T. Belman. Black comes out in support of NATO giving Zelensky the support he needs to achieve “an acceptable result”. He does not define what he considers “acceptable”. Obviously the more support we give the more acceptable the result will be assuming it acts as a deterrent. . My problem is, that such added support may result in escalation rather than de-escalation. How much escalation, with its concomitant death and destruction, is he prepared for. Or is he arguing to win at all costs.;
Secondly, he assumes that this is a conflict between the democratic west and the totalitarian Russia. Many have argued that it is really a struggle between the New World Order and what Dr Turley calls a civilization state. Others call it the Nation State or nationalism. The NWO doesn’t have a lock on democracy and the rule of law. Just look at what America has become under its direction. Not only has it subverted the rule of law and the constitution but it has overturned the Judeo Christian morality on which it was founded. Many would argue that the NWO is a danger to the kind of life we led and the kind of life we want to live.
By Conrad Black, EPOCH TIMES March 7, 2022
All of modern history could be ransacked in vain to find a more ludicrously implausible and self-defeating policy than the Biden administration’s deliberate suppression of American oil and gas production, which has scorched the world oil price upwards and financed the barbarous Russian invasion of Ukraine that the United States rightly condemns and vigorously opposes.
The 2002 invasion of Iraq was justifiable as an assault on a terrorism-exporting state, though allegations of development of weapons of mass destruction proved to be false. But the chief geopolitical consequence of it was the disintegration of the Iraqi state and the assumption of a vastly increased influence over Iraq by America’s principal regional enemy, Iran. As is now almost universally recognized, the enterprise was a disaster, but if instead of dismissing the Iraqi armed forces and police while leaving them to retain their own weapons and munitions, assuring a prolonged civil war, the United States and its allies had replaced Saddam Hussein with another autocrat whom they could be confident would not provoke the West, that intervention could have been a durable success.
The very long intervention in Afghanistan began with the perfect justification of overthrowing the terrorism-supporting regime of the Mullah Omar and driving al-Qaeda out of the country. Of course, it became the supreme example of mistaken mission creep and took on the impossible task of transforming that primitive multi-tribal state into a modern democracy. For most of the 20 year-American involvement there, the United States was generously assisting Pakistan, which redirected a significant portion of that assistance to the Haqqani Taliban, which conducted guerrilla warfare against the United States and its allies in Afghanistan throughout their long presence there.
Iraq and Afghanistan may furnish some precedent for the recent policy toward Ukraine, but in profound policy incoherence and irresolution, truckling to climate change extremism with the inevitable consequence of enabling a very dangerous belligerency is a uniquely terrible and lethal strategic misjudgment. If freedom is stamped out in Ukraine and that country is, however contested, subsumed back into Russia, it will be a terrible set-back for the West and the partial disgorgement of much of our great and bloodless strategic victory in the Cold War.
In his State of the Union message on March 1, President Joe Biden had the supreme opportunity to turn his troubled administration and steep slide in approval ratings around (and they do seem to have turned up a little, but not because of that address—because of the comparative success of the Ukrainians). If he had boldly declared that the dangers of climate change and the efficacy of a reduction of fossil fuel consumption, questions that are, to say the least, strenuously debated, had to yield to an immediate strategic threat of greater urgency, and announced steps that would sharply reduce the price of oil and natural gas, it would have ranked with a long series of previous distinguished examples of courageous presidential leadership.
It would have been a sequel to President Franklin Roosevelt’s pursuit of the status of the “great arsenal of democracy” (1940), President Harry Truman’s call for assistance for Greece and Turkey against local communists and the USSR, and the Berlin Airlift and the United Nations intervention in Korea. It would have justified some comparison with President John F. Kennedy’s address on the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, President Lyndon Johnson’s championship of civil rights in 1965, and, however controversial the underlying commitment, President Richard Nixon’s invocation of the “silent majority” of Americans over Vietnam in 1969.
