against the Argentine forces which Britain won boosted Thatcher’s ratings and easily won an election she was otherwise looking likely to have lost.

While Thatcher was raising the patriotic blood of the British, Reagan was using death squads by the name of the Contra Guerrillas in Nicaragua to spread a campaign of fear and intimidation to oust the Sandinista government there. A scheme was devised to secretly fund the Contras through the then prohibited selling of arms to Iran. Concurrently Reagan was assisting the government in El Salvador in its fight with rebel groups in the country.

‘Between 1981 and 1986, senior administration officials secretly facilitated the illegal sale of arms to Iran, who was subjected to an arms embargo at the time. The administration hoped to use the proceeds of the arms sale to fund the Contras, an anti-Sandinista rebel group in Nicaragua. Under the Boland Amendment, further funding of the Contras by legislative appropriations was prohibited by Congress, but the Reagan administration figured out a loophole by secretly using non-appropriated funds instead.’ (Wikipedia)

‘Reagan's policy has been criticised due to the human rights abuses proven repeatedly to be perpetrated by El Salvadoran security force with Amnesty International reporting that it had received: "regular, often daily, reports identifying El Salvador's regular security and military units as responsible for the torture, "disappearance" and killing of civilians. Types of torture reported by those who have survived arrest and interrogation included beatings, sexual abuse, use of chemicals to disorient, mock executions, and the burning of flesh with sulphuric acid."’

The point about the three instances of war at a distance above is the degree to which home audiences were mostly kept quite ignorant, undisturbed and unconcerned concerning the abuses that were taking place in these wars assisted and often financed by the U.S. taxpayer. Thatcher and Reagan of course went on to ever greater electoral success in subsequent years totally unblemished by the death and destruction they had wrought overseas.

The next steps in making war acceptable came after 9/11. The regime change wars that followed would be said to be about ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’. This gave sanction to the death and displacement of millions. Unlike in earlier wars engaged in by the United States journalists would no longer be permitted free reign to investigate and report as they had done during the Vietnam War. Now they would be embedded with the coalition troops and be given nightly briefings, the material from which could be passed on to “inform” the waiting public back home. Another layer in the santizing of war had been laid down.

Now we arrive at the main topic of this commentary, the events which have taken place in Ukraine between the years 2013 and the present day.

In the last few months of 2013 protestors arrived on Maidan Square in the centre of Kiev. These protestors engaged in largely peaceful demonstrations to signal their wish to draw closer to the European Union, a process being pursued by the then president and government who sought to obtain much needed funds. For the protestors this movement toward the EU was moving too slowly and they had doubts that it would result in the outcome they hoped would transform their lives.

At some point in late November/December 2013 an influx of radical elements joined the protest and began using violence both against those protestors they regarded as unable to effect the kind of change they sought. Many had been receiving military training in Poland. Others had received training in subversion techniques in the U.S. embassy in Kiev. Together they began accumulating a wide array of weapons from hand guns to hunting rifles to medieval-type clubs to Molotov Cocktails and the use of heavy cobbles and bricks from surrounding streets. These radical elements, many of whom bore swastika tattoos and emblazoned police shields they had taken from the security forces with Nazi symbology, began attacking the lightly-armed police and torching government buildings. Barack Obama, U.S. president at the time, called them “peaceful protestors” and warned the then Ukrainian authorities to leave them alone.

Maidan Square became a scene from hell as the early months of 2014 wore on. Some seventeen young policemen lost their lives at the hands of the “peaceful protestors”. The square was a war zone day after day. All manner of attacks were made on the security forces armed with only a baton and shield. Heavy chains, toxic sprays and even a fork-lift truck was used against their static line of shields. Kiev’s chief of police requested that his men be given fire arms but the Ukrainian president of the time, Yanukovych turned down the request stating that he wished to maintain “a dialogue” with those on the square.

In the western world there was a little disquiet regarding what was going on in the square however, the primary emphasis was on sympathy for those protesting. This was seen by the appearance of U.S. senators such as John McCain next to Ukrainian members of parliament who cheered on the crowd. The then Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland along with the then U.S. ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt also arrived on the square to lend their encouragement. You will perhaps be able to imagine the response to these events if they were to occur in the USA, UK or Europe in a situation where those you are cheering on have murdered seventeen police officers.

