Russia, Ukraine, and the USA

W.J. Astore

The situation along the border of Russia and Ukraine is volatile. War is possible. Given this volatility and the possibility of war, does it make any sense to send more weaponry to Ukraine?

From this CNN report, that is exactly what the USA is doing: sending more arms and ammunition to Ukraine:

“The second bird in Kyiv! More than 80 tons of weapons to strengthen Ukraine’s defense capabilities from our friends in the USA! And this is not the end,” Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov said in a tweet Sunday. The first shipment of security assistance from the US had arrived in Ukraine on Friday. That shipment included “close to 200,000 pounds of lethal aid, including ammunition for the front line defenders of Ukraine,” the US Embassy in Kyiv tweeted Friday night. The shipments come as the US has sought to convince Moscow to de-escalate the situation at the Ukrainian border, where Russia has amassed more than 100,000 troops. Earlier Sunday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken amplified his warning against a Russian invasion of Ukraine, saying “a single additional Russian force” entering Ukraine “in an aggressive way” would result in a severe response by the US and its allies. “If a single additional Russian force goes into Ukraine in an aggressive way, as I said, that would trigger a swift, a severe and a united response from us and from Europe,” Blinken told CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union.”

Let me get this straight: weapons and ammo are “security assistance,” or “lethal aid,” a construction that should win a prize for best oxymoron of the year. Hi! I’m here to help you. How about some “lethal” aid? Meanwhile, even as the US escalates the situation with “lethal aid” and threats, the US State Department insists it’s the Russians who need to “de-escalate the situation.” No contradiction here, right?

Consider here the words of Antony Blinken, he of the “swift” and “severe” and “united” response if only a “single” Russian force should enter Ukraine “in an aggressive way.” This naked bombast directly contradicts President Joe Biden’s words at last week’s press conference. Biden, who occasionally has “senior moments” of inadvertent truth, explained that NATO wasn’t united and that a minor incursion by Russian forces probably wouldn’t trigger a swift and severe response. It’s reassuring to know we have such skilled and consistent leaders as Biden and Blinken in charge here.

US meddling in Ukraine is complex, but let’s just say America’s leaders are part of the problem, not the solution. As usual, the US response to almost any situation is to send troops and weapons while telling the other side to “de-escalate.”

Worst of all, though, from an American perspective, is the lack of skilled and smart leadership in the White House. Biden appears confused and his vice president is hapless. Blinken is a neo-con tool who won’t be confused with Bismarck, let alone Henry Kissinger. He thinks American diplomacy is most effective when it’s backed by brazen military threats. No speaking softly with a big stick held prudently in reserve; Blinken prefers to shout loudly while openly brandishing the big stick of the US military.

It doesn’t bode well, does it?

Kamala Harris and Joe Biden with Antony Blinken on the far right. Not exactly the A-Team.

53 thoughts on “Russia, Ukraine, and the USA

  1. A Big Stick – More Weapons! This is the way of our world. Unless, a new narrative takes hold.

    Now, THE “MACHO” way of men solving problems is playing out on the world scene. We need a feminist, nonviolent solution.

    The new narrative is to ask the people everywhere to commit to nonviolence (as Gandhi and King did) and commit to working together for humanity – helping others. A plan is ready now.

    Here is a story:

    In 2122, the people will celebrate the 100 year anniversary of a planet united and dedicated to helping others because of ONE ACTION, the STARTING POINT, WOMEN rose-up as the Peacemakers.
    Why? Because “Nonviolence” is the answer to bring Peace.

    WOMEN and NONVIOLENCE prevailed because the people saw the power and were able to “Save the Planet and Save Lives!

    Or maybe they did not! Which will it be? You choose.

    Please contact Andre (at) . A plan is ready now! PLEASE ask me about the CATALYST!

