It’s pretty clear that Russia is geared up for a major offensive, which could be launched at any time. The Ukrainian military has been significantly degraded, and its morale is shot. Whenever the Russian offensive is launched, it will be successful. Which is why it makes sense that Russia is giving NATO an opportunity to surrender Ukraine before launching the offensive that would render any such surrender unnecessary.
However, the source is unreliable, so this should be regarded as possible news yet to be verified rather than actual events that have definitely taken place. And even if it is real, that doesn’t mean the neocons have enough sense to accept either the terms or the fact of their defeat in their proxy war.
Russian officials arrived in Washington, DC Thursday morning to discuss the terms of Ukraine’s SURRENDER. The “Special Flight Squadron moves Kremlin officials traveling on important matters.
TERMS: The terms given to Washington, DC for Ukraine are:
Complete Ukraine surrender.
Complete surrender of all military equipment.
Russian territory will range from Karkhov to Odessa, and gives Russia complete control of Black Sea coast.
Western Ukraine cannot join NATO, or have any military aid.
Russia does not care who controls western Ukraine, and have openly offered it to Poland.
Put bluntly, the Ukraine war is over and Ukraine lost. Completely.
They can no longer defend themselves in any meaningful way. If hostilities are not halted, Ukraine will simply be slaughtered and, believe it or not, Russia does NOT want to do that.
Notice this information isn’t anywhere on the mass-media news?
Notice the Washington Post STOPPED PRINTING it’s “Ukraine War Update Section?”
No reporting that Ukraine has lost – – – and not a word about Russia’s victory.
The only reason I’m a bit dubious about this is that it makes no reference to the USA ending Russian sanctions, and permitting its European and Asian satrapies to also end the sanctions. Especially in light of the recent statement by the Russian ambassador to the USA:
US attempts to hamper the development of the Russian economy through sanctions are increasingly damaging bilateral relations and making respectful dialogue between Washington and Moscow virtually impossible, Russian Ambassador Anatoly Antonov has said. His remarks followed Washington’s announcement on Friday that it is considering further sanctions on Russia over the Ukraine conflict.
Translation: the neocons won’t be able to give up Ukrainian territory without also giving up their sanctions regime. I find it very difficult to imagine that Russia would accept a Ukrainian surrender that did not involve an end to the Western sanctions. But it should be kept in mind that the fact that Hal Turner’s report did not mention sanctions does not mean that the Russian delegation is not demanding them of the US negotiators.
Which also points to the reason to take the report seriously: if it was fake, it would probably refer to the Kiev regime as the party with whom Russia is negotiating. But this has been a war between Russia and the USA from the start.
Tim Pool does NOT want to let his guest talk about the 1967 Israeli attack on the USS Liberty or its potential implications for the current US Navy presence in the Eastern Mediterranean.
GUEST: I’m concerned with having American aircraft carriers over there, like what I keep being told about the USS Liberty, that’s something with the Israeli government-
TIM POOL: You should, you should be careful about that one!
SIDEKICK: Allegedly, the Israeli Air Force, jet fighter aircraft, I mean, they did end up paying out the American government.
GUEST: So I’m concerned, like false flag operation, like a missile comes out of Gaza and hits one of our aircraft carriers, but it was actually an Israeli missile. I don’t want, we should get out of there, it doesn’t-
TIM POOL: Let me stop you there. It doesn’t matter where the missile comes from. If a missile comes out of the Middle East in any capacity and hits a US target, everyone will claim it was exactly what they want it to be, exactly. The US military will say Iran did it, the pro-Palestinians will say Israel did it, the pro-Israel will say Hamas did it.
GUEST: Yeah, if it comes out of a foreign country other than Israel, then it’ll be hard to deny.
TIM POOL: It doesn’t matter where it comes from! The US will say Iran did it.
GUEST: Right, well, if it comes out of Tel Aviv it’s going to be hard to sell that.
TIM POOL: But prove it came out of Tel Aviv! How do you know? You read the news! You are going to get American intelligence agencies going to news organizations, saying “tell them it came out of Iran”!
