The Keyboard Commandos

W.J. Astore

As war in Ukraine drags on, the possibility for dangerous escalation increases. The goal should be the quickest possible ceasefire and a diplomatic solution that puts an end to hostilities. Or, to cite Vera Brittain in “Testament of Youth” again: “No to killing. No to war.”

An obstacle to this are all the keyboard commandos in the West who are recklessly calling for dangerous escalations against Russia. These include a “no-fly” zone above the city of Kyiv enforced in part by the U.S. Air Force, and direct attacks by European air forces against Russian armored columns on their way to Kyiv. Such calls for military action are indeed reckless since Vladimir Putin has issued a none-too-veiled threat of a nuclear response to them. Is he bluffing? I for one do not want to find out.

The West is already providing advanced weaponry to Ukraine such as Stinger anti-aircraft missiles and Javelin anti-tank missiles. EU countries even talked of sending fighter aircraft to Ukraine, but that deal seems to be falling apart. Such weaponry may increase the costs of war to Russia, but weapons alone are not likely to prove decisive in any way.

For all those keyboard commandos out there, safely tweeting about attacks on Russian forces in the cause of “helping” Ukraine, I have a challenge for you. Come out from behind your keyboards, book a flight to Ukraine, grab a Kalashnikov or perhaps even a Stinger, and show how determined you really are to defend Ukraine. Barring that, and assuming you’re of military age and that you’re American, why not take this opportunity to enlist in the U.S. military, as NFL star Pat Tillman famously did in the aftermath of 9/11. Show us how tough you really are; show us how much you truly care.

Because, if you’re not willing to put up, it really is better (and also much more honest) if you shut up.

42 thoughts on “The Keyboard Commandos

  1. The deterrent you outline seems like it would be expensive. In the interest of resource conservation, I would like to offer an alternative: Encourage the cheer team routine above an open flame and make sure the pom-poms are made from synthetics.


    1. Reminds me of our clueless, frenetic cheerleaders back in high school chanting “BLOCK THAT KICK!” whenever our team had the ball on fourth down deep in our own territory and dropped back — sometimes in our own end zone — to punt.

      Liked by 1 person

    1. Bacevich’s imaginary dialogue has some extremely realistic advice, essentially saying don’t be afraid to choose diplomacy/bargaining/some concessions over macho rhetoric/posturing and military responses. I can’t help but think that if in this current situation that if Biden (ie; NATO, because let’s be honest) had thrown Russia/Putin a bone and said ‘OK, we agree not to let Ukraine and Georgia join NATO’ (and signed appropriate documentation), then US/Russian relations would’ve been eased and been on the road to recovery significantly, WITHOUT the US/NATO virtually giving up anything that they currently had, other than the vague possibility of NATO entry by Ukraine or Georgia. Things would’ve been stabilized politically at the place they were a few months ago, with lessening of tensions. Ukraine would NOT have been invaded with all the always-tragic loss of life by civilians as inevitably results in armed conflicts.
      Unfortunately, I see little hope of something sensible like that happening in the US in the near future… but hey ‘Joe’ (Biden), prove me to be a pessimistic old geezer….PLEASE!

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I agree with you, Eddie, and said pretty much the same thing to a friend of Russian descent the other day. She maintains that if the U.S. had conceded over NATO membership for Ukraine, Putin would have come up with another demand/threat a few months down the road, and


          1. While I (unlike some mainstream media commentators) won’t pretend to be able to psycho-analyze Putin or anyone else, especially someone who’s from a significantly different culture, political status, and is on the other side of the world, I do see accounts (ie: Prof. John Meirshimer[sic] video, for instance) that state that this potential NATO membership of Ukraine and Georgia has been a major issue with Russia/Putin since 2008, so it doesn’t sound like it’s just a spur-of-the-moment excuse concocted to pseudo-justify an invasion (ie; like a certain nameless country did back in 2003, when it went to the other side of the world to invade a non-threatening country under pretenses that were later revealed BY ITSELF to have been false). And even IF Russia did ‘move the goalposts’ at that point, it’s still a time of peaceful negotiation and NOT WAR, which I’m sure the residents of Ukraine and Russia would’ve appreciated, while we could all sleep a little easier not worrying about accidental nuclear weapons episodes…

            Liked by 1 person

            1. The people behind that nameless country’s invasion in 2003 (e.g., Dick Cheney), had actually planned such a scenario long before they could get it to actually play out (see: Project for the New American Century). Just sayin’.