There’s no doubt that the stakes in the Ukraine war justified considerably more drastic measures than were taken, and that this swiftly escalated act of monstrous aggression has become a challenge to the moral integrity and strategic security of Western civilization. American and Western opinion clearly recognize this and are ready for measures adequately forceful to assure an acceptable result.
The American paleolithic conservative right, though it’s understandably skeptical of the current leadership of the Pentagon and rightly mindful of misconceived recent American military expeditions, is falsely trying to frighten America with the specter of another Vietnam: an open-ended commitment to ground combat with no exit strategy and grossly insufficient justification. Some of them are allowing impatience and skepticism to warn of non-existent dangers, as no one is asking for U.S. ground combat forces in Ukraine. A triumph for the suddenly semi-formalized tandem of China and Russia will completely humiliate the West and will green-light the continued expansion of both Russia and China in supremely confident disregard for the West, despite suddenly resurrected Western moral solidarity.
In this sense, we are somewhat re-enacting the late 1930s, of which Winston Churchill said, “There never was a war more easy to stop than [World War II],” if the British and French had not caved repeatedly, whetting the appetite and over-confidence of Hitler, the Japanese imperialists, and Mussolini. All the West needs to do now to reinforce successfully the inspiring heroism of the Ukrainians and their remarkable leader President Volodymyr Zelensky is to add slightly increased pressure on the scales of the correlation of forces in Ukraine. That Russian President Vladimir Putin is threatening a potential nuclear response, a broadened conflict, and the public execution of Ukrainian resistors to the invasion of their country is an indication of how severely challenged his criminal invasion is.
The selection of the next step by the West must be made in the next week or 10 days and will require extraordinary acuity and determination. We appear to be very close to agreement that about 70 adequately modern MiG warplanes of Poland, Romania, and Hungary, for which the Ukrainians have many trained aviators, will be handed over to Ukraine and replaced by the temporary deployment of more modern and numerous American and NATO squadrons. It may be that matters are being set up to allow Vice President Kamala Harris to do a star turn in announcing this in Central Europe this coming week. Even this small step would be unexceptionable in international law, and would ratchet up the pressure on Putin to negotiate an end to his Ukrainian invasion to very difficult levels.
There’s no doubt of the overwhelming preeminence of the West over Russia or of its moral right and duty to act. What we now face, thanks to the redoubtable Ukrainians, is as much an opportunity as a challenge to Western statesmen. There have been many green shoots of the revival of Western moral political fiber in the last two weeks, and a positive outcome of this, the greatest international crisis in 60 years, is distinctly possible and absolutely necessary. The fact that this is the only visible path back to public favor for the president and his administration presumably has not gone unnoticed by them.
The US is going to turn the tables this year by following the rules and the constitution.. Of that I am certain.
That means that Biden will be investigated and probably impeached along with the VP.. That means that the Speaker, appointed by the Republican majority will become President. Whoever it is they can hold the fort until Trump is re-elected for 4 years and DeSantis for 8 years.
I believe NATO will fracture and Putin will have his way in Ukraine. If the US does not agree to Putin’s terms, even though Zalensky is prone to, Putin will the demand more in the settlement. He can extend his demands to include all lands east of the Dneiper R. Putin’s victory in Ukraine will put a stop to the NWO’s plans.
I was born an optimist.
@Raphael
I agree that your vision here may soon be seen to be the only alternative, but for myself, I believe there is still an opportunity to preserve the threads that have been caught in this manufactured knot. I would note that once the Gordian knot is hacked asunder, the tender threads that form any reference to our previous society will be lost and something new and different will replace the old, and whatever form that might take, it will come at an unfortunate loss.
I believe there are still opportunities to be played out and the efforts of many are building towards a credible solution without the need of any hacking at the knot, which would be the best route to success, if it should prove successful. There is a case that will be revealed today that will, should all promises be fulfilled, lead to a display over the next 6-8 weeks of many details that were previously unknown and will provide a greater clarity of the 2020 fraud for those still nursing their resolve that the significant fraud they saw was something other than fraud or something less than significant. Also, the 2022 election is not far off, and many things might be achieved in revisiting the electoral contest as we saw with the events in VA, even amid the deep corruption that controls the system.