GUEST: I don’t think the Americans want their carrier to be hit as a false flag. Maybe the USS Liberty thing was an accident.
SIDEKICK: That’s the controversy over it. The Israeli government claims it was an accident, but some survivors say that they don’t think it was an accident, so was it a false flag? That’s why people talk about it.
GUEST: Did America get involved in the 1967 war after that?
SIDEKICK: No, because it ended up it ended up being really short but-
TIM POOL: We are, we’re going to go to super chats so if you haven’t already would you kindly smash that Like button, and subscribe to this channel.
I’m not saying Tim Pool is wrong, although I think there is zero chance that any Israeli missiles will be launched at any American ships; the fact that the US media still avoids the subject of the USS Liberty like vampires avoiding holy water tends to indicate that the Israelis don’t have any desire to risk repeating that sort of debacle, not when the US Navy is perfectly capable of sinking its own ships without any help from friend, foe, or greatest ally. And, depending upon the captain, possibly without even intentionally trying to do so.
Also, there are no shortage of influential neocons in the US government and media who want war with Iran far worse than the Israelis do. They are both less attached to reality and more distanced from the potential consequences. Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld once said, in an ironic turn of phrase, that US neocons are willing to fight to the very last Israeli.
What is most interesting about the interview, however, is the way in which Pool tells the guest to “be careful” after he brings up the incident, and then immediately attempts to change the subject, twice. It would be very interesting to ask Mr. Pool why he believes one has to “be careful” about a minor military engagement that took place 56 years ago and is such a matter of public record that it has its own Wikipedia page.
This is what media gatekeeping looks like in action. It’s the avoidance of certain topics and the steering of the public discourse away from those topics when they are, for some reason, accidentally brought up.
Osama bin Laden wanted to speak directly to the American people.An undated letter promising endless war is one of hundreds of documents collected in the May 2, 2011 raid on his compound in Pakistan that was released Wednesday. The full text is below.
However, the full text of the letter was not actually provided by Foreign Policy. Two lines, highlighted below in bold italics, were omitted with the following note.
(TN: Two lines of poetry that say the Mujahidin will not stop fighting until the United States leaves their land.)
Removed: document Wed 15 Nov 2023 21.19 CET This page previously displayed a document containing, in translation, the full text of Osama bin Laden’s “letter to the American people”, as reported in the Observer on Sunday 24 November 2002. The document, which was published here on the same day, was removed on 15 November 2023.
In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful.
From Usama Bin Muhammad Bin Ladin to the American people,
I speak to you about the subject of the ongoing war between you and us. Even though the consensus of your wise thinkers and others is that your time (TN: of defeat) will come, compassion for the women and children who are being unjustly killed, wounded, and displaced in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan motivates me to speak to you.
First of all, I would like to say that your war with us is the longest war in your history and the most expensive for you financially. As for us, we see it as being only halfway finished. If you were to ask your wise thinkers, they would tell you that there is no way to win it because the indications are against it. How will you win a war whose leaders are pessimistic and whose soldiers are committing suicide? If fear enters the hearts of men, winning the war becomes impossible. How will you win a war whose cost is like a hurricane blowing violently at your economy and weakening your dollar?
The Bush administration got you into these wars on the premise that they were vital to your security. He promised that it would be a quick war, won within six days or six weeks; however, six years have passed, and they are still promising you victory and not achieving it. Then Obama came and delayed the withdrawal that he had promised you by 16 more months. He promised you victory in Afghanistan and set a date for withdrawal from there. Six months later, Petraeus came to you once again with the number six, requesting that the withdrawal be delayed six months beyond the date that had been set. All the while you continue to bleed in Iraq and Afghanistan. You are wading into a war with no end in sight on the horizon and which has no connection to your security, which was confirmed by the operation of ‘Umar al-Faruq, which was not launched from the battlefield and could have been launched from any place in the world.