Yet despite the daily increase in violence, despite the obvious Nazi cult elements, despite the arson and general disruption to normal life that was occurring, as far as western political and media elites were concerned the president and his government were the ‘bad guys’.That western interests were invested in the potential result of the mayhem, murder and mass destruction involved and that this skewed the coverage, narratives and support is quite obvious. The entire weight of western mainstream media eventually got behind their political elites in lending their ever increasing support for the insurrection that was taking place. An insurrection that was taking place mind you against a democratically-elected president and government where the elections had been supervised by large teams of electoral observers.

The combined effect of political talking heads of every mainstream political party in the West plus their compliant media elites provided a wall-to-wall veil of decency to these entire murderous and quite clearly criminal events. That the president had to flee for his life, the government fall and U.S. approved quislings take over raised hardly an eyebrow. Even when the two characters mentioned above, Nuland and Pyatt could be heard in a leaked phone call discussing who should take over.

From the fall of the Yanukovych presidency and the then Ukrainian government until today a similar veil of decency has been drawn over events in Ukraine, once again for the benefit of western self-interest. Some 15,000 died in the years after the coup in 2014, the vast majority at the hands of the Ukrainian military and the Nazi-mentality radicals and ultranationalists who were taken into the Ukrainian National Guard. By indiscriminate mortar shelling of villages, towns and cities in the Russian-speaking east the death count inexorably rose over the years. These deaths appear to have counted as little to western news editors and politicians as they did for the ethnic Ukrainians who perpetrated them. Both appear to have regarded those who died, men, women and children of all ages, as sub-human. Western audiences were kept in the dark with only vague inferences that pointed to “The Russians” being at fault.

The facade of western decency and eastern dirtiness continues unabated to this day. Edward Bernays who used the word ‘propaganda’ proudly as a positive thing and a beneficial tool, would surely stand in awe of the emotional and news blackout perpetrated by western political and media elites regarding the killing zone of eastern Ukraine which they assisted in holding in a vacuum. The dying screams would not be heard. The funerals for young boys who had been playing soccer in a school yard or that of a young teacher who lay decapitated by the school house door, or the lady out shopping in her village centre… all as nothing. Not newsworthy at all to western “journalists”, editors of politicians. Because their deaths were not useful and indeed, were counter-productive to the ‘Evil Russia - Innocent Ukraine’ narrative they so fervently and consistently wished to promote.

It continues to this very day. In every speech or statement by a western political figure or official. In every article approved by western editors across the western world. It’s by now a deeply embedded and ingrained policy, with memes that reinforce themselves constantly with no one within the mainstream brave enough or interested enough to contradict them. And a public who, in the main, continue to believe what they are told by their politicians and mainstream news outlets. Too busy or too little interested to look any deeper they meekly accept as true what those who hid so much and lied about so much in the past, tell them. A blanket of lies using all the psychological tricks Bernays used plus so much more learnt from the West’s wars over the years.

HOW TO SELL NAZIS, INSURRECTIONISTS & A MURDEROUS COUP TO THE WORLD

HOW MIGHT THE END GAME IN UKRAINE PLAY OUT?

It's all over bar the shouting. But the fat lady must sing before the end & has a three-part song soliloquy to render. Will the audience applaud... & what might subsequent reviewers say about it all?

That Russia holds the winning hand in Ukraine has been clear to the most astute observers for well over a year now. When western economic and financial sanctions against Russia failed there really could only be one outcome, especially when major trading nations such as India failed to rally to the side of the USA, UK and EU who had expected a united front against Russia for form. In the first three to six months from February 24th 2022 when Russia’s special military operation began we began to see that whatever plan the western powers had with which to see Russia on her knees was failing and failing fast. Then, in 2023, with the defeat of the Ukrainian regime’s Summer offensive, the seal was set without any doubt remaining, on what the final outcome would be.

That Russia will take the Ukrainian regime all the way to a total capitulation no longer remains in doubt. However, as everyone is now fully aware, this entire conflict, from start (in 2014) to finish, is only very marginally about Ukraine from the western perspective. The view from Washington, Whitehall and Brussels takes in a far wider perspective, one that simply cannot countenance defeat in Ukraine. We can only speculate regarding what options they have devised in the inevitable total defeat and quite possibly chaotic and utterly humiliating rout of the Ukrainian army. These possible options are the subject of this present commentary.

What are the major factors informing the view of western political elites regarding the wider geopolitical implications of the conflict in Ukraine?

It is clear that Ukraine holds inordinate influence over the thinking of the western powers. Despite Ukraine having less obvious vital assets for the western leadership than previous interventions by them in the Middle East, it is clear that Ukraine invokes some especially unrelenting intent in them. Why should this be so?

