2022. Suddenly the western media is trading stories about impending war, sabre rattling while TV stations parade Victoria Nuland as some form of oracle
So we wake up in 2022 and take a look around us. The first words that spring to mind are “What the...?” We have stories of the British supplying weapons systems to Ukraine so that people can be murdered, we have Victoria Nuland paraded on SKY News claiming that Russia’s moves are typical of a country that is possibly intending to conduct a false flag event, attacking its own troops and blaming Ukraine and creating a pretext to invade. All this while the social media has gone wild with stories about “Putin” wanting “Lebensraum” for Russians. And yes, it must be true, because I saw it on the Internet! And on television!
Hey, wait a moment here guys, calm down, take a seat, make yourselves a nice cup of coffee, whoa! Hold your horses! Breathe deeply. What brought all of this on suddenly? Is someone trying to find a story to take our minds off Covid? Does someone have political problems at home? Are we following the notion, If you want to control a guy, make him afraid? Is NATO making yet another attempt at self-justification?
Maybe. I mean, everyone knows NATO is an anachronism and its raison d’être died when the Warsaw Pact was dissolved back in 1991. You know, when NATO promised not to encroach eastwards if the Warsaw Pact was dissolved, only since then 14 nations have joined in 5 waves.
And here we reach the crux of the matter. NATO needs to invent external threats to justify its own existence, otherwise everyone will start to see it as the monster it is, basically the cutting edge of the BARFFED Lobbies (Banking, Arms, Resources, Finance, Food, Energy, Drugs), whose member states spend, collectively, one point two trillion USD on weapons systems to murder people each and every year. That is one point two thousand billion dollars every twelve months. Yet who elected NATO to control its Member States’ foreign policies? Oh yes it does, believe me. Try wriggling out of one of its wars and see what happens. Try not paying the 2 per cent of GDP to NATO instead of wasting it on schools, healthcare, hospitals, public services, infrastructure.
And lo and behold, up pops Russia again as the ogre in chief. I mean, it’s big enough isn’t it? So big in fact that there are huge areas practically without anyone living in them (so why does it need Ukraine?), and it’s super-rich in mineral resources, so a double-whammy...it provides a great THEM to justify the US and is rich for those intent on pickings, you know, create problems, support terrorist groups inside to splinter the country then move in and syphon off the gas, oil, gold and so on.
So from that side this “Russia is going to invade” story appears.
Now from Russia’s side, from the very beginning, no good winds have ever come from the West, now, have they? Napoleon was one, Hitler was another. But right from the start when the Soviet Union was taking its first steps, the West jabbed its unwelcome and ever-pervasive snout into the internal affairs of a sovereign nation. What again? Yes, in the Russian Civil War, causing the deaths of millions. They lost, of course, as Napoleon lost and Hitler lost, but at a huge cost.
So with this history, and with NATO’s expansion after lying that it would not, with NATO aircraft being sent into the Black Sea, with NATO conducting exercises in the Baltic and poised to stick a spear into Russia’s side by accepting a Ukrainian bid for NATO membership, let us put all this into context.
For a start, Russia does not need to invade Ukraine. What for? Russia is far richer and has far more resources, does not need the “Lebensraum” and as far as the citizens of Donbas are concerned, they are perfectly capable of defending themselves. What Russia does not want is Ukraine inside NATO or NATO inside Ukraine, for the obvious reasons outlined above.
What Russia wants is a pledge from NATO (as if that is worth the paper it is written on) that it will not expand further and will not instal offensive weapons systems inside Ukraine. Talks last week showed that NATO is not prepared to make that commitment. So we can conclude that it does have plans to enter Ukraine or accept Ukraine into its fold, NATO member states are already arming Ukraine and so it is obvious that NATO is preparing the ground to attack Russia in the future.
So the fact that Russian troops are stationed inside Russian territory – they are not in Iraq – means not that they are planning to invade anyone (what purpose would that serve?) but rather, that if and when NATO makes its move, Russia is ready.
As for Victoria Nuland’s declarations on SKY News, what is she smoking? Russia intends to carry out a false flag operation, murdering its own troops so as to create a casus belli with Ukraine??? Russia does not carry out false flag operations, such as the ones the western-backed terrorists carried out in Syria, gassing civilians in areas crawling with Government troops, then blaming President Assad who has won the civil war with support from Russia’s counter-terrorist operation.
Conclusion: Once again, NATO is posturing and today using Ukraine as a pawn. Sorry to disappoint anyone but Russia will not invade Ukraine. It is, however, ready when NATO pounces. The fact that NATO refuses to sign any binding agreements is a clear sign that its intentions are suspicious, to say the least.
Let us ask, what does Russia gain from invading Ukraine? Nothing. What does Ukraine get from becoming a NATO member? It becomes a pawn. Do the Ukrainian people benefit? No, they would prefer to continue policies of development and improving public services. Does NATO benefit from arming Ukraine or allowing Ukraine to join NATO at a later date? Yes, it strengthens its strangle-hold around Russia’s neck on the western front.
What it cannot do is counter Russia’s superior airpower, missile technology, superior soldiering and defensive systems. In any conflict, NATO would be destroyed within minutes, along with its Headquarters in Brussels and possibly along with the main cities of all NATO countries, if an attack were launched on Moscow or Saint Petersburg. So Russia is right to view NATO with suspicion, not trust a word its leaders say and prepare itself for any eventuality.
At the end of the day, instead of looking at one another through the sights of a gun, shouldn’t we all be working together to tackle the climate change challenges, to protect the environment, to defend animals at risk of extinction, to work on medicines to fight Covid, to work together to prevent a pandemic of NIPAH, the next boy on the block, should it occur? To feed the hungry? To implement social welfare systems in countries where there are none? With so much to do, NATO is provoking Russia once again?
Mister Biden, tear up this policy. Brandish an open hand for a handshake, brandish open arms for an embrace and step back from the brink. Confrontation will get you nowhere. And ladies and gentlemen, do we not have far more pressing and urgent issues to solve together? Isn’t everyone tired of belligerence, wars, bombing and warmongering creeps using demonology to start their campaigns? Sometimes I wish “Don’t Look Up” actually happened, for several reasons.
Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey can be contacted at [email protected]
The simultaneous destruction of three gas pipeline strings in the Baltic Sea is unprecedented, operator Nord Stream AG announced