As for us, jihad against the tyrants and the aggressors is a form of great worship in our religion. It is more precious to us than our fathers and sons. Thus, our jihad against you is worship, and your killing us is a testimony. Thanks to God, Almighty, we have been waging jihad for 30 years, against the Russians and then against you. Not a single one of our men has committed suicide, whereas every 30 days 30 of your men commit suicide.
Continue the war if you will.
Palestine shall not be seen captive for we will try to break its shackles. The United States shall pay for its arrogance with the blood of Christians and their funds.
Peace be upon those who follow right guidance.
Justice is the strongest army, and security is the best way of life, but it slipped out of your grasp the day you made the Jews victorious in occupying our land and killing our brothers in Palestine. The path to security is for you to lift your oppression from us.
There can’t be much doubt as to why Bin Ladin’s “Letter to the American People” is being disappeared, in light of the recent Hamas attacks, the Israeli invasion of Gaza, and the rush of US men and material to the Middle East. The neocons in the US and UK media are obviously attempting to prevent the pro-Palestinian side from presenting its perspective to the public, and more importantly, they are trying to hide the material link between the past US military defeats in Iraq and Afghanistan with the present US military presence in Syria, Israel, and the Eastern Mediterranean Sea.
I doubt it matters in the slightest. As even the ADL has reported, the youngest generation in the West is solidly against the Israeli position in the Gaza conflict, while only the Boomers generally support it. While the Millennials and Generation X are more balanced – or in the case of GenX, characteristically apathetic – neither of them are even remotely interested in fighting anyone in the Middle East for any reason.
But there can be little question that this is an all-hands-on-deck situation for the neocons, so it will be very informative to observe which public figures fall in line with the demands of the Narrative, and which ones are not being controlled.
UPDATE: The media is officially upset that its attempt to disappear the Bin Ladin letter has failed:
A vile letter written by the warlord behind the 9/11 atrocities has gone viral on TikTok with users saying that reading it has led to them ‘understanding’ as to why the horrific attacks were carried out in 2001. The letter began to gain traction online after UK newspaper The Guardian linked to a 2002 article which translated it in full in an article about the ongoing Israel-Hamas war. It was subsequently deleted with the outlet telling DailyMail.com in a statement that it was removed because was being shared ‘without its original context.’
They’re not even attempting to pretend to be journalists anymore. The letter is “vile”? The attacks were “horrific”? Furthermore, The Guardian linked to the article in 2002, so the letter began to gain traction 21 years later, which is indeed “after” the link, but is a very misleading way to describe what happened and why people are paying attention to the vanished letter.
Remember, facts provided without approved context consistent with the Narrative is misinformation.
Zaluzhny’s aides are deleted, one by assassination
Large-scale new ‘house cleaning’ of entire general staff is reportedly announced from Zelensky’s side
Major media campaigns from both sides push urgent narratives of stalemates, Zaluzhny implying the war will be lost, and an eye-opening exposé on a ‘isolated’ and ‘messianic’ Fuhrer-bunker version of Zelensky
Zelensky suddenly cancels presidential elections, likely sussing the plan to promote Zaluzhny as challenger
Money spigot has still been turned off for the foreseeable future, with no realistic plans on horizon at the moment
Ukraine now catastrophically losing on virtually every front of the war, set to soon lose another major, strategically critical city
Many influential voices like Arestovich now openly push ceasefire
The ‘grim reaper’ CIA director set to pay visit, which only happens on eve of some major pivot or escalation. Diplomats and Foreign Secretaries are sent to ‘discuss options’ or ‘negotiate’—CIA directors are sent to deliver final threats of action
Now, much of the foregoing information is already being discussed elsewhere. But the one chief question no one else seems to be asking is the most critical of all: if factions in the West intend to replace Zelensky with Zaluzhny, then what is the actual purpose? What do they intend for Zaluzhny to do or accomplish that Zelensky cannot?
Some haven’t thought this through, and just assume that “Zaluzhny is a strong leader” and therefore is being made to replace Zelensky so that he can whip the military into shape and win the war. But why would Zaluzhny need to be president to do that? He’s already the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces and that’s literally his job description.