#1 THE NUCLEAR OPTION

The intransigence and depth of commitment to never backing down but always taking things to the next level, forever doubling down with no end in sight without much doubt begins in the hours immediately following 9/11.

It is in the meetings in those hours when the total, and never to be backed away from, goal of eliminating all those who were considered to be active or potential threats to the United States was formulated. 

Nothing else in recent times has the power of 9/11 to engender such an open ended commitment. 

No enemy, possible enemy or nascent enemy of the USA would henceforth be allowed to stand, all were required to be wiped off the face of the earth and replaced. There was to be no Plan B. This goal was never to be questioned, never amended and would be followed to the bitter end until accomplished. 

This, it is clear,  is why we are most likely headed toward a nuclear encounter, an attack, most probably limited, at least at first. 

The Russian leadership, after achieving a clear victorious conclusion to its special military operation in Ukraine will quite probably be given an initial ultimatum to stand down. The seriousness of this ultimatum would be given in some manner, directly most likely to the Russian president himself. This would be the threat of a nuclear attack. 

The president would not act on this threat, not with a nuclear response. But would he order the Russian military to stand down if he was made to understand the threat was real? Perhaps. He would most likely be given 24 hours or less to consider his options. If at the end of that time he had not given the order and some sign of him giving that order was not seen by the U.S. state then I am quite certain a limited tactical nuclear strike would be made on some target within the Russian federation. Not one of the major sites, not a city, most likely a significant military site of some kind. 

The calculation made by the U.S.president and his advisers would be that the Russian president would not wish to engage in an all-out nuclear war and would be cowed into no retaliatory return strike at that moment. Then another ultimatum would be given.

If Russia was made to stand down in this manner then further threats would likely be made that would attempt to have Russia back down even further and retreat to the pre-February 24th 2022 borders of the Russian Federation. This might well come with a sweetener however along the lines of the Minsk Accords, perhaps NATO retreating to its positions at the time of German reunification, or the creation of the European security architecture including Russia that Russia asked for just before the start of its special military operation. Standing down like this would be a very bitter pill to swallow. But what would be the alternative? That alternative doesn’t bear thinking about. Would Putin blink? That’s the billion dollar question.

It is only a remote possibility that any of these sweeteners would be actualised however as the 9/11 protocols insist that ALL present, possible and nascent opposition be eliminated and replaced. It is much more likely that further threats of nuclear attacks would be made to get Vladimir Putin to resign and even to have Russia's present governmental system disbanded and a western system put in its place. 

All of this because of the unquestioned 9/11 goal has no Plan B, no reverse gear. All forces deemed to have the potential to effect harm on the USA MUST be eliminated. The goal requires Russia to be rendered completely toothless and no longer a potential threat of ANY kind. Once the Russia campaign was taken to full completion the ongoing campaign against China would receive even greater weight, power and dedication until the potential opposition in China too removed or else the nation was rendered to a state akin to the weakness level engendered in Syria. In tandem, most probably Iran, or undermined to an extent where its president, government and system of governance will be eliminated and replaced also. Step by step the intention is to effect the post 9/11 plan to the full.

#2 THE WRECKING BALL OPTION

A Russian victory in Ukraine currently remains totally unthinkable to all western leaders that are presently fully committed to winning in Ukraine. Their concept of winning however, requires to be examined. It does not require the Ukrainian regime of the Ukrainian people to win. It is they who must win, those in control of western power who must faithfully bring the 9/11 plan to fruition. If this means making Ukraine completely unlivable for either Ukrainians or Russians, so be it.

In this scenario each of the western powers would commit to doing everything possible to disrupt anything approaching a peaceful solution in Ukraine. Diplomacy died with 9/11 and no return to life will be granted. The 9/11 protocols demand total and unflinching war with every “enemy” out there without relenting for a moment. Nothing but destroying the “enemy” will remain sacred. No nation, no people, no principle.

Every possible weapon from subversion to assassination to the fomenting of coups to dirty tricks of every possible kind, not excluding sabotage to nuclear reactors across Ukraine. No rest to be given to either side in a chaos-creating deluge of disastrous events for any and all sides, putting each against the other to make things utterly unmanageable for the Russians in particular. 

The hope would be, once again, to bring Russia to its knees and as detailed above, with no respect whatsoever to any ethical or moral considerations whatsoever.  By all means necessary in short.