    Thank you.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. For a tiny slice of US meddling in Ukraine, consider this now-infamous phone call featuring Victoria Nuland, with a reference to then-VP Joe Biden:

    From 2014. What a sticky and tangled web we weave.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. And then what? – is the question that comes to mind.
    Blinken has never been anything but a reckless warmonger in a nice suit who mostly boasts to other belligerent paper pushers in board rooms sipping martinies.
    If the Russians did move into Ukraine, there is nothing we could do except to get our troops slaughtered.
    There are not enough in place to start with anymore, or our NATO partners, assuming they go along, the ramp up to get to force takes too long and the supply lines are way too long not to even get to the problems with moving material when many lines of transport are constricted because of COVID.
    And where else would you apply force on Russia? Go after subs? Really?
    Sanctions? There have been sanctions on Russia already and they seem to be just fine anyway.
    Putin is smart enough to know this.
    He knows we can’t back up Blinken’s office bravado on the ground, not without defeat.
    We can’t defeat rag tags when we have total air supremacy and large bases in country (Afghanistan) and far more troops (with all the ramp up time needed to assemble and transport).
    Russia has all the transport lines going in not to mention troops in place and ready supply.
    And, just merely by the way, the Ukrainians are hardly model small-d democrats. Closer to full blown Nazis. (thank you Victoria Nuland and a few others – another proof that just being a woman makes you a peacemaker)
    So …. you send your people there as a trigger to set off a big confrontation if attacked and then you get attacked (still theoretical), and are overwhelmed – What then, Mr. tough guy on the news, trying to explain all those bodies which, BTW again, may never make it back to the US?
    No cards to play.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. William, this last line in your comment, “openly brandishing the big stick'” is the perfect segue to my comment posted in The Washington Post before I even got to this new post of yours.
    “In my Curriculum Vitae as a Canadian, I was highly visible at the 1976 Republican National Convention in Kansas City. Having long hair, beard, wearing my trademark #13 jersey, I walked softly carrying my big stick.

    Yesterday, I posted this comment in The Washington Post discussion of the Ukraine Crisis,
    “The hypocritical, duplicitous, schizophrenic attitude of SOS Blinken and the US Power Elite is Dangerous to all Humanity in the extreme.
    This is the US position in the Tug of War with Russia over Ukraine,
    “We must never stand for the flouting or erosion of our bedrock principles. That means no tolerance for overt or tacit spheres of influence, no restrictions on the sovereign right of nations to choose their own alliances, no privileging one state’s security requirements over those of another.” What BS!

    The Soviets deployed their missiles to Cuba in 1962 AFTER the US deployed it’s missiles aimed at Russia in new NATO MEMBER Turkey.
    In an Act of War by International Law, the US Navy erected a total Blockade of Cuba and was willing to start Armageddon/WWII over those Soviet missiles 1500 miles from the US.

    The US totally denied Cuba’s “Sovereign right in making an alliance” with the Soviets after the failed CIA Bay of Pigs debacle. In reality, the US established it’s “sphere of influence” in the Western hemisphere, bedrock Principles be damned!

    The Military Warsaw Pact opposite NATO in Europe collapsed with the Soviet Union in 1991.
    In it’s delusional and arrogant hubris with no Warsaw Pact opposition, US/NATO, and discarding it’s verbal promise not to move East beyond the Unified Germany if the Soviets withdrew it’s Military forces from Germany back to Russia, then advanced toward Russia.

    Ukraine is only 800 miles wide from Russia’s border to Western Europe, a much shorter distance than the 1500 miles from Cuba to the US.
    Americans are not that exceptional. Putin is following that 1962 US playbook, threatening Armageddon/WWIII, if NATO arms Ukraine and admits it into NATO.

    NATO forces are already in Ukraine training the Military to fight Russia as the US proxy force, knowing the Ukrainians wouldn’t stand a chance against Russia no matter how many weapons it gives Ukraine.
    The US has already given close to $2 BILLION in Military aid since the 2014 US orchestrated Coup in Ukraine, changing the Russian friendly government the Russian speaking majorities in the East and Crimea voted for, installing the proxy Neo-Nazi anti-Russian government to mirror the US.

    That was the same Ukraine government US Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland was caught on tape saying she wanted even BEFORE the Coup was a done deal.”

    This was at the end of some 5,000 comments, and to my disappointment, returning to the discussion to see what’s new this morning, my comment was deleted.
    It’s happened before when I add the SINS of OMISSION so it’s the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth, instead of the typical misleading US Propaganda hiding the Whole Truth.

    As for the reference to the big stick, the article has been removed from the front page index, but my big stick comment is still there as the last comment. Probably no one will see it except for the few here who will want to check it out?

    The Washing Post character limits prevented me from continuing.

