Richard Black: Nuclear war is unthinkable; peace is the better course of action. Please consider it

It's the end of the world as we know it. Is there a chance for peace?

Destruction through preventive humiliation. This is how one could describe the goal that the collective West wants to achieve with Russia. And it is in order to achieve the demise of the Russian country, of the Russian people, of the entire Russian ethnos that we are witnessing a continuous escalation of provocations and attacks that go even beyond the traditional and old Russophobia of certain Western elites. 

Most recent is the attack on the North Stream 1 and 2 pipelines whose sabotage with explosives made them completely inoperable. 

The attack that the U.S. and Britain have carried out is not only against Russia but also against Germany, which sees its hegemonic dream in Europe and its independence from the Anglo-Americans fading, aspirations both based on cheap energy derived from Russian gas.

Only those who do not want to see the reality before their eyes can, in fact, believe that London and Washington are uninvolved in what happened in the Baltic Sea and how the precedent of destroying an international gas pipeline is unheard of in severity.

Every action of the collective West, every statement, every provocation thus brings us closer and closer to the possibility of a nuclear holocaust. Among those who see the reality in all its drama is Richard Black, former Virginia Senate senator and retired Marine Corps colonel. Our readers will remember him for his brave and honest views on the Syrian crisis, the worldwide Covid epidemic, and even the situation in our beloved Italy during the closures imposed by the governments then in office.

More and more we hear about U.S. preemptive nuclear strikes against Russia and the possibility of fighting a limited and victorious nuclear war for Washington. Black takes a different view and made this clear in his letter to the U.S. Congress on September 27. I quote it here for our readers:

"Dear Representatives and Senators:

I am troubled by the loose talk about launching a nuclear attack on Russia. From time to time, senior Republicans and Democrats have suggested employing such weapons. This appears to be a deliberate effort to acclimate Americans to the idea of nuclear warNow, we have Zelensky's office jumping on too. On September 21, 2022, Newsweek ran this headline: "U.S. Needs to Threaten Russia With Nuclear Strike: Ukraine". The article quotes Mykhailo Podolyak, Zelensky's senior aide, as saying, "The other nuclear states need to say very firmly that as soon as Russia even thinks of carrying out nuclear strikes on foreign territory—in this case the territory of Ukraine—there will be swift retaliatory nuclear strikes to destroy the nuclear launch sites in Russia."

Of course, it is impossible to limit retaliatory nuclear strikes to destroying only the nuclear launch sites. Not only would damage be widespread, but Russia would be forced to respond in kind to threats targeting its nuclear deterrence capability. Russia would launch an immediate, massive nuclear response, including air and ground-based hypersonic missiles and submarine-launched ballistic missiles. Each Russian submarine would shower down 100 nuclear warheads, sufficient to incinerate the entire National Capital Region or the Western European industrial heartland.

As the Ukrainian War drags on, globalists are marching us relentlessly toward this nuclear Armageddon. Why?

There would have been no war had we not overthrown the democratically-elected government of Ukraine by violently ousting President Yanukovych in 2014. We promoted war by flooding Ukraine with massive arms shipments afterwards.

The U.S. could have achieved peace by simply pressing Ukraine to implement the 2014 Minsk Peace Agreements which it had signed, establishing a clear framework for setting outstanding issues peacefully. Ukraine promised to implement the Minsk agreements, but chose instead to make war on the Donbass for the next seven years. Ukraine's attacks killed 14,000 people before Russia ever entered the war.

Within two months after Russia crossed into Ukraine, Russia and Ukraine were finalizing a draft peace agreement. However, Prime Minister Boris Johnson suddenly flew to Kiev to block its implementation, undoubtedly coordinating with the U.S. State Department beforehand. War would continue, regardless of the parties' longing for peace.

NATO had ample opportunity for peace but deliberately chose war. The U.S. realized that, with Russia's back to the wall, it would have no choice to but to attack. In 2007, U.S. Ambassador to Russia William Burns pointedly warned that movement toward absorbing Ukraine into NATO might well trigger war between Ukraine and Russia. Nonetheless, the Obama administration overthrew the Ukrainian president and flooded in weapons, knowing that doing so would trigger war. 