#3 THE UNTHINKABLE OPTION

Again, Russia wins a resounding victory. The Ukrainian army is in complete disarray and the Zelensky regime collapses along with the virtual end of all state administrative functions. All governmental salaries payments end along with pension payments, social security allowances and essentially, all state financial outflows simply cease. What happens next?

Next it is agreed that Poland, Romania and Hungary enter western Ukraine and take certain predefined territories as protectorates on what is termed on a “temporary basis”, a temporary basis that it becomes clear quite soon is on an open-ended basis. Other nations may well be invited to take a slice also with the parcelling out administered most likely through the UN and OSCE.

Meanwhile the Blackrock conglomerate buys up significant portions of rump Ukraine and proceeds to sub-let at a hefty profit to significant numbers of big name companies across western Europe looking to cut their bottom line staff costs. The European Union becomes the biggest cash cow with billions of euros in aid flowing constantly to the benefit of western and U.S. construction concerns such as Halliburton.

What is unthinkable about all this? Nothing. So, what does the unthinkable option consist of?

All of the above assumes that Russia is left to administer the eight regions it now has subsumed within the Russian Federation, that is all territory from the east bank of the Dnieper River to the Azov Sea. This is what is unthinkable and surely anathema to the West. The 9/11 protocols would have completely failed at this point. Russia would continue to thrive after the war and indeed would have very productive new lands to invest in and make exceedingly profitable for the Russian economy.

All of the above is unthinkable from the western elite perspective. But there it is. It is an option. Halt the entire campaign of destroying and replacing all forces of opposition and in addition, forget the necessity (as seen by those immediately after 9/11) of achieving full spectrum dominance worldwide. Undermining China under this option becomes a completely unattainable goal with Russia surviving and now prospering more than ever.

In addition to the above the West and NATO find themselves to be completely humiliated, reduced hugely in stature and relegated to has-been status with the vast majority of nations now looking to Russia, China and the BRICS for leadership, not them. Unthinkable indeed!

So, which option do you think is most likely to be taken over the next three to six months for that is the approximate time period when the decision will require to be made. 

1, 2 or 3… or perhaps 4? 

What say you?

RUSSIA, TAKE THE DONBASS, IT’S THE RIGHT THING TO DO!

 

First posted 3rd February 2022

Zelensky & Biden both need war, or at least the threat of war, to draw support for their flagging opinion poll ratings... which are descending rather speedily down the toilet.

These two are far from the brightest lights among an array of dim bulbs who can only flicker rather than flash. Perhaps Putin ought to give them what they crave, take the Donbass and light them up a tad?

No matter that western elites would go totally ape-shit, it’s looking increasingly like the right thing to do. More than that, it is looking like the *essential* thing to do, the right thing to do, the thing that can put an end to the current West-created impasse. With its back covered by China, Russia can pretty much afford to set the screwheads of western idiocy raving mad at him. Let’s face it, what more can they say about him they have not said a thousand times already? He can take it. He’s shown this innumerable times.

There’s an old saying, you may as well be hung for (stealing) a sheep as a lamb. Russia has something to lose admittedly, however, far less than when this all blew up due to U.S. and EU interference in Ukraine’s business back in the winter of 2013-14. Russia can just about afford the damage the western powers will try to inflict upon her. She has gone through so much worse during WWII than the West could possibly do and that Stalingrad Spirit has not faded with the years. The Russian people have much the same mettle now as they did back then. Tradition has faced down modernity in most Russian households and the respect for the veterans of WWII lives on and provides a needed example for young Russians now.

The highest percentage of those in the Donbass are pro-Russian Russian speakers who know all too well that they would be far better off as part of the Russian Federation than they ever will be in Ukraine even if they live to be a hundred years old or more. Besides, they feel so much closer to Russia, both physically and mentally than to those who would be their eternally greedy masters in Kiev or further into the depravities of EU nations (as they see them). The vast majority of those in the Donbass would greet Russian troops as liberators and greet them with cheers, hugs, flowers and loaves of bread with a sprinkling of salt.

Russia and the Russian people would weather the storm of rhetoric and attempted economic venom from the West in the event of Russia storming in. A lesson will have been taught NATO, a lesson the American architect of the Cold War containment policy of the Soviet Union, George Kennan would say was well deserved. He predicted back when the first three ex-Warsaw Pact states were welcomed into NATO that the day would come when Russia would be angered enough to refuse to tolerate any further encroachment. It appears that day has well and truly come.