    The Republican whips did their job and the crowd dissolved.
    Continuing to walk softly carrying my big stick, President Ford and a large retinue of some 25 People appeared on the Mezzanine with the President having his hands on the railing looking down into the Lobby.
    Not 15 feet above me I said, “Good Day Mr. Ford! How are you Today, Sir?”
    Looking at me he replied, “I’m fine, thank you. How are you?
    Lifting up the pamphlet toward him answered, “I’m doing great, but I’d love to talk to you about these UN-United States!” In a nanosecond, like a single cell amoeba, he and his retinue moved right along.

    Watching from CanaDa, there is no doubt these 45 years later, the UN-United States is revealing itself to Americans and the World.


    1. When I posted this comment, you had not yet posted the recording of Victoria Nuland referred to in my comment The Washington Post deleted. Obviously. we’re in sync on the matter, separated on the physical plain, but united in Spirit!

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Forgive me. At 77, sometimes I forget. I have to correct to this, “Lifting up the pamphlet toward him answered, “I’m doing great, but I’d love to talk to you about THE CONSTITUTION of these UN-United States!”


  5. As far as Biden’s role. He is pretty much a tool of his advisers and other interests. He is like too many presidents who basically are suits in the window display. The other week I was finishing a piece on the Iranian revolution and went back to earlier origins with the 19 August 1953 CIA/MI5/(+local cutouts) coup removing Mohammad Mossadegh. The CIA documents are online and available. Instead of unbiased evaluations in their own, internal, reports back to the US and to the President (Ike) and cabinet you can read, repeatedly, propagandist smears in order to build a case. It is worth looking up and reading, especially the supporting and summary documents (PDFs, scanned from typewritten pages).

    The public point (claimed, supposed purpose) of the CIA was untainted information with more reach than average reporters. But the taint hits you as soon as you read the documents. The “communist” smear seems very consistent and usually they seem virulent. That also brings up a very real question about who is really in charge and of what. The untainted reports are actually heavily tainted. The best reporters probably give better evaluations, but then you really need to know who is the best in that regard. Even in the 1953 documents the CIA talks specifically about influencing “their” favorite reporters. All those “leaks” that aren’t leaks at all, for example. Ted Koppel, in 444 nightly programs, starting 24 March 1980, day 142 of the hostage crisis, never once mentioned the 1953 coup or the name of Mossadegh.

    So, again, who really is running the show, ever?

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Fellow American blogger James Howard Kunstler this week has his usual cynical tongue-in-cheek comments on the DC foreign policy establishment…….

    “Then there’s this Shangri-La called Ukraine. Can anyone find it on the map? It’s nowheres around here. Let’s face it: Ukraine is not sending us any new voters or bananas. What good are they? You might argue: they exported the Vindman twins to America (win-win); they supported Hunter Biden’s cocaine habit for six or seven years and paid the mortgage on The Big Guy’s beach house. So, maybe we do owe them.”

    “But then, it’s said that Russia is lurking on Ukraine’s border like a hungry bear at the edge of a sheep pasture, licking its chops, fork and knife in its fisted paws, napkin tied around its throat, visions of mutton-filled perogies dancing in its head. The whole DC foreign policy establishment says we should take a few potshots at that bear, teach it a lesson. I say, just throw Guatemala over the fence, let the bear chew on that, including a few bananas for dessert. There it is: problem solved.”

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Speaking of “lethal aid,” I was reading Mark Rudd’s memoir, “Underground,” in which he cites Timothy Leary saying, “Listen Americans. Your government is an instrument of total lethal evil.”

    I am still struck by the notion of 200,000 pounds of lethal aid as being something to crow about. Timothy Leary knew the score …

    Liked by 1 person

  8. “…Blinken prefers to shout loudly while openly brandishing the big stick…”

    Forgive me for being sexist here, but your phrase does conjure up a vivid image of Blinken unzipping and attempting to prove he has the bigger appendage. And really, this entire scenario reeks of extreme testosterone poisoning. These boys should tuck them back in their pants and act like civilized adults.

    I was horrified this morning to read that Biden is seriously contemplating sending troops over there, to accompany the massive amounts of materiel. The old white men in charge of the MIC (Ms. Noland is a wannabe) are all but openly subjugating the President to satisfy their own evil aims.


