The conclusion is that this remains a completely unnecessary war with the American government operating using an out-of-date Cold War mentality that benefits only the military-industrial complex. Nevertheless, most establishment Democrats and Republicans continue to support a war that NATO deliberately orchestrated. This is a war that could have and should have been avoided, yet it marches us down the path to nuclear holocaust.
Colonel Jacques Baud, a Swiss Intelligence Officer, has written a comprehensive book about how the war started: Operation Z: The Hidden Truth about the War in Ukraine. In it, he explains how Europeans hated and feared Vladimir Putin, which saw the EU insist that Ukraine should not trade with Russia but must, instead, enter into a trade agreement with them. This European trade dispute first impinged on the American consciousness when Victoria Nuland, acting for the Obama Administration, orchestrated the 2014 coup, ousting the pro-Russian government.
In December 2014, George Friedman, president of the U.S. geopolitical intelligence platform STRATFOR, said in an interview with the Russian magazine Kommersant: Russia defines the event that took place at the beginning of this year [February 2014] as a coup organized by the U.S. And in truth, it was the most blatant [coup] in history.
Then, in 2016, while Obama was still in the White House, the US deployed a land-based air defense system—the “Aegis Ashore”—in Deveselu, Romania. In early 2022, America set up the same system in Redzikowo, Poland. The system can launch Tomahawk nuclear missiles that need only 10 minutes to fly to Moscow.
Can you spell provocation? This situation is like the October-November 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis that brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. The Soviet Union, then led by Nikita Khrushchev, placed approximately forty nuclear missiles less than one hundred miles from Florida.
In 1961, the US government put Jupiter nuclear missiles in Italy and Turkey. It had also sponsored a CIA-led force of some 1500 Cuban exiles, who were armed and trained to overthrow the Castro regime that had seized power in 1959. The Bay of Pigs (Bahia de Cochinos) invasion lasted only five days, from April 15, 1961, to April 19, and was an unqualified disaster.
Castro feared American forces would try again, so he welcomed Soviet missile placements on his island. The 61-year-old Khrushchev believed he could do this with impunity, having engaged with the 44-year-old, naïve John Kennedy in a summit some six weeks after the Bay of Pigs fiasco. For Kennedy, the summit was also a disaster. The Soviet leader rolled Kennedy, and the latter said that Khrushchev “beat the hell out of me.”
In a spectacular turnaround, Kennedy negotiated his way out of the nuclear crisis without firing a shot. We removed our missiles from Italy and Turkey while promising not to invade Cuba again. For his part, the Soviet leader removed his missiles from Cuba.
Fast forward 61 years, and the West again baited a despot. One year later, we’re getting service announcements in the United States about what to do during a nuclear strike. Last August, Liz Truss, then England’s Foreign Secretary, said she would hit the nuclear button even if it meant global annihilation. It was as if they were trying it out on the public to see if people would accept nuclear war. All this drama and fear-mongering could have been avoided.
What’s clear, though, is that the West both wanted and still wants this war. If the West had let Zelensky continue with his proposal to Russia at the end of March 2022, Ukraine would have retained its pre-February 2022 configuration. (Remember, Zelensky had first requested negotiation on February 25, the day after the invasion began, which the Russians had accepted.) However, the European Union negated the idea of negotiation by providing the first package of 450 million euros in arms. In March, Zelensky made another offer that Russia welcomed and was ready to discuss, but the European Union once again responded with a second aid package of 500 million euros for arms.
Then, on April 2, Boris Johnson called Zelensky, asking him to withdraw his proposal; otherwise, the West would stop their support. Then on April 9, during a visit to Kiev, Johnson reiterated the Western position. Ukraine was willing to negotiate an end to the war, but the West would not have it.
Meanwhile, Ukraine’s military successes are not what they appear to be. Baud explains that Ukraine’s retaking the Kharkiv region was a hollow accomplishment because Russian forces had essentially withdrawn from the area to the Donbass, an ethnic Russian region in the east that was their real objective. When Ukrainian troops went after the remaining Russian troops, they found themselves drawn into a killing field. Russians bombarded them with artillery, inflicting huge casualties to the tune of an estimated 5,000 men. Similarly, 2,000 were lost in Khersn flinging themselves at a reinforced Russian line earlier. This slaughter happened after Zelensky overrode his military leadership because of Western pressure. He sent his men to die so that Western political leaders could claim a false victory to keep their war politically viable.
The only European leader exhibiting rational behavior is Hungary’s Victor Orbán, who refuses to engage in actions detrimental to his nation. For this, he is hated outside Hungary, although not inside. In contrast, our American President has now abandoned the “no-first-use” policy and reserves the right to use nuclear weapons first. According to Baud, Russia maintains a no-first-strike nuclear policy.
The Ukraine war has dangerously depleted our weapons supply to the extent that it will take several years to replenish. This threatens our ability to reinforce our allies in Israel, Taiwan, and the Republic of South Korea. Nor is this a future problem. It’s a current problem. On May 7, 2023, John Solomon’s Just the News reported that we are falling substantially behind in committed armaments shipments to Taiwan.
Western leaders orchestrated an unnecessary war and risk nuclear confrontation with an enemy whose nuclear arsenal is superior to Western powers. America once had tactical nuclear superiority over Russia because of our advanced nuclear submarine fleet. However, our Naval capabilities have not kept pace with those of our enemies.
While America has wasted nearly $10 trillion on mostly useless military adventures and green energy initiatives, the Chinese and Russian governments have built up their military capabilities and are jointly superior to ours. In Ukraine, Putin’s army is gradually destroying the opposition. His troops fight with superior strategy and tactical skill.
Simply put, Russian leadership is superior to that of the West. It seems the only parties benefiting from this war are corporate globalists.
Source: American Thinker.