So, logically speaking, the only possible explanation I can see making sense is that Zaluzhny is being chosen to sell the ceasefire to the people. Such a thing would sound more acceptable from the standpoint of a military leader and strategist who can explain that the situation is hopeless without time to recover and replenish the forces with an armistice. And more importantly, to sell it to the troops.
Notice how all of this has been transparent to anyone who simply watches the direction that the elite neocons are taking. This was obvious as far back as April and May, but the need to focus on the defense of Israel, which is the absolute #1 neocon priority, means that the Ukraine war will be over as soon as a military leader a) replaces Zelensky/Yermak and b) meets Putin’s terms.
However, it may not be as easy to accomplish (b) as the neocons and the media believe. I expect Putin will demand, at the very least, a complete end of the collective sanctions regime, a disinvitation to NATO, and the province of Odessa, and it’s going to be very, very difficult for all the true believers in the Narrative to accept that.
Notice, in particular, that the CIA director who is meeting with Zelensky this week wrote the following to his then-boss, Condoleeza Rice, in 2008 when he was the ambassador to Russia:
“Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin). In more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players, from knuckle-draggers in the dark recesses of the Kremlin to Putin’s sharpest liberal critics, I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests.”
In any event, don’t be surprised if the collapse and first attempt to reach a settlement happens considerably sooner than anyone expects. Keep in mind that the speed with which these events are taking place tend to indicate that the war in the Middle East is not proceeding as well as anticipated.
If you want to know why I expect that Israel will lose its war with Hamas and the Arab nations, and why the USA will lose WWIII, just read this transcript of a strategic analysis of Russian military doctrine by Ben Shapiro, and then recognize that he is a public microphone who simply repeats what the neocons who are running both the micro and macro war efforts genuinely believe:
Russia is not a first-world power. Russia is a second-world power. As they suggested, it’s a gas station with a nuclear arsenal. That doesn’t mean it’s not geostrategically important. It doesn’t mean it can’t cause all sorts of headaches and problems for the West. It doesn’t mean that it can’t turn off the gas that they get and cause serious problems for Western and Eastern Europe.
What it does mean is that when Russia goes to war, Russia does not go to war the same way the United States does. It does not go to war the same way Israel, or the UK, or NATO does. When Russia goes to war, it basically just uses overwhelming force and kills enormous numbers of civilians.
And what we’re seeing is that the Russians don’t even have the number of supplies that they need to fight this battle. What that means is that the war gets ugly, it gets ground down, and very vicious, street fighting, lots of civilian deaths, and this has been part of Russia’s playbook for quite a while. They’ve been using this since Chechnya in the late 1990s. If you cannot pacify a region, you just start killing as many civilians as you can.
At the very least, you try to shock and awe people into surrendering, by killing civilians and demonstrating that you are harder than they are, that you do not care how many civilians you have to kill.
Ben Shapiro, 3 November 2023
Now, read it again, this time keeping in mind the famous aphorism of Sun Tzu regarding knowledge and the likelihood of either victory or defeat.
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
The neocons neither know the enemy nor do they know themselves. That is why, now that the conflicts have transformed from one of influence and subversion to one of power and war, they are destined to lose.
It looks like we’re about 2-3 weeks away from being told that Hamas has built underground death roller coasters, Hezbollah is unleashing lethal AI rape-bots, and Iran is locking little children into a cage with a sabretooth tiger and a Tyrannosaurus Rex, if current social media is any guide.
Of all the things that never happened, whatever the latest Middle East-related outrage is supposed to be never happened the most.
First, Americans are perfectly aware that the neocons are frightened by the situation in the Middle East and are desperate to get Americans to go and fight Iran for them. Which is what they’ve been doing for the last 18 years, since 2005. That’s not happening, not on a scale that matters, and regardless, not for long. All US military involvement in the Middle East can be reasonably expected to accomplish is to give Russia and China free rein in Europe, Asia, and Africa. Because it’s too late, as evidenced by the events in Ukraine over the last 20 months.
