Today at Anti-War.com there were three items that, taken together, present a nice critique of the flawed geo-political thinking that has allowed the Neocons to perpetrate war after war around the world and has led America to the brink of nuclear war. All this has been accompanied by almost incalculable human suffering, which is clearly not something that has any influence over Neocon strategery. That’s the wickedness angle.
It is often advocated that Ukraine should not join NATO and remain neutral.
Why do I never hear the same argument, from the voices that advocate Ukraine's neutrality in order to guarantee peace, advocating about the need for Belarus to stay neutral. Russia used Belarus as a staging ground for invading Ukraine. Why is it ok for Belarus to be solidly in the Russian influence zone.? Why the difference?
If NATO should stay out of Ukraine, Russia stays out of Belarus. that would be fair, NOT?
BTW I liked Stockman's take on the German Greens: "That is to say, the road to "net zero" apparently wends its way through Moscow!"
I wonder how Wall Street is involved in all this activity - it can't be simply neocon delusions of adequacy running the show, considering Wall Street's role in both World Wars. The NSA has ears to hear, so NSA, what have you heard?
Stockman’s hypothesis that the German Greens support war against Russia to push their green agenda using Russia as the scapegoat, and end cheap Russian energy, makes sense.
The neocon axis of evil would rather rule over a pile of radioactive ash, than cede any part of the Earth to another power. Those foolish idiots could not understand that when the Soviet union dissolved a perfect opportunity existed that would have allowed the U.S.A. , Russia, India and Europe to live in peace and prosperity.
There is no path to war. In 1914 all Europe went to war with bands playing and flags flying. Four years later the monarchies that were, weren't. After the 2020 election, J6, a suspension of the rule of law and widespread dissatisfaction our 'woke' military will rally their few thousand faithful and go off on some adventurism overseas. Yeah, sure. Did we win the war of the balloons?
The media promoted Russian Hoax that began with Trump has done well in providing cover for the Red Chinese infiltration of the USA. Reporting, for what it is, highlights Chinese agents that have burrowed into our national politics, economics, universities, even land purchases. We never hear of Russians being credibly named in any of these same serious intrusions into US sovereignty. There is, however, a plethora of reporting on CCP infiltration: The Biden 'think tank' financing at Penn, Hunter Biden's shady dealings with CCP corporation front men, Senator Feinstein's longtime driver, Rep. Swalwell's honeypot, recent stories of real estate buys near sensitive US military facilities, etc. And these are just what we know about through open-source reports.
Red China, unlike Russia, has a much greater appetite and military capability for annexing resource rich territories to secure its future energy and economic requirements.
I don't see how America has been trying to contain China since WWII.
Also, it's a mistake to lump Trump's China policy with Biden's. Trump sought to rectify the trade imbalance out of concern for everyday Americans. Biden seeks a smackdown of China simply because they've gotten uppity. The former sought a rational policy for the long-term benefit of both parties; the other is merely enforcing colonial might.
It is often advocated that Ukraine should not join NATO and remain neutral.
Why do I never hear the same argument, from the voices that advocate Ukraine's neutrality in order to guarantee peace, advocating about the need for Belarus to stay neutral. Russia used Belarus as a staging ground for invading Ukraine. Why is it ok for Belarus to be solidly in the Russian influence zone.? Why the difference?
If NATO should stay out of Ukraine, Russia stays out of Belarus. that would be fair, NOT?
BTW I liked Stockman's take on the German Greens: "That is to say, the road to "net zero" apparently wends its way through Moscow!"
I wonder how Wall Street is involved in all this activity - it can't be simply neocon delusions of adequacy running the show, considering Wall Street's role in both World Wars. The NSA has ears to hear, so NSA, what have you heard?
Stockman’s hypothesis that the German Greens support war against Russia to push their green agenda using Russia as the scapegoat, and end cheap Russian energy, makes sense.
CSIS War Game: US vs China over Taiwan - Provoking War to Preserve US Primacy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyAq8xAhmSI
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/are-reparations-part-american-rescue-plan-cities-say-yes-and-plan-use-federal-funds
The neocon axis of evil would rather rule over a pile of radioactive ash, than cede any part of the Earth to another power. Those foolish idiots could not understand that when the Soviet union dissolved a perfect opportunity existed that would have allowed the U.S.A. , Russia, India and Europe to live in peace and prosperity.
There is no path to war. In 1914 all Europe went to war with bands playing and flags flying. Four years later the monarchies that were, weren't. After the 2020 election, J6, a suspension of the rule of law and widespread dissatisfaction our 'woke' military will rally their few thousand faithful and go off on some adventurism overseas. Yeah, sure. Did we win the war of the balloons?
The media promoted Russian Hoax that began with Trump has done well in providing cover for the Red Chinese infiltration of the USA. Reporting, for what it is, highlights Chinese agents that have burrowed into our national politics, economics, universities, even land purchases. We never hear of Russians being credibly named in any of these same serious intrusions into US sovereignty. There is, however, a plethora of reporting on CCP infiltration: The Biden 'think tank' financing at Penn, Hunter Biden's shady dealings with CCP corporation front men, Senator Feinstein's longtime driver, Rep. Swalwell's honeypot, recent stories of real estate buys near sensitive US military facilities, etc. And these are just what we know about through open-source reports.
Red China, unlike Russia, has a much greater appetite and military capability for annexing resource rich territories to secure its future energy and economic requirements.
I don't see how America has been trying to contain China since WWII.
Also, it's a mistake to lump Trump's China policy with Biden's. Trump sought to rectify the trade imbalance out of concern for everyday Americans. Biden seeks a smackdown of China simply because they've gotten uppity. The former sought a rational policy for the long-term benefit of both parties; the other is merely enforcing colonial might.