Russia has been preparing for this eventuality. She has built up her defences making herself as immune as she can do for whatever the West throws at her. Putin has done his best to appear unperturbed while readying her defences. His crowning achievement may well be the development of the array of hypersonic weaponry now standing ready to repulse any insane American Dr. Strangeloves who think Russia is a pushover.

Russia has established new, stronger and vastly more dependable trading partners and networks, chief of all that with China. After taking Donbass, if he should decide to, Putin will need to cleave ever closer to China and share military technologies as never before, get the second Siberia to China pipeline completed in record time and make official the loose alliance against the West that has borne such fruit in recent times.

The West, in the aftermath of Russia acting in its own best interests by taking the Donbass will be in disarray no matter how resolutely furious it may seem. Nations such as Germany, France and Italy will find its elites wetting themselves at the thought of going along with the USA and UK in their new super-sanctions against Russia. They know what Russia can do to their economies by return, turning off the gas tap, freezing them out as she turns to other, more agreeable, and much friendlier markets.

Russia’s true friends will stick with her, India, South Africa, perhaps a Lula-renewed Brazil and above all of course China. Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Yemen and many others will stand cheering and applauding as Russia gives the USA and the EU a double whammy. Many will dance in the streets and wave Russian flags, even as far away as the Sudan and Mali. And naturally across Serbia and among the populations of the ex-Warsaw Pact nations where many still recall Russia with affection and despise the warmongers of the West.

All in all taking the Donbass more and more looks like the best thing Russia can do right now. Its pleas for understanding have fallen on stony ground, its hopes to be welcomed into a common European home, dashed. The long years of patiently waiting for the West to come to its senses and for the redundant, fear-based force of NATO to be disbanded, have ended. Russia has finally come to the terminal end of any patience it had. Now it will act on the basis that its enemies are truly insane with no possibility of psychiatric treatment in sight. Only shock therapy has any potential for effecting a cure now.

Russia, take the Donbass, it’s the right thing to do!

THE WEST’S GEOPOLITICAL CHESSBOARD IS SOAKED IN UKRAINIAN BLOOD

 

We are nearing the end of the bloody Ukraine saga. The puppets of the western powers are sagging at the end of their strings, drowning in their own blood. To pull the curtain down is long overdue.

We have been watching a tragedy take place at the furthest edge of Europe for almost two years now, a tragedy of epic proportions written by some of the most experienced authors of such tragedies across the western world. Unabashed by their initiation of many similar, earlier, bloodbaths they sought to stage yet another sequel, one last bout of “useful” carnage. The epilogue however, is being rewritten for them.

If the American, British and European political elites have any sense of decency left in their bodies they will release their death grip on Ukraine now before Ukrainians die in even greater numbers. What we have seen so far is only a prelude to the wholesale massacre of Ukrainians that will come with further input of finance, weaponry and ammunition from the West. It is time for them to show humility now, accept the humiliation that comes with defeat and spare the lives of the Ukrainians who will now die if they don’t.

Russia has won. They have lost. And through the intransigence of the western powers an unthinkable number of Ukrainians have died who would still be alive and with their families if they had abandoned their plan to initiate regime change in Russia. Ukraine was their chosen tool, their pawn in a global chess game. Russia was the ultimate target of a scheme initiated in 2008 at the NATO Bucharest summit, pushed onward during Ukraine’s ‘Orange Revolution’ in 2004 and carried through to a yet further stage in the Maidan insurrection of 2014. 

Only a few steps more were required after the coup on Kiev’s Maidan Square. The next elements involving inexorable pressure against Russia, of continual deceptions, goaded Russia further and further until she was brought to the final corner from which there was only one way out. The trap had been laid meticulously. Russia, made to mount her campaign against her chief tormentor, NATO, via the illegal Ukrainian regime that had been maneuvered into position with all military advantage catered for. Every financial and economic weapon was poised to bring Russia down and bring about regime change in short order.

As we see now, it all went horribly wrong for all those terribly “clever” western planners who had readied every possible weapon, poised for the right moment to strike. One by one Russia blunted every single one of them. In a little short of two years Russia has brought about a momentous defeat for all her attackers. One by one Russia tore down every defence so meticulously constructed and strategically arraigned against her by all the best military minds the West had at its disposal. Russia, alone, defeated every NATO nation through the complete and utter defeat of Ukraine.