Second, if you want people to care even a little bit about what happens to you or your children, it’s not particularly helpful to be constantly observed chanting “death to the White race”, “Europe must be destroyed”, “Jesus is evil”, all the while systematically undermining the greatest civilization Man has ever known through advocacy of abortion, feminism, mass immigration, miscegenation, and satanic transgender ideology.
Neocon Inc. can invent whatever imaginative atrocities they like. Jon Podhoretz and Ben Shapiro can hurl accusations of hatred of this and anti-of that all they want. Aside from a few gullible Boomers who wouldn’t hesitate to believe that Iran is building a lunar military base using rockets fueled with the blood of Jewish children, no one gives a quantum of a fragment of a damn what they say anymore.
Never believe a wartime President. Especially not a would-be wartime President. Ron Unz reminds us that they are always – literally and historically always – lying to the American people about what the declared enemy has done to justify going to war with them.
During 1940 the determined efforts of President Franklin Roosevelt to involve America in the war against Hitler’s Germany were blocked by the overwhelming opposition of the American people, running at 80% according to some polls. A group of young Yale Law School peace activists had launched the America First Committee and it quickly attracted 800,000 members, becoming the largest grassroots political organization in our national history. The leadership of the AFC included many of our most prominent business and journalistic figures, and famed aviator Charles Lindbergh, one of our greatest national heroes, served as its top spokesman.
With American antiwar sentiment so seemingly strong and resolute, various political stratagems were employed to reduce it. In late October 1941, just few weeks before the attack on Pearl Harbor finally settled the issue, FDR announced in a nationwide radio broadcast that he had obtained a German map that revealed the secret Nazi plans to seize control of Latin America, which Hitler would then use as a base to attack the United States as part of his bold plan of world conquest.
Our President declared:
Hitler has often protested that his plans for conquest do not extend across the Atlantic Ocean. I have in my possession a secret map, made in Germany by Hitler’s government – by the planners of the new world order. It is a map of South America and a part of Central America as Hitler proposes to reorganize it…This map makes clear the Nazi design, not only against South America but against the United States as well.
Probably millions or even tens of millions of Americans believed FDR’s words about that direct threat to our national security and therefore softened their resistance to our country’s involvement in the European war. But as historians have long since acknowledged, the map was a forgery, probably produced by FDR’s own close British collaborators. In an earlier private conversation with the British ambassador, FDR had warned that his secret activities with the British would probably lead to his impeachment if they were revealed.
I think few Americans at the time were willing to publicly accuse our President of such major falsehoods, but from a distance of more than eighty years, what strikes me is the sheer absurdity of FDR’s accusation. Germany had no significant navy and had been stymied for over a year by the barrier of the English Channel, only 18 miles wide. Yet apparently a large majority of the American media and the American public were willing to believe that the Germans could easily cross the thousands of miles of the Atlantic Ocean and gain control of the countries of South America, whose total population was considerably larger than that of Germany itself. So the excitement of being privy to a secret intelligence document seems to have triumphed over rational thought in the minds of many people, including eager journalists.
FDR’s illegal efforts to involve us in a totally unnecessary war outraged many of our Military Intelligence professionals at the time, but they were bound by an oath of secrecy, and their views only became known years or decades later when they published their books and personal memoirs. Extensive archival research by Prof. Joseph Bendersky fully uncovered their extremely bitter contemporaneous sentiments, and he noted the “fierce delight” they took in FDR’s eventual death: “Finally, the evil man was dead!”
Just after the end of the war, Gen. George Patton, one of our most illustrious military commanders, told his colleagues that he intended to resign his commission so that he could begin a nationwide speaking tour to provide the American public with the true facts about the war that they had just fought. Patton soon died in a highly-suspicious vehicle accident, and decades later his self-confessed American assassin revealed that he had killed Patton under direct orders from top figures in our own government.
Government officials have long recognized that secret information, even if heavily distorted or completely false, can be used to effectively shape media coverage. Many journalists and pundits are always eager to receive leaks, confidential tidbits that they are willing to make the centerpiece of their one-sided stories, thereby allowing themselves to be manipulated.