  2. Mr. Astore, you quoted the Testament of Youth. Greta Thunberg said, and I paraphrase, you adults are leaving the mess to us children – you need you to act. Yes! The adults must act for climate and peace.

    Regarding peace, the male, dominant, patriarchal, militaristic way of resolving conflicts will not change UNLESS something different and special arises! There is no blame assigned to men. History created the circumstances, but now is the time to change.

    A NEW EMERGENCY PLAN is prepared to create the “PODIUM” for WOMEN’S VOICES HEARD AROUND THE WORLD as the “counter measure” to war and militarism (which will also affect the climate movement)! All the mechanisms are in place!

    Women have already been uniting and have practiced mobilizing as evidenced by the Women’s March on Washington, Women marched in Jerusalem, Women Crossed the DMZ in Korea, Women in India, the #MeToo movement, Portland, Oregon, and most recently in Belarus. The new is designed to “harness the power” of women and nonviolence to create trust and respect between nations and people and create the atmosphere to re-allocate military spending.

    If “No to Killing, No to War” is the slogan, the children can’t mobilize. Let’s ask the women to lead.
    This is a formal request to you and all columnists. Will you write about women and ask them to lead?

    A new global peace movement can affect the Ukraine crisis, but more importantly, it can sustain an on-going peace movement to change ourselves and change our cultures of violence. The plan is not exclusive to women. Men are included.

    It may not work but we have to try every idea! Thank you! Peace and Love, Andre

    Andre Sheldon
    Founder and Director, Global Strategy of Nonviolence, For the Children
    Email: Andre (at)

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks for your comment. Well, which women? Maggie Thatcher? Hillary Clinton?

      We need wise, compassionate, peaceful people to lead — which definitely means more women, but not exclusively so.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Hello WJ – Hoa Binh!

        I have been fortunate to network with “non-governmental” women leaders from around the world. Here in the U.S., a few of the women I believe are wise and compassionate are: author Alice Walker (The color Purple), spiritual leader Marianne Wiliamson, Feminist Gloria Steinem, and Sister Joan Chittister (ask me about my small world story).

        Around the world: Chair of the Elders, Mary Robinson, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet, author and activist Arundhati Roy from India (was good friend of Howard Zinn – Howard was my confidante), Exec Director of ICAN Beatrice Fihn, Nobel Peace Laureate Leymah Gbowee from Liberia, and one of my favorites, Ela Gandhi, the granddaughter of Mahatma Gandhi.

        I have lists of women I’ve networked with. Ela Gandhi told me all I need is one woman to take the plan I’ve developed as her own. This is my quest. However, everyone is busy or in their own “silo.”

        I am a 71 year old man, person, that believes we need to change our culture of violence. We need something different. All my research shows women have an advantage. Without women to create change, nothing will change and there will be no peace.

        The world’s crises are getting worse and require our utmost attention. War and militarism derail all the good work – like Vietnam did to Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society.”

        My plan was submitted to Sec-General Guterres’ staff and I am planning to return to meet directly with Guterres. One last step is needed. I’m going to “MAKE IT HAPPEN!”

        I would love to speak with you about. Could we zoom to introduce ourselves?

        Thank you. Peace and Love, Andre

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Always happy to chat. My email is

          We need a greater range of voices and ideas. But when you think of certain women in prominent positions in U.S. government (Kamala Harris, Condoleezza Rice, Samantha Power, Victoria Nuland, Madeleine Albright), you realize it isn’t simply about getting more women in positions of power.

          It’s truly about diversity of ideas, perspectives, and commitments. So, for example, Marianne Williamson is truly “diverse” not only because she’s a woman but she’s antiwar and a critical thinker who knows about compassion and is committed to peace.

          Liked by 3 people

        1. Hello Susan et al. The U.S. and Russian women are exactly what I’m talking about. Women’s groups are everywhere! Now it is time to take the concept to its highest level and unite all of the organizations under one umbrella!

          Please contact me to discuss the strategy planned.
          My email is Andre (AT)

          Peace and Love, Andre Sheldon
          Director, Global Strategy of Nonviolence


    1. “book a flight to Ukraine, grab a Kalashnikov ” Even at 67, that is a damn tempting, though thoroughly impractical, proposition.


