Just over a year ago, I made a statement regarding the Russian invasion of Ukraine . . . that taking a public position on that attack and the resulting war was a “no-win scenario” for a political or policy analyst. Putting my opinions out there would only ignite passionate flamewars by those who are equally ignorant about what’s going on over there.
Once I finally took the bait — just a few days ago — I at least led with the fact that . . . even with my own biases, presuppositions, and personal experience in that region of the world . . . I still trust nothing about what we’re being told. In short, what I do know:
-Putin is a murderous authoritarian.
-Zelsnsky, while rightfully seeking resources to defend his nation, also leads the most corrupt country in Europe.
-Biden . . . well . . . does anyone believe anything written for him on his teleprompter?
A year ago, I even offered my internet followers to comment with their own thoughts and favorite conspiracy theories related to that conflict. (Trying to avoid the fray, myself.) Then, I let it go . . . for a year.
As is typical of these types of debates, if I don’t mention EVERY aspect of EVERY nuance in EVERY post, meme, or article written, then fallacious logic, assumptions, and accusations are leveled at me. Like . . . that I don’t:
-understand Putin’s intention to next invade . . . Poland, the Baltic states, Scandinavia, etc., etc.
-understand what a “treaty” means, or what our legal obligations are to other NATO countries.
-know anything about geopolitics, in general. (Nevermind that I’ve actually spent time in and worked in Russia, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, et al., and most of those making that accusation . . . not so much.)
One reader commented:
“What the f-ck is wrong with you? If you’re going to comment on a geopolitical issue, learn something about geopolitics. F-ck!”
The fact is, I have my own passions about those countries, the direction of this war, and the people in that region so affected by the decisions and actions of leaders who might have rather nefarious intentions. As a non-interventionist, constitutional libertarian, I’ve been very clear:
-I believe this is Europe’s problem. Not ours. We were not attacked.
-I believe in George Washington’s Doctrine of Unstable Alliances, as restated by Thomas Jefferson. “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none.”
-As such, NATO is nothing more than an unnecessary money pit for the United States. We pay for the defense of a group of countries with twice our population so that the likes of Bernie Sanders can wave the flag of their artificial, American-subsidized democratic socialism in our faces.
-I refuse to accede to any currently-proposed rationale that might ultimately send my 24-year-old son to fight on yet another European battlefield.
Another reader responded:
“It’s basic geo-political math when dealing with authoritarian globalist regimes. Russia must be stopped now or we’ll have a bigger fight later. It’s a ‘duh’ statement.”
I disagree, for a lot of reasons. Europe is lazy and soft, due largely to American largesse in doing their job for them, since World War II. It’s time for them to set aside their cushy cradle-to-grave social welfare programs and “man up” to their responsibility in defending their borders. They have over 600 million people, (compared to Russia’s less-than-150 million), yet collectively spend less than a third of what we spend on national defense. Europe — as a whole — has the financial resources to defend itself. Far greater resources than does Russia, to launch offensive actions against them. Europe only needs the motivation provided by America saying, “No more. We are not risking our blood and treasure on your defense so that you can provide ‘free’ healthcare and ‘free’ college at OUR taxpayers’ expense.”
Further, the Russian people do not want a war, and their young men have been shown nothing worth dying for. They have not been attacked or invaded. They cannot sustain a large-scale conflict with an unmotivated army, against the populations of countries, (Poland, the Baltics, and other formerly occupied Soviet satellites), who hate them and are therefore willing to defend their lands ‘to the death,’ rather than returning to forced servitude to Moscow.
One reader made what I believe to be an accurate assessment:
“Poland will not be ‘next.’ Russia will not attack a NATO country. If they may have considered it prior to Ukraine, they most assuredly see now that their military is incapable of taking on such a task.”
Yes. But . . . “nukes.” (No, I’ve not forgotten about those.)
If NATO goes all-in against Russia, Putin had already intimated that he may have no choice but to go nuclear. Especially if he believes it’s the only way to save his country, save face to his growing nationalist leadership, or just save his position on the throne of Mother Russia.
Seriously though. As bad a man as I think Putin is . . . is he the kind of madmanwho’d be willing to set off a nuclear exchange that would level the Kremlin and other of Russia’s architectural treasures? (Not to mention the unimaginable loss of life.)