    1. It was the Obama-Biden-Nuland regime that orchestrated the 2014 US Coup in Ukraine.

      I’m sure it was Biden’s intention to allay some of Russia’s insecurities and perceived Existential threats from NATO, when he appointed Victoria Nuland Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs of the United States


  9. Did someone up there suggest a better response? I’m not smart enought to know if we are doing something wrong or if it’s right.
    I can and will say Peace be with us please.


    1. Sending weapons and making threats is not a wise response.

      Why not let the Russians and Ukrainians settle their border and political differences without our weapons and threats? We wouldn’t appreciate Russian interference along the border of US and Mexico.

      Leave it alone. We need to focus on defending the U.S. Constitution and our own domestic problems.

      Liked by 1 person

    1. In 1 Samuel 15:2-3, God commanded Saul and the Israelites, “This is what the LORD Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'” God ordered similar things when the Israelites were invading the promised land (Deuteronomy 2:34; 3:6; 20:16-18).

      A little ironical that Peace Makers should be called the Children of this war-mongering God eh?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. That IS the Difference between the Old and New Testaments. In the Old Testament God creates Good and Evil, males War and Peace.
        The Old Testament said a man and woman caught in Adultery had to be stoned to death. When the Religious Establishment brought the woman, minus the man caught in the act, to Jesus reminding him The Law said she must be stoned to death, Jesus didn’t agree in the New Testament.
        Blessed are the Peace Makers is a New Testament thing I think most people are calling for. The God and Father of Jesus and we who believe, in the New Testament is all Good, a healer and forgiver of wrong doing provided we learn and stop doing wrong.

        You hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
        This people draws close to me with their mouth, and honours me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
        But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
        Matthew 15:7

        Liked by 1 person

  10. If the Russians are the bad guys, then what better thing for them to do than take over Ukraine where they are hated by so many (in the western part at least). Russia tying a ball and chain to its own leg and we want to go to war to stop that?

    Liked by 2 people

  11. I think it would be helpful if you would briefly review for your readers ( and all the friends and relatives that they hopefully would forward it to) the actual history of Ukraine from 2014 to now. This would include the fact that the US instigated the coup that put in the neo-nazi government; It would include the fact that nazis have played an important part in events in Ukraine which has caused Russia to a) assist some people in eastern Ukraine against murder and mayhem caused by the nazi Azov battalion by providing them with some small arms plus medical help and food and b) to agree to accept back to Russia the Crimean Island that the citizens of Crimea voted for.

    Over 90% of the citizens held a referendum and voted to return to Russia. This was their second referendum. The first one was when Gorbachev allowed the satelite states like Ukraine to become separate countries. Crimea voted then to go back to Russia where it had been for over 200years before Kruschev decided in the 50’s to give it to USSRUkraine. At that time Russia said no because Russia and Ukraine had worked out an agreement regarding their vast and ONLY warm water port, Sevastopol, located in Crimea – how many ships could be there, how many soldiers, sailors, tanks airplanes etc. So in 2014 the Russians were already there! They did not invade!!! They had a right to be there and a right to protect their port which, it was clear, was a main goal of the US regime change ploy.
    The presence of Nazis, the true facts of Sevastopol, the citizens’ referendums, the US spending $5 billion to train people to protest the Ukrainian elected government, the US continuing plots. None of this is ever mentioned in the MSM – not in the NYT or Wa. Post or on network and cable TV news. I suggest readers who want the full story go to Consortium News which was founded by Robert Parry, an investigative reporter for major publications. He died a couple of years ago, but his articles on Ukraine are still available and very readable.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Ranney, your comment shows why the founders believed that an informed citizenry could be counted on to keep a democracy going indefinitely. If only we all kept up with the facts of history. Modern life offers so many distractions and diversions that invite citizens to be ignorant politically. The payoff in profit is very big. Government is becoming increasing difficult in America even as the stock market soars beyond belief. It isn’t a coincidence.

      Liked by 1 person

  12. I confess that I haven’t read widely about the history of the situation in Ukraine, although I’m learning from many of these comments.