      1. No need for American, British, or Canadian Rambo-wannabes to buy any guns or enlist in any mercenary army. According to a video I just saw from a Chilean businessman from a hotel room in Kiev — the man normally lives with his family in Kharkov (Eastern Ukraine) — the Ukrainian nazi “heroes” are handing out weapons to anyone who will take them while forcibly conscripting males between the ages of 18 to 50 (or thereabouts). So just book a flight to Poland (if you can find a commercial airline that will go there) and then make your way on foot across the open steppe on your way to “Victory” and “Glory” in Kiev. Once there, the nazi “defenders of democracy” will give you anything you need to either get you killed or a prisoner of war somewhere that you never heard of. Bon Voyage!


  3. Before deploying as an enlisted (E-5) Navy Electrician’s Mate “advisor” to the now-long-defunct Republic of South Vietnam in July of 1970, I had some weapons “training” (one week) at Camp Pendleton with the U.S. Marines (i.e., brig guards, embassy decorations, or bullet-catching shock troops). Then many months later, after eight months of language school at DLIWC (Monterey) and three months in-country at Cam Rahn Bay (north of Saigon) I found myself banished (for growing a beard without my commanding officer’s permission) to an Advanced Tactical Support Base (ATSB “Solid Anchor”), essentially a pile of sand dumped on a defoliated stretch of jungle mud alongside a dirty brown salt-water river two kilometers from the southern most tip of the Ca Mau peninsula. Needless to say, after all that time, my non-existent familiarity with weaponry of any sort made me not only incompetent in its use, but a positive danger to anyone unlucky enough to locate somewhere in my vicinity.

    Anyway, one night the base alarms went off and everybody had to put on their helmets and flak jackets and get to their “battle stations,” which in my case meant a tower at one corner of the base equipped with an M-60 machine gun, a night-vision scope, and a telephone on the wall of the tower. Together with a shipmate of mine, we climbed the tower and then waited for orders or for something to happen. I looked through the “starlight scope” and couldn’t see anything out in the darkness but a vague green mush. So we just waited.

    All of a sudden “our” Vietnamese marines manning a 50-caliber machine gun down below us started firing, with the red tracer rounds arching off into the night. Having only seen warfare in movies, I pointed the M-60 in the same direction and pulled the trigger, making a loud noise and sending a stream of bullets out into the night.

    The Vietnamese marines down below us immediately stopped firing, so I did, too. Quiet enveloped the base. The phone on the wall rang. I picked it up and said: “Hello?” A voice on the other end — coming from the base command center — demanded to know: “Tower [X], what are you shooting at?” I honestly replied: “Whatever the Vietnamese down below us are shooting at.” Silence. Then a “click” as someone on the other end of the line hung up. I never got assigned to that tower again. Lucky for everybody.

    So, by all means U.S./U.K./NATO-EU “trainers,” hand out all the guns you want to any 18-50 year old with a finger to pull the trigger. But don’t feign surprise if he shoots himself or anyone nearby, sells it on the black market, drops it and just hauls ass, or joins a criminal gang seeking to profit from the lack of any competent government administration. Oh, and by the way, where did all those “trainers” go all of a sudden? I think our Vietnamese, Iraqi, and Afghan trainees could tell you.


  4. Having demonstrated my utter uselessness as a base tower machine gunner at ATSB Solid Anchor, I got reassigned to another “battle station,” this time on one of the Vietnamese boats tied up at a pontoon barge out in the river. As the base translator/interpreter, I had to take my helmet, flak jacket, M-16 rifle and ammunition with me, along with a radio which, naturally, I had no understanding how to operate. In theory, so I understood, should the base get overrun by the “enemy” — meaning local rice-farmers, fishermen, and/or a few other Vietnamese with cast-off U.S. weapons bought on the black market who wanted us to leave them alone and depart (which we eventually did) — I would use this radio to call in “air support” to do whatever they would supposedly do.

    Anyway, when the base alarm bells went off and a few mortar rounds started exploding on our base, I got all of my gear together and made my way out onto one of the boats out in the river. Then silence. So we waited. Noting happened. I got sleepy, and so I piled up my gear on an ammunition box (with the M-16 on top) and went below decks to catch a little shuteye. Then the noises started again. I woke up and went “topside” to resume my nebulously described “duties.” Unfortunately, someone had moved the ammunition crate with all my stuff on it, and as I came up on deck, I tripped over it, sending my M-16 rifle over the side of the boat and down into the swirling brown water. I could do nothing but helplessly watch it vanish from sight.

