Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...



Recommended Posts

You might as well appeal against a thunderstorm as against these terrible hardships of war. War is cruelty, there is no use trying to reform it; the crueler it is, the sooner it will be over.”
― William Tecumseh Sherman

William T. Sherman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In these outbursts of malicious enthusiasm or enthusiastic malice, one discerns two neocon obsessions that have been characteristic of the conservative establishment since the 1980s. One of these fixations is the Eternal Hitler, who is always lurking in the antidemocratic corner. This deathless knave, who has arrived in an updated form, is eager to reenact all the evil carried out by his earlier incarnation, including mass extermination of people who are considered to be inherently inferior. But the sempiternal Hitler must fight the equally eternal Churchill, who will emerge, as he most recently has in the form of Volodymyr Zelensky, to combat absolute Hitlerian evil. This inevitable confrontation occurs each time “the democracies” let down their guard. 



Link to comment
Share on other sites

A second problem is that Putin is many things other than the terms Biden used to describe him. He commands the largest nuclear arsenal on earth and 10 times as many battlefield nuclear weapons as the U.S. military. He is the man we must look to if we hope to end the war in Ukraine. For Putin alone can order the Russian army to stand down or withdraw, presumably a goal of U.S. foreign policy.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the fate of Ukraine and the lives of its civilian population are evoked in calls for more escalatory action from the West, it is these very people who will suffer and die in large numbers every day the war drags on. Western media coverage is often crafted to portray only one outcome as acceptable: a decisive Ukrainian victory, in which the government of Volodymyr Zelenskyy emerges from the horrors of the Russian invasion in complete control of all of its territory, including Crimea and the Donbas region. Ukraine, as a free and independent state, should be free to join NATO, and Russia has no legitimacy in questioning the implications of such a move. Advocacy for accepting anything short of this outcome is a victory for Russia and therefore traitorous to even consider.



Link to comment
Share on other sites



Will Biden Blow Up the World?
By Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

April 4, 2022


If you thought that the neocon-controlled US plan to isolate and destroy Russia couldn’t get any worse, you were wrong. In a speech in Poland, brain-dead Biden said that Putin could not stay in power. This was not a slip. As Dr. Ron Paul points out with characteristic insight, “Previewing President Biden’s trip to Europe last week, US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said that, ‘the president is traveling to Europe to make sure we stay united.’

That sure didn’t go as planned. This may have been the most disastrous – and dangerous – Presidential overseas trip ever.

The US and its NATO allies have repeatedly proclaimed that ‘protecting Ukraine’s democracy’ has never been about threatening Russia. Holding out NATO membership and sending billions of dollars in military equipment to Ukraine, starting under Trump, was not threatening Russia. CIA training camps in eastern Ukraine, where paramilitaries were trained on US weapons systems, was not about threatening Russia.

But at every stop, President Biden seemed to undermine the narrative his own Administration had carefully crafted. First up, warning that Russia might use chemical weapons in Ukraine, Biden promised it would ‘trigger a response in kind,’ meaning the US would use chemical weapons as well. That would be a serious war crime.

National Security Advisor Sullivan had to be brought to explain that the US has ‘no intention’ of using chemical weapons.

Later, speaking to the 82nd Airborne in Poland, President Biden told them that US troops would soon be in Ukraine. He said to the troops, ‘you’re going to see — you’re going to see women, young people standing — standing the middle of — in front of a … tank, just saying, “I’m not leaving. I’m holding my ground.”’

A White House spokesman had to clarify that, ‘the president has been clear we are not sending US troops to Ukraine and there is no change in that position.’

Clear? Well, not really. He had just said the opposite to our own troops!

Then, at the end of Biden’s final speech in Poland, the President inadvertently told the truth: the US involvement in Ukraine is all about ‘regime change’ for Russia. Speaking of Russian President Putin, he told the audience, near the border of Ukraine, ‘for God‘s sake, this man cannot remain in power.’

The President’s disaster control team immediately mobilized in the person of Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who offered this pained interpretation of Biden’s clear statement, ‘I think the president, the White House, made the point last night that, quite simply, President Putin cannot be empowered to wage war or engage in aggression against Ukraine or anyone else.’

No, that’s not what he said. The president has a leading Constitutional role in the formation of US foreign policy, and he said in a public speech that ‘regime change’ in Russia is US policy. Any attempt by his staffers to try to explain it away looks terrible: either the President has no idea what he’s saying so we should not take seriously what is essentially a declaration of war on Russia, or the President took the opportunity on the border with Ukraine to essentially declare war on Russia.

Presidents Reagan, Ford, and Bush Jr. were all known for their gaffes. Some were funny and some were serious. But none of them declared war on a nuclear-armed adversary in that adversary’s own backyard and then afterward had to send out staff to explain that the president didn’t mean what he just said.

Interestingly, Biden saved his most hawkish and bombastic statements for this final speech in Poland, at which none of the more cautious NATO partners like Germany and France were present. So much for ‘unity’ being the prime purpose of the trip.”

The warmongers are taking an enormous risk, even for them. Putin is not the maniac they portray him to be but rather a cautious statesman pursuing Russia’s legitimate security interests. In previous articles, I’ve cited the work of the America’s foremost expert on Putin, Professor Stephen Cohen, to show this. But no one can doubt that Putin is tough and, if cornered, will fight with everything he has. An effort to oust him could bring on a nuclear war that will destroy the world. Even if only “tactical” nuclear weapons were used, this would have disastrous consequences. As the distinguished philosopher Robert Paul Wolff has noted, “The weapons referred to as ‘tactical nuclear weapons’ are fission bombs each of which is rated as the equivalent of perhaps 3000 to 5000 tons of TNT or some similar explosive. This is referred to in shorthand as a 3 KT or 5 KT tactical nuke, a catchy form of speech that sounds hep and knowledgeable, what was called when I was young ‘inside dopester.’