    Perhaps someone will fill me in here. As I understand it, Ukraine had previously been denied NATO membership. Russia doesn’t want Ukraine to ever become a member, as that would represent one more threat on the Russian border. The U.S. is dancing around the issue, using it as a carrot or stick, depending on the circumstances. Now, if I’m correct about all the above, then why is NATO, in effect, rushing to Ukraine’s defense, a country that is NOT part of the alliance? Is it because the U.S. is playing its own game, and has pressured fellow NATO members to render support? Is it that the U.K., Spain, France, Norway, et. al., are simply pre-emptively shoring up member countries bordering Ukraine, in anticipation of a Russian invasion? This all seems murky, in terms of rationale, and I’d appreciate some more education, if anyone would be so inclined.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. First I want to say that the Ukraine – Russia issue is a snarl of historical, cultural, economic and military strategic geography that even the most diligent of historians would have difficulty sorting out. Perhaps for that reason it would be wise to stay out of it.

    The U.S.A, the people, the government and the military have no finesse when evaluating the true interests of a foreign country. Afghanistan is the most current and clear example. Having said that I am now going to throw a political hand grenade into this discussion.

    Consider this:
    “How did Ukraine get so divided?
    You have to remember that Ukraine’s present-day borders are very new and that its historical ties to Russia are very old. So the distinction between Ukraine and Russia is a bit blurrier than the distinction between, say, France and Germany.

    That line started blurring in the 1700s, when Russian leader Catherine the Great began a process of “Russifying” Ukraine — making it Russian — that continued right up through the 1950s. This meant shipping in ethnic Russians, imposing laws that required schools to teach the Russian rather than Ukrainian language, and stationing lots of Russian troops in the area. At some points in the 1800s, the Ukrainian language was banned outright.

    In the 1930s, Soviet leader Josef Stalin caused a famine in Ukraine that killed several million Ukrainians, mostly in the east. He then repopulated the area with ethnic Russians. In the 1940s, Stalin forcibly relocated the ethnic Tatars who dominated Crimea’s population, replacing them with Russians as well. (Some of those Tatars, who are Muslim and ethnically Turkic, have since moved back; they are a minority in Crimea and have expressed fear about returning to Russian rule.)

    For most of this process, Russia focused overwhelmingly on the east, which has vast coal, iron, and some of the most fertile farmland on earth. Ukraine’s linguistic dividing line matches up almost perfectly with the line between its farmland in the east and forestland in the west.

    The effect of all this history is that lots of Ukrainians, very understandably, despise Russia and want nothing to do with it. But there’s also a significant proportion of Ukrainians whose families have substantial connections to Russia, who may remember the Soviet era fondly, and do not want to break away quite so fully as does the west. This national identity crisis has been centuries in the making, and it is a big issue today.”

    To me this sounds a lot like what we did to the American Indians. Slaughter, starvation, disease propagation, seizing of land to re-populate with white Americans, banning Indian languages and customs, etc.
    My heart is with the Ukrainians who want their country to be free and independent.

    What would you do fellow readers if you were an Ukrainian knowing the history of your country and its relations with Russia?


  14. Good new piece by Bacevich. Am going to send him a fan note, if my allergies let me.

    Grotesque incompetence of our ruling elites. Hell, we all thought Reagan was bad. The failure of our system to produce second-echelon personnel to cover for and do the real work for our dimbulb presidents is irrefutable proof of that. Hell, we are far worse than the USSR under Chernenko ever was.

    Check this out:

    Time to go eat some dinner. Hopefully will get some writing done this evening, but no guarantees. Ideas for the Gitmo piece; will send a draft as soon as I have one.

    Dan [] Dances With Bears » CONTENT ANALYSIS OF SECRETARY BLINKEN AT GENEVA REVEALS PSYCHOPATHOLICAL INCAPACITY TO NEGOTIATE WITH RUSSIA By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken revealed publicly in Geneva on Friday, January 21, that he will not negotiate a no-war agreement with the Russians because he cannot.



  15. This even made the New Zealand news today!

    The Pentagon said Tuesday that US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin has put up to 8500 troops on heightened alert, so they will be prepared to deploy if needed to reassure NATO allies in the face of ongoing Russian aggression on the border of Ukraine.