Also, there are still some who hold out hope that something positive and, hopefully productive, will come from the Durham prosecutions, hopefully before its value is simply that of any surviving record of ancient history. Perhaps they are correct, or perhaps it will only be seen by those on the other side of the resolution of the Gordian knot, using Alexander’s method or that of Themistacles. For now, I cling to the hope and recognition that we may still win this fight, but only if we give these current endeavors the short time left to come to fruition and riddle out the knot from within the system.
@Peloni What is my suggestion for fighting the Hydra? That’s a fair question, and one that I have been asking myself for a long time. How to fight evil, without becoming evil yourself? I know what I would like to see happen, but being a (relatively) moral person, I try to restrain those thoughts. Having spelled out the need, I think that we must rely on the Almighty to raise up someone who is wise and shrewd. I thought that perhaps Trump might be the one, but the task turned out to be more than even he could handle. Again, he was trying to play within the rules. I am fairly certain that to defeat those who would destroy us, our champion will have to say, “The rules be damned, I’m going to save America”. Of course, that opens up the possibility of unforeseen consequences. Still, the Gordian knot cannot be untied or untangled. It must be hacked asunder.
I don’t agree with the statement “If freedom is stamped out in Ukraine and that country is, however contested, subsumed back into Russia, it will be a terrible set-back for the West and the partial disgorgement of much of our great and bloodless strategic victory in the Cold War.” We have NOT won “The Cold War”. We succeeded in Europe, and lost in Asia: from China to Vietnam – communist countries, to Pakistan and Afghanistan and Bangladesh and Sri Lanka and Indonesia – radical Muslim countries.
The most peaceful previous period in European history was between 1815 and 1870. In 1815 agreement was reached on dividing Europe into spheres of influence. as long as this agreement was kept, therewere no wars in Europe. In 1870, Germany, headed by Bismark decided to have a stronger role in the leadership of Europe and invaded France. Germany lost its appetite for rule of Europe through the disasters of the World Wars it started and lost, and an uneasy peace reigned in Europe from after Soviet expansion into South-Central Europe until 2022 mainly because the West and the East did NOT try to upset the spheres of influence. NATO – which was founded in 1949 as a military organisation against Russia – invited Ukraine to join, thus challenging Russia, and Putin accepted the challenge, unlike Chaimberlain, who did not accept the challenge by Germany. Putin also knows the statement of Churchill quoted in the article: “In this sense, we are somewhat re-enacting the late 1930s, of which Winston Churchill said, “There never was a war more easy to stop than [World War II],” if the British and French had not caved repeatedly, whetting the appetite… ” and has no intention of caving down to what he perceives as “Western Encroachment”. He announced in 2008 that he would not tolerate the enlargement of NATO to the borders of Russia – and he did not back down. The fault of this war, and all the suffering it has caused, is entirely the fault of the NATO countries – including the USA.
I don’t agree with the statement “If freedom is stamped out in Ukraine and that country is, however contested, subsumed back into Russia, it will be a terrible set-back for the West and the partial disgorgement of much of our great and bloodless strategic victory in the Cold War.” We have NOT won “The Cold War”. We succeeded in Europe, and lost in Asia: from China to Vietnam – communist countries, to Pakistan and Afghanistan and Bangladesh and Sri Lanka and Indonesia – radical Muslim countries.