    Then, I noticed the Vietnamese sailors madly scrambling to untie our boat. I looked down the river and watched a sequence of splashes slowly “walking” their way upriver towards our boat as the unknown mortar operator out in the darkness successively fired his weapon and then readjusted his aim. I figured that another two of those splashes and I would have to reach a decision. Either just stand there and absorb blast and shrapnel, or dive into the river current and swim for it.

    Thankfully, the shooting stopped as suddenly as it had begun. I made my way ashore, back to base, and never told anyone about my missing weapon. Too embarrassed, really. But just as relieved, since I never knew what the hell anyone ever expected me to do with it that I could later live with myself for doing. As noted above, I had stupidly pulled a trigger once and never wanted to go through that again.

    Years later, after my honorable discharge from Uncle Sam’s Canoe Club, I looked in my service records and discovered that I had been awarded a “combat action” ribbon, as well as a Vietnamese Staff Service commendation, second class. Whatever in the world those could possibly mean . . .

    Eventually, someone made a movie called “Forrest Gump.” I recognized myself immediately, except for the part about falling into a huge pile of money.


  5. From Andrei Martyanov’s blog: Reminiscence of the Future:

    “I don’t know why all this fuss among all those so called US “realists” that Russia somehow is “not winning”, when the latest — one will see now how a huge cauldron around Mariupol will be reduced and Russian and LDNR forces are literally into hostage rescue situation with civilians in Mariupol being taken hostage by Nazis. What a “lovely” ally the West created for itself. For an update now, Andrei Raevsky [a.k.a., the Saker] does an excellent job of cutting through Ukie and West’s propaganda and fakes and here is his latest:

    Several days, difficult and violent combats to denazify Mariupol. The outcome is not in doubt, but all the ingredients are here to indicate a truly intense urban assault operation.

    Donbass. Again, the outcome is not in doubt, I will announce it here as soon as I get enough convergent info to confirm the closure of this operational cauldron

    Kiev – here I really don’t know. I get the need to resolve the Kiev situation in some way, but I remain deeply concerned by any Russian operation to liberate the city. Kiev is not Mariupol and while in Mariupol there are no other options than to kill all the Nazis, I will keep hoping for some negotiated solution similar to what is happening in a lot of (admittedly much smaller) towns in recently liberated eastern Ukraine.

    “I totally concur, from what I observe now, by far the most interesting (from psychiatric point of view) is the reaction of the West to its own bullshit in which it got caught and doesn’t know how to escape [emphasis added]. Militarily, however, this operation will be studied in (real) military academies for a long time as a classic way of removing a rogue armed forces and regime with clinical accuracy. This also explains to a large degree the hysteria in the West’s media and political establishment.”

    And, just incidentally, Gilbert Doctorow has a neat paraphrase of the U.S./UK/NATO-EU “show of force” in response to the Russian military operation currently underway in Ukraine. He called it “a show of plumage.” Precious Peacocks on Parade.


    1. Wow. Descriptors like “classic way” and “clinical accuracy” recall all those references to the U.S. military’s alleged brilliance and its “surgical strikes.” Maybe Mr. Martyanov should wait until the war is over before praising the Russian military “operation,” i.e. invasion?

      Let’s point out the BS and Orwellian terminology used by all militaries, not just the ones we don’t like.

      Finally, I reject the use of Nazis. Yes, there are neo-Nazi elements in Ukraine. But the Nazi regime died with the Third Reich in 1945. Let’s get a grip, people.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. In the first place, I do not “like” war or the military forces of any nation that wages war in the pursuit of national interests, legitimate or otherwise. But wars continue to happen, irrespective of what I want or don’t want, and once underway, a person can objectively analyze military operations — a more useful term than the emotionally laden “invasion” — in terms of their success or failure to achieve the desired political ends (as Clausewitz or Sun Tse might define those). And, once again, the Russian Federation has clearly announced its political objectives: Demilitarization and Denazification. Both of these terms have definitive, actionable relevance.