Even now, in the face of this utter defeat the leaders of these nations appear ready to sacrifice more Ukrainians, unwilling as they are to face the humiliation this by rights ought to be owned by them. For those who care to look past whatever prejudices, wishful and magical thinking they might still retain, can surely acknowledge that the Ukrainians have paid a high enough price for the geopolitical mendacity and cynical “cunning” of their western masters. It’s time to say “Enough!” and let the blood-letting end. There has been carnage enough. Far, far more than enough. The West must let Ukraine go. The tool is broken. The pawn is fallen. The chessboard is no longer black and white, but soaked blood red.

  

THE WEST'S WAR IN UKRAINE - HOW'S IT GOING?

Western politicians & pundits are cranking up the rhetoric as the Ukrainian conflict nears its conclusion, a huge Russian win. How will this be spun in the West, and what will they do in the meantime?

HOW ARE WESTERN POLITICAL ELITES & PUNDITS COPING?

You can understand the motivation of western politicians and the tame pundits who appear on western news programmes and talk shows discussing the conflict in Ukraine. They daren’t face facts. They don't want to confront what it would mean for them to halt the conflict and seek a negotiated settlement. They are determined to simply kick the can further down the road and just maybe, somehow or other, they can get out of this without having to eat crow. People often have short memories, especially if they have been conditioned through incessant misinformation for years on end. This is their great hope. 

They assume that there will be a big uproar when Ukraine finally goes down. This is unavoidable. But they know well that those folks within mainstream media ALSO got Ukraine totally wrong so they will tend to minimise the publicity and will mirror the fabricated narrative that has been concocted and pre-cooked. 

It appears that what they have fixed upon is a lie they think the largely already grossly misinformed and conditioned public will believe, that Russia wanted all of Ukraine and they failed in that ambition. In fact there is no evidence whatsoever that this was the Russian goal, far, far from it. Russia would want this like a hole in the head as the saying goes. Indeed, Putin struggled manfully from the start of all this in 2014 to ensure that Ukraine stayed intact and sovereign. His major concern was to safeguard the safety and autonomy of the Russian-speakers in eastern Ukraine who were, from 2014 under major military attack by the Ukrainian military and associated ultranationalist militias. 

At no time did Russia wish to grasp the poisoned chalice that is Ukraine. Russia was only pushed into mounting what was meant to be a limited campaign to get the Ukrainian regime to fulfil its promise to give the Russian-speakers enough autonomy to guarantee their safety and the ability to continue the pro-Russian ethos, culture and affiliation that was an integral part of their way of life on the border with Russia in eastern Ukraine.

So, together the politicians speak from the same hymn sheet stating that all will go to plan if we just keep going by throwing ever more money and, if available, weapons and munitions at Ukraine. If, finally, it all goes belly up we’ll say that Russia failed to take all of Ukraine so it’s really a success, not a failure even if it might look that way. If not enough people are falling for this fairy tale they can say that well, it was all Ukraine’s fault. They got it all wrong, not us. They didn’t do what we said. If they had done so everything would have been hunky-dory and they (and we) would have won. They will keep all heads under the parapet whereever possible and point at Ukraine when it all comes crashing down. The big hope is that people are already conditioned, or ignorant enough, so that they can sneak away untarnished. That's how the political and media mind works. You have surely seen this all before as they are both entirely predictable.

…

UKRAINE: WAR AS THE THEATRE OF THE ABSURD

This conflict has been treated as a theatre production all along by the Ukrainian regime, or at least the two or three spokesperson who speak for it. The audience is if course the entire population of the western world and the transmission agencies western press and media. It really didn't matter what fabrications were fed to the transmitting agents it was believed implicitly by all and sundry. That all and sundry included all western politicians whose intelligence officers knew well to only convey positives up the line. In total this all fed into the required 'war mode' way of thinking. We are always right and doing well and the others are always wrong and being constantly defeated. As in other recent western military disasters this has led to the blind leading the blind... and it is still going on. Those blind mice are of course headed for the cliff edge where they will fall over one after another.

…

MORE BLOOD MONEY FOR UKRAINE?

More money for Ukraine equates only to more dead Ukrainians. Speak peace for real, not as a rhetorical tactic. Ukraine is currently losing a new high total of just under 1,000 per day dead and wounded.

If western leaders want to consult their consciences rather than their likelihood of getting re-elected they must pressure every colleague to vote to end this.

The further this goes on the more dead and mutilated Ukrainians there will be and the more territory lost to Russian forever. But politically U.S. politicians are likely to just keep the whole thing rolling on and hope they can keep their heads below the parapet when the whole thing goes completely belly up. Like with Afghanistan.