Today, wealthy globalists have billions at stake, and they intend to have their war profits even if it means gambling the lives of hundreds of millions of people across the globe.

Few Americans knew anything about Ukraine before February 24th. Was Ukraine in South America, Asia, Africa, or Europe? Many Americans couldn't have answered that question. But now, in order to address a local border dispute on the other side of the globe, war hawks demand concrete steps toward a nuclear war that might exterminate 60% of humanity, plunging mankind into a primitive state.

Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, and Clinton all approached nuclear confrontation with utmost caution. But the Obama administration changed course when it recklessly overthrew the Ukrainian government in 2014 and flooded Ukraine with weapons aimed at Russia. It did so knowing that it was threatening Russia's most vita) national interest: the defense of its territory against nuclear aggression.

Now, the Biden administration threatens to cast caution to the winds. Many of its allies suggest a game of one-upmanship where the U.S. and NATO fire nuclear missiles in response to Russia's use of such weapons to defend its territory. In other words, we would destroy the entire world as our way of saying, "Oh yeah? Well take this!"

Would simple revenge justify killing hundreds of millions of unknowing people? Should we annihilate the world's population to intervene in a border war where the U.S. has no vital national interest?

The U.S. can promptly end this war by making Ukraine a neutral, non-aligned state, just as we did during the Cold War with Austria in 1955. Yes, there would be some territorial adjustments resulting from the war. But peace would end the ongoing bloodshed, avert a nuclear conflagration, and assure Ukraine's long-term safety and independence.

Nuclear war is unthinkable; peace is the better course of action. Please consider it.”

So far Richard Black's goodwill and deep humanity but the problem may be more tragic than it seems at first glance and transcends the limits of ideological confrontation and the eternal struggle for power and earthly glory. 

According to Youssef Hindi, the current battle is part of an eschatological warfare that in recent years has also been embraced by gradually broader strata of the Russian intelligencija where, in the days of the Soviet Union and dialectical materialism, the eschatological side was a Western prerogative behind the screen of defending “democracy” from communist absolutism. In his rather lengthy column (which the attentive reader should address anyway) Hindi states that there has long since been no Christian Europe and America whose roots are firmly rooted in the God of the Gospel. Beneath the veneer of Catholic and Protestant Christianity, actually flows, ever more tumultuous and from the Old to the New World, the current of Jewish-Zionist messianism that sees Russia as the land of origin of Gog and Magog and thus of the forces that are an irremediable existential threat to Israel and Jews all.

This would explain the Western attitude toward Russia, the incredible Russophobia that results in self-destructiveness tending to the collective suicide of all Westerners and eventually human civilization.

That the pieces on the chessboard are not of mere inanimate matter is later also recognized by Thierry Meissan when, in his short article, explains why the militiamen of the Azov Battalion abandon unburied the bodies of their comrades killed in combat: adherents (sic) of the philosopher and mystic Dmytro Donstov, they are convinced that they are descended from the Viking Variangians and that the Valkyries will descend to the battlefield and choose the best warriors to form the Army of Twilight, so as to fight the last battle against the Russians at the end of time.

What was initially a group of stadium goofballs with a Nazi cosplay fixation is now a trained and fierce militia with a, ideological superstructure more sophisticated than it had at the beginning. The methods to achieve this are probably the same as those used by the Americans (by Americans?) to create ISIS, and this circumstance may explain Israel's incredible and deafening silence. In fact, the Jewish state was always incredibly silent when the Ukrainian neo-Nazis paraded through the streets of Kiev with all their fine trinkets and Nazi symbols in full view.

As one can understand, the situation is very complicated and tense, which is why people like Richard Black are even more valuable and deserve to be listened to carefully. Whether they are, only the future can tell us.

Subscribe to Pravda.Ru Telegram channel, Facebook, RSS!

Author`s name Costantino Ceoldo
Editor Dmitry Sudakov