        “Demilitarization” means — in the short run — the removal of all US/NATO military infrastructure from Russia’s borders and back to where that “alliance” stood in 1997. In the longer run, the dissolution of NATO — the “Nefarious American Terrorist Operation” — must ultimately occur, for the benefit of Europe and America as well as the wider world. So, in terms of these political — not to mention economic and social — objectives, does the ongoing military operation advance those goals? Time will tell, but after about one week, much of the US/NATO-installed military infrastructure in Ukraine has vanished. As part of that military infrastructure, the U.S./UK/NATO-EU instigators, trainers, and facilitators have vanished, too, along with much of their hardware. So the ongoing operations have accomplished at least that so far.

        As a somewhat technical aside, Mr Martyanov’s use of the word “classic” and “clinical accuracy” refers to maneuvers such as enveloping an enemy force and either eliminating it or forcing its surrender. The Russians call these classic “surrounding” maneuvers “cauldrons,” for obvious reasons. Following the U.S.-instigated coup of 2014, the newly installed nazi “government” attacked the eastern oblasts (“regions”) of Donetsk and Lugansk, initially forcing back the local defenders. With some assistance from Russia, the local defenders counter-attacked and enveloped their attackers in a series of classic cauldrons. Rather than die, the surrounded attackers sued for peace and the illegitimate Ukrainian coup-“government” signed the Minsk Agreements establishing a “cease-fire” line from which the Ukrainian “government” continued shelling and killing Russian-speaking Ukrainians for the next eight years. Today, the ongoing maneuvers of the two newly recognized independent countries (formerly oblasts of Ukraine) along with the Russian, Belorussian, and Chechen military forces seek to precisely recapitulate those “classic” maneuvers. This worked before and seems quite likely to work again.

        As for “Denazification,” it means ridding the Ukrainian government — in whatever form that will eventually take — of the ultra-nationalist, Russophobic gangs (like the AZOV Battallion, Right Sector, etc.) who openly revere and viciously emulate the tactics of Nazi Germany’s notorious SS (Schutzstaffel) and the desperate, late-stage Volkssturm — refer to Wikipedia for an understanding of these terms. I suggest that we focus on what these nazis (note the little “n”) have done and continue doing. Glibly referring to these U.S./UK/NATO-installed brownshirts” as simply “elements” or somehow “neo-” does not deceive the Russians from recognizing their true nature and control over the Ukrainian “government” since the U.S. forcibly installed them in power in February of 2014.

        For my part, I do not want my country — such as it any longer exists — forcibly installing nazis or jihadis or any other proxy terrorists in power over any governments, anywhere. So although I do not “like” wars to achieve national interests, I do accept that some still-sovereign governments and peoples will fight to resist the self-anointed “Uni-Polar Power” and its ravenous, grasping search for “full spectrum dominance,” which hasn’t won very many wars since 1945 but has destroyed many disobedient nations and bankrupted the American people to the enrichment of a fabulous few.

        Finally, and again: I do not use the term “nazi” as a pejorative epithet but as a factual description of a brutal, nasty reality fomented in great part by my own government. Does this mean that I wish to see the Russian Federation succeed in its demilitarization and denazification efforts, as I have described these above? What I wish for, or “like,” doesn’t matter in the affairs of nations, but I can understand why the Russians feel as they do and why they have reacted — when pressed back upon their own borders — in the manner they have chosen. Something tells me they have prepared for what this “disobedience” will cost them and have decided to pay the price of sovereignty. Have their U.S./UK/NATO-EU attackers done the same?


        1. I’m glad you find “operation” to be a more useful and less emotional term. So too does the U.S. military, with Operation Iraqi Freedom standing in for the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

          Perhaps Russia might call this “Operation Ukraine Freedom”; or Russia might borrow from the war on terror and call it “Operation Enduring Freedom for Ukraine.” Or Operation Provide Comfort (with its missiles, bombs, and tanks providing the “comfort”).

          I can understand why the Russians have reacted to NATO expansion and other acts I find lamentable and unwise, but I can still call it what it is: an invasion.

          Liked by 1 person

  6. An invading country committing obvious and specific crimes against humanity as defined under international law is being called out, sanctioned in every way possible with a demand for withdrawal, as it should be. Siding with the Ukrainians we must!

    Meanwhile and for decades now another invading country has been and is committing obvious and specific crimes against humanity but goes sanction free, protected by the United States, the victims, unlike the Ukrainians, ignored or called terrorists.