…

WHO IS IN THE RIGHT, RUSSIA OR UKRAINE?

Anyone who saw what was happening from 2014 onwards or knows anything about the near decade of the Ukrainian army and its vicious militia cohorts shelling civilians all across the Donbass region and has observed that, seeing the dead bodies of children, men and women of all ages in the process, certainly wants the Russians to win.

(This entire period where the Ukrainians army and its minions shelled and killed thousands upon thousands of innocent civilians across the entire Donbass was hidden from exposure in the western world by both western politicians and media. This should tell you EVERYTHING you need to know about what's going on.)

…

INTEL MASSAGED FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES

In previous years, prior to 9/11, the intelligence services of the USA, UK and EU could be relied upon to hold political and military concerns at arms length because their job was to get as near a completely clear view as possible on the reality of the geopolitical situation. The political class needed to hear as close to the reality as possible in order to hone their political actions to that reality. To obtain this reality the intelligence agencies could not afford to take a one-sided, prejudiced view, i.e. seeing western aims and actions as all good and the opposing sides aims and actions as all bad. They had to try to take as objective a view as possible so that an overall, as accurate as possible picture could be obtained that would assist in the decision-making process. 

After 9/11 all intelligence agencies were, by one means or another, either by overt demands or subtle inferences made to graduate toward providing what was wanted rather than providing what was objectively known. Those who provided what those in Washington, Whitehall or Brussels wanted to hear received plaudits, gold stars and promotion. Those who didn't were seen as suspicious, perhaps leaning toward the enemy and bad for morale. That sort of thing gets around and the resultant blind ignorance is what we saw all around the West now in both the political and mass media fields. And most of it stems from the shock of and aftershocks from 9/11.

…

WAR RUSSIA EVER GOING TO LOSE THIS?

Russia was never going to contemplate losing this conflict as such a result would have existential implications for Russia stretching on for the foreseeable future. If Russia was to lose it would have NATO on its doorstep. This was not only seen in terms of an active military threat by NATO but also in terms of the constant destabilising factor of its presence and the absolutely predictable overt and covert manipulation of that presence against Russia in a constant effort to undermine the state from below. Any and all resultant effects of a loss in this conflict by Russia was quite likely in the medium to long term to see renewed chaos brought to Russia by a multitude of sources pressing home the plan to weaken Russia and break it up into parts. Russia was NEVER going to let ANY of this happen.

…

WILL THE NEOCONS MARCH ON TO THE NEXT TARGET AFTER UKRAINE COLLAPSES?

The calculus of much neoconservative thinking appears to be based on a concept that is rapidly ceasing to be true, that the USA has such military might that it can shell and slaughter any number of nations and make them change into some kind of shape the neocons consider kosher. 

Nations, tooled up with better weapons than ever, with smart missiles and bombs and increasingly smart intel and AI-driven drones, see all the weaknesses the USA is now laying bare. The USA as it is now can’t cope with all the problems and their complexity that are rising now to confront their obsession with global interference.

Like one of those titanic dinosaurs that came to the end of its evolutionary niche and was brought down by a horde of much smaller creatures, the neocon elites of the USA, stuck in their long-ago mindset of the mighty USA able to do whatever it wants to whoever it wants whenever it wants,  are in for a shock to their system. Predators are circling and vultures will soon follow.

HOW FAR WILL THE COLLECTIVE WEST FALL WHEN UKRAINE GOES DOWN?

The western powers have bet big on Ukraine weakening Russia. They have invested huge political and financial capital in the enterprise. What happens if they emerge from it totally bankrupted?

Currently we see the USA stretched far beyond its normal ability to reach. The national debt now stands at some $34 trillion with an annual interest payment of some $1 trillion and counting. This while military expenditures continue to rise. All with the prospect of a war with Iran in the offing and a massive rebuilding of Israel’s economy required. Add a potential re-start of the Korean War (North Korea just changed its constitution to once again designate South Korea as an enemy.) 

Seeing the U.S. state’s weakness it is inevitable that nations who have been under active threat and sanctions by it will see their opportunity to implement policies they have long waited to implement, further adding to North American woes. The Houthis are clearly unimpressed with the U.S. campaign (now in its fourth round of missile strikes against them) and are continuing to prevent passage of ships attempting to reach Israel. Each missile fired by the U.S. ships in the region costs many millions of dollars.