  16. Although I may have posted this here before, one very memorable Noam Chomsky interview (at least for me) was by The Free Thought Project; within, he noted some truth in the oft-repeated conservative reference to Russia-gate as a “hoax”, though likely not in the context typically believed and hyped by most conservatives [“Chomsky: Trump is a Distraction, Used by the Deep State to ‘Systematically Destroy’ America,” July 20, 2017]:

    “Every cabinet official was chosen to destroy anything of human significance in that part of the government. It’s so systematic that it can’t be unplanned. I doubt that Trump planned it … [since] his only ideology is ‘me’. But whoever is working on it is doing a pretty effective job, and the Democrats are cooperating—cooperating in a very striking way …

    Take a look at the focus in Çongress. It’s one of the few decent things Trump has been doing. So maybe members of his transition team contacted the Russians. Is that a bad thing? Recent ambassador to Russia, Jack Matlock, had a blog where he pointed out that, ‘It’s exactly what you should be doing. It’s the job of ambassadors and diplomats coming in. There are serious problems and tensions you want to talk over to see if there’s anything you can do about them. Instead of just building up force and violence.’ That’s what the democrats are focusing on, and meanwhile all these other things are going on and they’re not saying anything about them.”

    Chomsky had also emphasized that, “While everything is focusing on that, the Paul Ryan republicans, who are, in my view, the most dangerous and savage group in the country, are busy implementing programs that they have been talking quietly about for years. Very savage programs, which have very simple principles. One, be sure to offer to the rich and powerful gifts beyond the dreams of avarice, and [two], kick everyone else in the face. And it’s going on step by step right behind the [Russia-gate] bluster.”

    Liked by 2 people

  17. Washington hasn’t exactly established a close working relationship with all N.A.T.O. Alliance members. Türkiye has been slugged with a host load of CAATSA military sanctions thus won’t commit to U.S. military backing in a possible war. France and Germany don’t have a strong conviction when it comes to American foreign policy. Russian Gazprom providing gas and oil to a number of European nations. Crimea Peninsula already sacrificed along with Northern Georgia. Who wants a gas & oil crisis right now? Then there is the risk of use of nuclear WMDs. Radiation disbursement leads to regional crop devastation. Interrupting the food supply for many civilians can be devastating. China may gain big from this regional dispute to exploit weaknesses in Western led alliances in the invasion plan of Taiwan. 5000 American troops in Ukraine with the option of substantially increasing those numbers? Joe Biden’s leadership is now tested to the max as if COVID wasn’t enough to tackle.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Matt Taibbi, as usual, nails it here:

    The “core interest” of the Washington consensus is war. It isn’t just big business, but our biggest business, one of the last things we still make and export on a grand scale. The bulk of the people elected to congress and a lion’s share of the lobbyists, lawyers, and journalists who snuggle in a giant fornicating mass in the capital are dedicated to the upkeep of the war bureaucracy.

    Their main purpose is growing the defense budget and militarizing the missions of other government agencies (from State to the Department of Energy to the CIA). Washington think-tanks exist to factory-generate intellectual justifications for foreign interventions, while attacking with ferocity — as if they were emergencies like pandemics or deadly hurricanes — the appearance of ideas like the “peace dividend” that threaten to move any of their rice bowls to some other constituency.

    Both Biden’s comments and the “Obama doctrine” were fundamental betrayals, presidents saying out loud that there existed such a thing as “our” interests separate from Washington’s war pig clique. The latter group somehow believes itself impervious to error, and takes extraordinary offense to challenges to its judgment, amazing given the spectacular failures in every arena from Iraq to Afghanistan to Syria.

    These people consistently lose popularity contests to cannibals and fingernail-pullers, and their playbook — one play they run over and over, never deviating despite decades of disaster — is designed to reduce every foreign policy situation to contests of force. Their wag-the-dog thinking always argues the right move is the one that allows them to empty their boxes of expensive toys, from weapons systems to Langley-generated schemes for overthrows, which a compliant press happily calls regime change.

    The article is subscription-only, but here’s the link in case you do subscribe (or want to):

    Liked by 3 people

  19. Sure is funny how fast the Democrats are moving to send $500 million in military “aid” to Ukraine:

    Meanwhile, as Glenn Greenwald notes, if you talk about peace, you’re obviously some kind of traitor and/or Putin puppet:

    Discourse in this country is sinking to new lows.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. And now even the current leader of Ukraine is saying that the US, IK, NATO, etc should de-escalate their aggressive rhetoric! Of course the US pundits & war-hawks discount his views because what does he know — he just lives there, is intimately involved with getting along with his neighbors, and — surprisingly— doesn’t want his country turned into a battleground and end-up like war-torn Iraq or Afghanistan.

    Liked by 2 people

Comments are closed.