    This situation of outrage and immediate punitive action in one case and full support along with silence in another should be so obvious, so glaring right now that there should be comments upon it everywhere the Russian invasion is denounced, but I have yet any such comments if I’m not providing them.

    You’ll notice I haven’t mentioned the country which is the beneficiary of absolute protection against any sanctions for criminal behavior. I’m asking all who read this if they can fill in the blank. Most Americans would be very unlikely to be able to do so, the “special relationship” being such a long term thing that for one country and only that one, injustice is seen by my fellow citizens as not only acceptable but beyond criticism.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. In all the excitement, I’ve lost track: is this still support for two pro-Russian areas on the border, or is it demilitarization, or is it a full-scale invasion and war? For those who would defend this as “de-nazification” … is this any different than the US-favored tactic of “regime change”? Have the civilians who have been killed so far been certified as “nazis” or are they collateral damage and, ultimately, Ukraine’s fault for resisting?

    Liked by 2 people

      1. I see no need for that last sneering sentence. I ask that everyone here avoid personal attacks. Those who fail to follow this will be blocked.

        I appreciate all viewpoints, but we must avoid personal attacks. If you can’t avoid them, please go elsewhere.

        Liked by 2 people

  8. When Russian and Americans Troops faced each other in place, in Germany as the consequence of WWII working together as Allies, I thought the Military Warsaw Pact opposite NATO was created at the the same time as NATO in 1949.

    I just learned reading this, it was created only AFTER West Germany joined NATO in 1955. West Germany was the buffer between Americans and Soviet Russians.

    With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the repatriation of Russian forces from East Germany and no Warsaw Pact Nations opposite NATO, Russia thought Ukraine would be that last buffer between Russia and the US until a genuine Peace was worked out.
    Russia is not willing to be a compliant pliable Vassal State to US Full Spectrum Dominance in this World.

    Written by – Elijah J. Magnier:

    “It is time for the US nuclear weapons in Europe to return back to America.” The Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov summed up the Russian roadmap beyond Ukraine. This means that the Russian battle has begun because America has strategic nuclear forces in NATO bases spread across the European continent, including Turkey (which possesses fifty nuclear bombs at the Incirlik base under US ‘control’). Seemingly, the options ahead are much more defiant and complex than a « simple » war on Ukraine because the countries that Russia said should be denuclearised are NATO members.

    The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation was created in 1949 by the US, Canada and other European countries to provide security against the Soviet Union and combat communism. In reaction to the integration of West Germany into NATO in 1955, the Warsaw Pact (the Soviet Union, Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, and Romania) was created. Following the end of the Cold War between the Soviets and the US, the Warsaw Pact was dissolved, but NATO was not. Several former Warsaw Pact members joined NATO after March 1999, notwithstanding the promises (which were neither treaties nor signed agreements) given by western officials, mainly the US, that NATO won’t expand “one inch eastward”.

    Russia spent the last two decades building its strength and believed itself ready to confront the US in asking it to drop its spread of nuclear weapons in the former Soviet Union European countries. NATO claims to defend its members and protect European allies against missile threats outside the Euro-Atlantic area. However, the UN security council did not authorise the US occupation of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen and Syria. The US (and its allies) doesn’t heed or need any authorisation to use its deadly force anywhere it chooses in the world. Therefore, NATO can only be an advanced US base in Europe, keeping the European leaders within its “club” under control and rallying behind the US objectives. Indeed, the US – conveniently – evoked Monroe’s 1823 doctrine, which told European countries how to handle their foreign affairs. Because of the US expansionist policy in Europe, Russia has decided that it has the power and will use it to stop it before it is too late.

    It is not difficult to ascertain whether Minister Lavrov is raising the ceiling of Russian demands and is serious about revealing Russia’s insistent requests for the US disarmament of dozens of bases spread across Europe. Indeed, this fits with President Vladimir Putin’s demands, who requested, before the war began, that NATO return to what it was before 1997, that is, with only 12 members and the exit of the 16 members (excluding Turkey) who joined subsequently, from 1999 and until 2020.

    It is unclear how President Putin intends to implement his goals, even if he seems serious. Thus, he asked his strategic nuclear force to be fully prepared in response to the West’s call to arm Ukraine and provide it with more weapons to prolong the war.