Congress is demanding that money needs to be spent strengthening the border between the USA and Mexico rather than sending it to Ukraine in what is increasingly being recognised as a lost cause. Only U.S. politicians who are desperately trying to save face and stave off humiliation still want this. Sending seemingly endless billions to Ukraine kicks the can further down the road where they hope they can misdirect attention somehow and say the whole catastrophic failure there was their fault.

However, even if western populations fall for the assertion that it was the various lacks of the Ukrainian regime and its army that caused the whole enterprise to go belly up the U.S. political elite will not go unscathed. Not by a long shot. The consequence of their defeat in Ukraine along with the billions already spent and the billions that will still be required in some form or another if the U.S. elites don’t simply walk away, will be enormous.

But the fall from grace doesn’t end there. With the conclusive victory of Russia over the Kiev regime a number of hits to the reputation of both the USA and its tool, NATO will be inevitable. The shock that all those who advocated for Ukraine are recognised as having spread misinformation with the specific purpose of duping the entire population of the western world will reverberate across the collective west. The reputation of the USA as global cop will fall even further than it did due to the Afghan humiliation. NATO too will be seen as a failure, a paper tiger. And, when there is no longer any possibility for western media to hide its duplicity since the Ukraine conflict began in 2014 the autopsy on its failures will begin.

The mistrust with which a gathering number had already felt toward the Big Brother aspect of western states during Covid will be multiplied many fold. Western politicians, already held in extremely low esteem will plummet even further to an all time nadir from which this time they may never rise. In the USA and across Europe political heads will roll. Macron is surely a political dead duck, Scholz also. Biden is a certain casualty as is Sunak in the UK. Even now we see a changing of the guard in Slovakia with Robert Fico now prime minister backing up Viktor Orban of Hungary in saying no more money for war to Ukraine.

The western powers who went to war with Russia and were defeated on both military and economic battlefields as well as the battlefield of public opinion will be discredited. The new batch of leaders who take their place will recognise the realities facing them and will as quickly as possible mend fences with Russia and reestablish economic ties across the board at Russia’s discretion. A new security architecture for Europe including Russia will be agreed, signed and ratified in the UN. Russia’s eight new oblasts will be formally acknowledged as now being fully integrated regions of the Russian Federation along with Crimea.

The BRICS+ group as a whole and as individual nations will increasingly work with ever more nations globally creating new agreements that lead to stronger connections one to another in a spirit of tolerance creating stable, peaceful conditions. The USA, humbled by multiple humiliations from Ukraine to Gaza to Yemen, North Korea and beyond, will restrict itself to its own borders repatriating its troops from Germany and the rest of Europe and in time, from all its other bases worldwide. 

The changes above will be on different timetables. Some, such as the fall of most, if not all, the war-advocates in regard to Ukraine will fall in the short term. The return and retrenchment of U.S. military forces and military assets from Europe and beyond will necessitate a longer term until completion though significant numbers of troops will head home before a significant period of time has elapsed.

BRICS will have many more applications from nations that were once allies of the western powers. The Eurasian Union will be vastly strengthened also. Latin America, free of threat from a cowed USA to the north will experience a wave of changes where pro-U.S. politicians can no longer find an electorate willing to vote for them. Eyes will look east to China and Russia for investment and trade agreements. Cuba will at last be made free of the sanctions the USA has imposed on it for decade upon decade as will all others who have suffered under these mendacious, unilateral, illegal acts of state terror. 

We will no longer talk of ‘The West’. Almost all, if not all those who clung to the U.S. orbit will, one after another, disassociate themselves from it. The USA will head to a level of bankruptcy far beyond the level it has reached now. Israel, its proxy in the Middle East will likely be equally bankrupt soon after and will most likely disappear from the map, replaced, once again, by the name Palestine. The USA will be isolated and quarantined until it becomes clear that once and for all it has learned its lesson and begins to atone for its past crimes.

This is how the mighty West will fall with the total failure of its Ukraine gambit. Ukraine will be the catalyst that causes an eventual chain reaction of loss of reputation for the USA across the globe. Its misbegotten attack of Russia will be seen to have brought about its downfall by its very own hand. The indefatigable Palestinians, Yeminis, Iranians, Syrians, Iraqis and very likely the North Koreans, will also have gladly assisted in the process. Wiser heads across the USA, UK and Europe having replaced the fanatical idiocy of those who went before and the complete fall from grace of those who advocated for war will leave no doubt in any mind of just how far the collective west has fallen.