A perfect example of this process occurred during the run-up to the Iraq War, when leaks of secret intelligence information from Bush Neocons were widely promoted in such elite media outlets as the New York Times and the New Yorker. This persuaded our gullible citizenry that Saddam Hussein was on the verge of developing nuclear weapons and also planned to attack our country with anthrax and other deadly biological weapons, while seemingly being in cahoots with Osama bin Laden, his regional arch-enemy. As I described a decade ago, most of Congress and the American people fully accepted such obvious nonsense, resulting in our disastrous Iraq War, which began the destruction of much of the Middle East:
The circumstances surrounding our Iraq War demonstrate this, certainly ranking it among the strangest military conflicts of modern times. The 2001 attacks in America were quickly ascribed to the radical Islamists of al-Qaeda, whose bitterest enemy in the Middle East had always been Saddam Hussein’s secular Baathist regime in Iraq. Yet through misleading public statements, false press leaks, and even forged evidence such as the “yellowcake” documents, the Bush administration and its neoconservative allies utilized the compliant American media to persuade our citizens that Iraq’s nonexistent WMDs posed a deadly national threat and required elimination by war and invasion. Indeed, for several years national polls showed that a large majority of conservatives and Republicans actually believed that Saddam was the mastermind behind 9/11 and the Iraq War was being fought as retribution. Consider how bizarre the history of the 1940s would seem if America had attacked China in retaliation for Pearl Harbor.
An even greater absurdity unfolded last year, after a serious of mysterious underwater explosions destroyed the $30 billion Russian-German Nord Stream pipelines, probably Europe’s most important civilian energy infrastructure.
Numerous top American officials had publicly threatened to eliminate the pipelines if Russia invaded Ukraine, but after Russia did so and Nord Stream was destroyed, virtually all the mainstream media outlets both in America and in Europe declared that Russian President Vladimir Putin had probably destroyed his own pipelines, thereby further demonstrating his criminal insanity, and scarcely any other possibility was even considered. When Prof. Jeffrey Sachs was interviewed on Bloomberg TV and pointed to the American government as the obvious suspect, his statement was greeted with horror and disbelief and he was quickly yanked off the air.
Stop falling for the lies. You have the advantage of knowing the lies are coming, they are usual at least bordering on the absurd, when they don’t fly right past the border and into outright ridiculousness. They’re also usually championed by a small phalanx of Prometheans who provide the paper-thin “evidence” to support the President’s Daliesque whoppers.
There is no excuse for falling for this nonsense again. You’re going to hear outrageous lies about China, Iran, and quite possibly Niger or some other African nation soon. Don’t fall for them.
A single family is providing the intellectual justification, such as it is, for the neocon wars on Russia, China, and Iran. Notice that despite the fact that their policies appear to be based on an ideological foundation, their ideology du jour changes from Trotskyite to Reaganite depending upon whatever the geopolitical environment happens to be:
Donald Kagan, the patriarch of Kaganism, followed a similar intellectual trajectory to his colleagues Irving Kristol and Norman Podhoretz: Marxist academics who transformed into rabid Reaganoid Cold Warriors in response to the Soviet Union’s support for Arab nationalism and anti-Zionism in the 1960s. Donald was quite clearly in the Republican camp, though his children have dropped some of the “right-wing” elements of the neo-conservative doctrine (previously used to mobilize Evangelical Christian voting blocs) and replaced it with a unified American state ideology that is as at home in the Democratic Party as it is in the GOP.
Donald’s sons, the American Enterprise Institute’s Frederick Kagan and the Brookings Institute’s Robert Kagan, were highly influential in the George W. Bush administration through think-tanks such as the Project For A New American Century and the Foreign Policy Initiative, though today they have largely distanced themselves from the GOP following the party’s alienation of Jewish elites through Trumpification.