    It is to be noted from the statements of Russian leaders that they are fully prepared for confrontation and solidarity behind President Vladimir Putin, contrary to what President Joe Biden would prefer. The US is trying to show the war as if it were one person’s decision, the Russian president alone, as previous US Presidents did in Iraq (Saddam Hussein’s regime) and Syria (President Bashar al-Assad’s regime). The terminology “Putin’s regime” is now widely used.

    US War Propaganda is now saying it will be going after Russian Oligarchs supporting Putin.

    Spiritually, I see that US move as leading this World as the 1st step in going after not only Russian Oligarchs, but US, Canadian, British, French, German, and all the other Oligarchs of this world, bringing to fulfillment this testimony of Jesus, ‘I say to you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
    And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.’

    James the Apostle is even more explicit, ‘Go to now, you rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you.
    Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth eaten.
    Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. You have heaped treasure together for the last days.’

    Since access to all Russian information on the War is being censored, listening to MSNBC this AM, Russia is implying the next step in the extreme ECONOMIC WAR the West is waging against Russia to destroy it’s Economy, will be to shut off of ALL OIL AND GAS to Western Europe as I suggest would be the logical next step a few articles back in this Blog, and the reason The Washington Post blocked me from commenting for a week just for posting it.

    If that comes to pass before any meaningful resolution of the conflict, you can be sure it will be a very HOT Summer, with discontent for all the regimes in the World.
    It will be especially HOT in the US, with more guns and AR-15s in private hands, than for any other People on Earth, being this World’s BIGGEST ARMS MERCHANT. The US sold $17 BILLION in US weapons to the former Warsaw Pact Nations already on it’s way to Russia’s border. Now it’s just giving weapons to Ukrainians as the Sacrificial lambs and they don’t even realize the US game plan in it’s WAR with Russia since the end of WWII

    God’s Judgments are Just.

    I have direct email addresses for Senators Dick Durbin (D), John Kennedy (R), Jeff Merkley (D), Jon Ossoff (D), Mike Rounds (R), and Senator Roger Wicker (R) since they replied , along with 6 other Senators, to my Message to all 100 Senators the 1st week of February.
    I don’t have to go through their restrictive character limits in the embedded Office email systems.
    I sent a separate Message to Senator Wicker Yesterday chastising him for calling for a NATO ‘no fly zone’ over Ukraine that would bring this World to the hundreds of Millions of Deaths and Destruction of Armageddon/WWIII long foretold in Scripture as we are on the cusp of it Today.

    I plan to sent this comment as is, in a single email to them all, but before doing that, I welcome any suggestions from anyone here for improvement.


  9. I know followers of this site are passionate about issues.

    I want to reiterate that we can disagree without being disagreeable.

    Also, some comments are getting overly long and off-subject. This comment section shouldn’t be used to push private agendas or to publish your own work. If you have something long to post that advances a personal concern or personal writing, use a link.

    I really hate to block comments, so I don’t. But I ask all my followers to show restraint, to stay on subject, and to treat each other with respect.

    If you think my advice or policy here is wrong, please go elsewhere. There are thousands upon thousands of blogs you can read and comment on.

    Many thanks.


      1. It’s a general policy, not a specific reply.

        Let me offer an alternative. You could have a short comment that directs readers to your own blog or site via a link, rather than using my site to solicit readers to respond to your work and agenda.

        I don’t want anyone coopting my site for their own purposes, no matter how noble. In short, the “comments” section should be for comments and replies, and brevity and civility are always appreciated. Thank you.


        1. How many Times have I wished I could say only “GOD” and everybody would understand perfectly!
          Then that Day written in the Bible would be a finished work, when ‘NO ONE would have to talk about God because EVERYONE would KNOW GOD.’

          I posted my comment above believing it is totally in line with the raison d’etre of your Blog.
          Besides, it’s TOTALLY compatible with ‘In Search of Christianity Lost’ you posted after my comment.


  10. Readers: I’ve never had an explicit policy on comments, but I think one makes sense. Here it is:

    COMMENT POLICY: Brevity and civility; clarity and accuracy; passion and largeness of spirit: please aim for these. This site is against pet peeves, score-settling, insults, and other bad behavior that impedes true debate and sound learning.

    I hope you find this useful. Thank you.

    I will place it permanently in the right sidebar.


Comments are closed.