The most peaceful previous period in European history was between 1815 and 1870. In 1815 agreement was reached on dividing Europe into spheres of influence. as long as this agreement was kept, therewere no wars in Europe. In 1870, Germany, headed by Bismark decided to have a stronger role in the leadership of Europe and invaded France. Germany lost its appetite for rule of Europe through the disasters of the World Wars it started and lost, and an uneasy peace reigned in Europe from after Soviet expansion into South-Central Europe until 2022 mainly because the West and the East did NOT try to upset the spheres of influence. NATO – which was founded in 1949 as a military organisation against Russia – invited Ukraine to join, thus challenging Russia, and Putin accepted the challenge, unlike Chaimberlain, who did not accept the challenge by Germany. Putin also knows the statement of Churchill quoted in the article: “In this sense, we are somewhat re-enacting the late 1930s, of which Winston Churchill said, “There never was a war more easy to stop than [World War II],” if the British and French had not caved repeatedly, whetting the appetite… ” and has no intention of caving down to what he perceives as “Western Encroachment”. He announced in 2008 that he would not tolerate the enlargemnt of NATO to the borders of Russia – and he did not back down. The fault of this war, and all the suffering it has caused, is entirely the fault of the NATO countries – including the USA.
@Raphael
I don’t see where there was a “socialist” power grab under FDR.
Eleanor Roosevelt later said that they did those public works and “the dole” because they were afraid of a revolution.
In the US about 6 million people died of hunger between 1930 and 1933 (inclusive) and it was covered up.
Socialist power grab is when more property distributed among the people, not the opposite, like what happened in the last couple of years.
@Raphael
So what is your suggestion? Serious question.
@Reader If they succeed in driving us into another great depression, it won’t necessarily be a run-up to another great war. Rather, a depression would more likely be an excuse for another great socialist power-grab, such as occurred under FDR. Another great war would just be icing on the cake.
@Peloni The Hydra doesn’t play by the rules, they use them against us. To defeat the Hydra, we can no longer fight with one hand tied behind our back. They will win if we continue to let them set the rules of engagement.
I think they are jacking up the prices on purpose.
When the oil and gas prices hit the upper limit, the US will generously open its oil reserves to save everyone and make a ton of money.
Plus, I wonder if they want to induce another Great Depression in order to cure it with another Good War.
At any rate, when everyone is broke, the US is going to be in better shape than others.
The UK already froze the assets of the Russian “oligarchs” (even Abramovich’s – he can’t sell “Chelsey” anymore after he established a trust fund for it) and, apparently, stole the Russian gold reserve.
@Raphael
I agree that the NWO is the mother of all issues spawning these other dangers to achieve their designs at overturning the world’s existing order. In my opinion, these dangers are the forest fires that will enable the NWO’s designs to come to fruition, and as a consequence, they can not be left to fester and succeed in the designs they were intended. Defeating these many individual crises created by the NWO is the only way to actually challenge and defeat the NWO currently.
I understand your concern that these crises are all simply heads of the hydra that will not actually defeat the greater concern. The problem is the captured status of the legal and political systems around the world by the NWO act to protect them from any culpability for their gross illegal actions. They aren’t even shy about publicly admitting their control in these matters. So even if you find proof that these villains are villains, they are beyond the reach of any real consequence – eg Fauci – at least currently.
The reality is that the world is already being undone, presently. Our current role is to stop these actions that are unraveling the world we know as best we can. Achieving this, we can bring it back to that which we are familiar, with added safety measures needed to prevent such unraveling from occurring again in our future and our children’s future. To do this the proof of the culpability needs to be brought to the masses and displayed as best we can without access of the media or political bully-pulpits which are all in the control of NWO. By doing so, we can motivate a renewed local control of political networks which is key to succeeding in the future. But, unfortunately, that is in the future.
Til some measure of political and legal control are responsive to the will of the people, defeating the individual heads of the hydra are as close as we can hope to come to success. Still, by doing so we are delaying our own conquest by the NWO, extending the battle as it were. In time, we might come to succeed in regaining the control of enough local political networks to bring the NWO to some level of accountability and thereby finally defeating and vanquishing the Hydra itself.
At least, this is how I see things, for what it might be worth.
@ Ted Belman said,
The NWO is the mother of all issues, on which rests virtually every other problem of our time. The NWO is a Hydra. Focusing on Covid, CRT, Climate, etc., creates a type of tunnel vision which prevents us from seeing the larger danger.
I would like to hear what @Ted and others (@Peloni?) have to say about this.