At PNAC, the Kagans were primarily concerned with expanding Israeli power by using the United States to topple Saddam Hussein, Bashar Al-Assad and strangling Iran, but by 2006, they grew increasingly suspicious and hostile towards Russia and China for seeking more control in how they interface with Western (read: Jewish) financial institutions and cultural values, while simultaneously choosing to pursue their own foreign policy paths independent of Pax Americana. Over time, the fears of Kaganism have been vindicated, as Russia and China have evolved from wild card United Nations votes to outright revisionist powers ready to directly confront Washington interlopers in their backyards.
The Kaganists blame the rise of China, Russia and Iran on the war and free trade weary American people, who in 2016 even managed to pressure Hillary Clinton into tactically walking back her support for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (a move that enraged Kagan). For most Americans, the nation-wrecking trade deficits (which are in truth subsidies to buy subservience), trillion-dollar wars, and mountains of body bags required to oversee a world empire are neither necessary or worthwhile for the well-being of the geographically gifted and resource rich United States.
In 2019, current Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Robert Kagan, the husband Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland, published an editorial excoriating the “America First” message embraced by segments of both parties and reiterated the minority Jewish-held internationalist elite consensus think-tanks have been churning out for decades. According to Blinken and Kagan, a world of realism, where countries are free of Jewish minders and American blood and treasure is exclusively reserved for the benefit of American people, is a “jungle” that allows budding Hitlers (Putin), Mussolinis (Iran) and Hirohitos (China) to spread “anti-democratic” revolution against “Anglo-American” (a term Kaganists use to identify their civilizational project even as they support demographic replacement of the European stock in English-speaking country) liberal-globalist hegemony.
The central domestic political theory of Kaganism purports that liberalism is in perpetual antagonism with “populism,” (which the Kagans view as a strain of Fascism), in other words, the will of the people. The Kaganists view the democratic accountability of political leaders, self-interested (at least in the case of Gentiles) trade-offs, and the free discussion of ideas as a distraction or minor inconvenience to suppress and push through, as shown in their latest book celebrating Franklin Delano Roosevelt for deceiving the American people into fighting a world war against Germany and Japan, two countries Kagan admits never posed a security threat to the United States but had to be lured into a confrontation anyway.
It’s really fascinating to read Donald Kagan’s books, and see how he constantly shifts his positions while never, ever, questioning his core assumptions. The sophistic rhetorical appeals to redefined words misrepresenting concepts is always interesting too, although it’s so transparent that the reader will find it astonishing that it actually works on the media and a substantive portion of the population.
The USA consistently refused to respect Russia’s red lines. Why on Earth would China pay any attention whatsoever to whatever the USA claims its red lines to be?
Any nation providing lethal support to Moscow in its ongoing conflict with Kiev would cross Washington’s “red line,” the US envoy to the UN, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, told CNN on Sunday. Earlier the same day, US State Secretary Antony Blinken directly warned a top Chinese diplomat, Wang Yi, against considering such an option.
“We … have to be clear that if there are any thoughts and efforts by the Chinese and others to provide lethal support to the Russians in their brutal attack against Ukraine, that that is unacceptable,” Thomas-Greenfield told CNN’s ‘State of the Union,’ adding that it “would be a red line.”
Her words came as Blinken was meeting Wang Yi on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference in Germany. There, the US diplomat told his Chinese counterpart that the US was “very concerned that China is considering providing lethal support to Russia,” Blinken told NBC’s Chuck Todd in the wake of the meeting.
This is what happens when you have a bunch of very special boys in charge of things. The neocons genuinely believe that they have the right to do whatever they see as in their own interest, but no one else has the same right.
Of course China is going to provide “lethal support to Russia”. It’s in their interest, because the same special boys who are threatening them if they do have already announced their intention to go to war with China just as soon as they’re done defeating Russia.
All I can conclude is that because the neocons hate literally everyone, including themselves, they’re playing a suicidal game of Samson burning down the temple using the US military as a match. I mean, it’s impossible to believe that they’re literally this stupid and totally unable to see the obvious consequences of their actions.
On the other hand, the possibility of stupidity should not be entirely dismissed. China is already allied with Russia, and World War III started with the Special Military Operation in February 2022.
“If China allies itself with Russia, there will be a world war.”