Let us think about this for a moment. If Russia were to send a flight of 50 heavy bombers to attack the capital city of Ukraine and if each of these bombers were to carry four so-called ‘blockbuster’ bombs, each containing the equivalent of 1000 pounds of TNT, and if all 50 of these bombers were to drop their bombs on the capital city, causing enormous amounts of destruction and death, this would be an attack using a total of 100 tons of high explosive. If Russia were to send such a flight of bombers every day for a month, it would at the end of that month have delivered to Kyiv an explosive power equivalent to one so-called tactical nuclear weapon rated at 3 KT.  In one month, Russia would have destroyed Kyiv with conventional weapons. Using a single tactical nuclear weapon, Russia would destroy Kyiv in roughly 3 seconds.  To ensure the complete destruction of Kyiv, Russia might have to double down and use two or three tactical nuclear weapons.  Not by any stretch of language can this be called a ‘tactical decision.’” See this.

The Ukrainian leader Zelensky, often portrayed in our captive press as a hero, has done his best to bring on a nuclear war. He wants America to be even more aggressive. “Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, visibly irritated, demanded that Western nations provide a fraction of the military hardware in their stock piles to his country and asked whether they were afraid of Moscow.

Several countries have promised to send anti-armour and anti-aircraft missiles as well as small arms but Zelenskiy said Kyiv was not getting what it needed.

‘It is tanks for our state. It is missile defence. It is anti-ship weapons. That is what our partners have, that is what is just gathering dust there,” he said in his now customary late-night video address on Saturday. ‘This is all not only for the freedom of Ukraine but for the freedom of Europe.’

Ukraine needs just 1% of NATO’s aircraft and 1% of its tanks, he said, adding that it would be impossible to stop Russian attacks on the besieged southern port of Mariupol without enough tanks, armoured vehicles and aircraft.

‘We’ve already been waiting 31 days. Who is in charge of the Euro-Atlantic community? Is it really still Moscow, because of intimidation?’ he said.

Zelenskiy has repeatedly argued that Russia will seek to expand further into Europe if Ukraine falls. However NATO has rebuffed his calls for a no-fly zone to be established over Ukraine on the grounds that this could provoke a wider war.”


Zelensky doesn’t need to worry. The US is leading us toward nuclear war. Glenn Greenwald summarizes US strategy in this way: The U.S. is, by definition, waging a proxy war against Russia, using Ukrainians as their instrument, with the goal of not ending the war but prolonging it. So obvious is this fact about U.S. objectives that even The New York Times last Sunday explicitly reported that the Biden administration ‘seeks to help Ukraine lock Russia in a quagmire’ (albeit with care not to escalate into a nuclear exchange). Indeed, even ‘some American officials assert that as a matter of international law, the provision of weaponry and intelligence to the Ukrainian Army has made the United States a cobelligerent,’ though this is ‘an argument that some legal experts dispute.’ Surveying all this evidence as well as discussions with his own U.S. and British sources, Niall Ferguson, writing in Bloombergproclaimed: ‘I conclude that the U.S. intends to keep this war going.’ UK officials similarly told him that ‘the U.K.’s No. 1 option is for the conflict to be extended and thereby bleed Putin.’

In sum, the Biden administration is doing exactly that which former President Obama warned in 2016 should never be done: risking war between the world’s two largest nuclear powers over Ukraine.”

We should unite behind the magnificent leadership of Dr. Ron Paul to do what we can to stop this madness. Our lives depend on it.

The Best of Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him mail], former editorial assistant to Ludwig von Mises and congressional chief of staff to Ron Paul, is founder and chairman of the Mises Institute, executor for the estate of Murray N. Rothbard, and editor of LewRockwell.com. He is the author of Against the State and Against the Left. Follow him on Facebook and Twitter.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


3 April 2022 by Larry Johnson

Bucha is the latest shiny object that the Western cats are chasing mindlessly without taking time to think critically about what Russia is actually doing on the ground. Russia’s invasion on February 24 was not a classic military attack. What do I mean? If Russia was intent on conquering and subjugating Ukraine without regard to the fate of Ukrainian civilians it would have launched massive missile and airstrikes on all major cities, bridges, airfields, railroads and communication systems. It did not do that. Not my opinion.

Read More >> Bucha Massacre? A Ukrainian False Flag? (sonar21.com)


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Col Douglas Macgregor Gives His Updated Opinion on Current Status of Ukraine-Russia Conflict

March 29, 2022

Col Douglas Macgregor appears for an interview with Dave Smith on his “Part Of The Problem” podcast.  Col Macgregor gives his status update on the Ukraine and Russian military along with some excellent background information on the U.S. cultural issues which are driving the U.S. position.

Additionally, Macgregor overlays the economic battle both domestically and geopolitically with the currency war and talks about economic repercussions for the U.S., NATO countries, Ukraine and Russia.   As noted by Macgregor when the Biden administration turned favorably toward Iran the Saudis immediately realized it was in their best interest to withdraw strategic support for the U.S.

It’s a good interview that goes into much more depth than the average media appearance, and permits discussion of multiple facets of the conflict in/around Ukraine. The video is prompted to begin at 17:34 when the Ukraine discussion begins. WATCH:



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • JakeHolman changed the title to TRUMPISM IN EUROPE AND UKRAINE WAR

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
  • Create New...