Russia has no chance against NATO/America in a conventional war. We’ve already seen that in how inept, poorly trained, and logistically challenged his forces have been over the last year. Even with limited training and experience, the Ukrainians have had the advantage of more highly advanced weapons being supplied to them. But, Europe, alone, can redirect its resources and make those weapons purchases. THEY can supply Ukrainian forces while THEY build up their armies if THEY think Putin will move against others of their number.
Politically speaking — here in America — Biden’s puppetmasters, (whomever they may be), have their base firmly and deeply in their pocket. The American left is all-in on sending hundreds of billions worth of weapons and other aid to Ukraine, regardless of the demonstrably negative impact on our economy. They think we can just print more money out of nothingness, I suppose.
As the meme goes . . . “Biden and the left care more about the Ukrainian border than they do about our own.” The anti-war beatniks and hippies of the 60s — who are now 70+ years old and are the ones making these decisions — have somehow transformed into Warhawks. Supporting a major “proxy war,” for now, they’re seemingly ready to jump all over that NATO treaty if the time comes, threatening an all-out global war.
On the opposite side of the political aisle, we’re widely divided. Many conservatives have fully signed on with the Biden administration. Far too many have been seduced by Putin’s rhetoric against America’s declining sexual morality and abandonment of traditional Christian values. None of those can list for me examples of Putin’s personal adherence to those stated Christian values. From his past in the KGB, the assassinations of his political opponents, his violent crushing of dissent and free speech, his invasion of other countries, to the indiscriminate slaughter and rape of innocent Ukrainian civilians. Despite his rhetoric, his actions are hardly Christlike.
Yet another of my readers criticized:
“A lot of conservatives and libertarians seem to have reverted to the isolationist sentiment of the 1930s. Russian influence operations in the US have been cultivating that idea since the mid-2000s.”
No, I’m not an isolationist. But I am a firm believer in these words, “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none.” As I’ve already emphasized: short of a direct attack by Russia on the United States, there isn’t a single geopolitical theory or rationale justifying my son being sent to fight and die on a goddamned European battlefield, in yet another one of their wars. And that has nothing to do with “Russian influence operations” over my thinking.
(I’ve been thinking about Russia since January of 1980, when I recorded a demo in a San Fransisco studio, for the song that would become the de facto theme song of the 1980 Moscow Olympics. I never dreamed where that experience would ultimately lead my thoughts and deeds over the last 40 years.)
NATO is one such of those “entangling alliances” now threatening to draw us into World War III. From the declining years of Stalin’s reign to the rise of Putin’s stated desire to reestablish all of Russia’s ancient and lost borders, European countries have been sucking America dry, while they flaunt their artificially-sustained democratic socialism. Not to mention the fact so many European nations are already being invaded by the Muslim hordes. The openly-stated intention of Islamic Imams and Ayatollahs is to raise the flag of Islam over every capital in Europe using mass refugee migration, relentlessly high birth rates, and by taking advantage of those countries’ democratic processes. (Muslims hold a millennial-length grudge against those white Euro Crusaders, and as I’ve previously written . . . I tend to believe bad people when they promise they are going to do bad things.)
It’s time for Europe to wake up and accept its financial responsibility for the defense of its borders. But, yes . . . I know . . . that “treaty” is not going away. Not with our current political leadership. They will continue spending us into fiscal oblivion, tanking the dollar, fanning the flame of inflation, and manipulating a global crisis into existence to advance “the need for a Great Reset.”
Despite my admission to not fully knowing what’s really going on . . . I am convinced that the Great Reset thing is a major influence on the decisions being made. (And, yes . . . I also know many of you think Putin is a thorn in the flesh of that objective. Maybe so. Maybe not.)
That doesn’t mean I can’t express my opinion and sound off just such a list of warnings while we wait to see who is right. My opinions and fears of the long-term ramifications of this war are just as valid as any of yours. Why? Because you don’t have any better grasp on the reality of what’s going on behind Biden’s, Putin’s, Zelensky’s, Xi’s, or Scwab’s closed doors. But, my thoughts — even my unlikely hope for America’s return to something akin to Washington’s Doctrine of Unstable Alliances — just happens to be a safer way forward . . . for your family, mine, and our entire nation.
Fantasyland or not, a man can dream of a more responsibly organized world — fiscally and militarily — that keeps us out of unnecessary wars and maintains our national sovereignty. But, as is my oft-repeated axiom:
“There’s the world we want, versus the world in which we actually live.”
I pray we get through this latest international crisis relatively unscathed.
