Timothy Birdnow

In a discussion on Facebook about the Russo-Ukrainian War, a guy named Daniel Rifenburgh says:

Starve Ukraine of munitions and they'll make peace fast. Russia has won. Let's declare it over. Let Russia keep the eastern russophone districts. The alternative is endless war, which is what the military-industrial complex and the globalist elites want. Screw them.


Bryan Alexander states:

The war won't be endless. (No war is.) And we still don't know what Putin's true objective is. He may want to conquer all of Ukraine. And the Baltic countries. And the globalists do NOT like the war in Ukraine. The globalists want peace—war is bad for business (except for arms manufacturers—but that is true in any war—and also true in peace).


I disagree:

I disagree Bryan; I don't think the globalists want peace at all right now. They want Russia forced into their glorious new empire. And they want to make war profits. And they want to help Joe Biden and other statists like Justin Trudeau hide their many sins with the war. They want to expand NATO and the E.U. into Asia. They want old style countries like Russia to become passe' in the new world government system. I think this war serves a great many purposes. I do agree we don't know what Putin's aim is, but I suspect it is not necessarily to take all of Ukraine now but to take all the Black Sea and leave Ukraine totally dependent - fodder for a later takeover. Conquer Ukraine and they have to defend it, hobble it and they have a buffer. It's the old Mongol strategy, and the reason why Ukraine is named that very name (It means "borderland" and was so called because the Golden Horde would go there periodically and ransack the countryside, leaving it a wasteland and buffer against the West.) I don't know for sure but I suspect Putin is doing much the same. And he wants a promise that NATO and the E.U. stay out of the "Russias" of which Ukraine was and is a member.

Bryan says:

You can disagree, of course—but. Globalists don't want a new Russian empire, because Putin is a loose cannon: He is not on board with globalism. He wants Russia to be a superpower. Nor will NATO or the EU be expanded into Asia. It's the EUROPEAN Union, after all. And you rebut your own point when you say Putin wants to leave Ukraine "dependent" and "fodder for a later takeover." (How is that NOT taking "all of Ukraine," just because he takes the rest of it later, rather than now?) Putin has already said quite explicitly, he doesn't see Ukraine as a "buffer"—he sees it as part of Russia! Ukraine is NOT one of the "Russias." It's Ukraine. And it's absolutely NOT a "member" of "The Russias"—it's an independent nation. That's just factually untrue. It's not even reality. The Ukrainians have wanted their independence for hundreds of years. And they've finally had it for over 30 years now.

Bryan you say:

"but. Globalists don't want a new Russian empire, because Putin is a loose cannon: He is not on board with globalism."

I couldn't agree more and that makes my case. The Globalists don't want peace. They want a system where they control everything. Russia is in the way. (That hardly makes them our friends as some conservatives have argued though.)

NATO tried to expand into Georgia, which is in Asia Bryan. That was a large part of what triggered the Russian invasion in '08. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nato/nato-promises-ukraine-georgia-entry-one-day-idUSL0179714620080403 The Georgians still hope to be let in.

Certainly some see NATO expansion into Asia. https://multipolarista.com/2022/04/09/nato-asia-pacific-china-russia/
 and
https://kinzinger.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=402768

There is also a move to get Israel to join NATO. https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1587678/israel-nato-turkey-european-union-latest-news-ont

I would add Ukraine is one of the Russias; the "Russias" include Great Russia, White Russia (Byelorus), and Ukraine (along with the largely forgotten Black Russia). Kiev was once the capitol of Russia before the coming of the Mongols. It diverged after the Mongols conquered Great Russia and turned Ukraine into a buffer zone, decimating it repeatedly for centuries. The word Ukraine means "borderland". That it is an independent nation is immaterial; so is Byelorus, which is also one of the Russias. Its like saying there are no Central American nations because they are independent of each-other. Honduras is as much Central American as is Panama.

Yes, they wanted independence (who could blame them) and Russia has no claim on their territory, but the reality is they are a very new nation. And there is considerable dispute about the boundaries, which the Russians have exploited. I would add the eastern part of the country is primarily Great Russian and speaks Russian and not Ukrainian. And I would further add that the United States fomented the Orange Revolution that threw out the democratically elected pro-Russian Viktor Yanukovitch.  He was kicked out via the CIA.

And I would further point out that Ukraine was regularly shelling the Crimean and also cut off the water from the Dneiper to that region. And threatened to cut the oil and gas pipelines.

That doesn't justify invasion, and I largely blame Putin, but the fact is this was an act of war and a provocation, one we simply ignored. This could have been resolved diplomatically, in my opinion.

As to your accusation that my argument falls because I say the end here is not the annexation of Russia, Bryan I think you misunderstand my point. The ultimate endgame here for Putin is to put Ukraine back in bed with them. I never said that was not the case. I was speaking about THIS WAR. Putin is willing to let go to catch the bigger fish. In the end he no doubt wants to annex Ukraine. He's said as much. But I think he could be forced to negotiate.

He could have been forced to negotiate before he ever invaded had we had anyone remotely competent inn office in Washington. The high price of fuel meant Putin was flush with cash. Stern measures early on could have moved the Russians and stayed Putin's hand.

I will add this; I've long argued that American policy is stoking the fires not just in Ukraine. We encircled the Russians. We invaded Iraq. We invaded Afghanistan. We allied with Georgia and even tried to build a pipeline system that would completely cut Russia out of the picture. And we expanded NATO, right to their doorstep. We put Poland and Hungary and the rest into the alliance. We were chewing on the Baltic States.

 The Russians get very nervous when a potential enemy (and given their paranoia everyone is a potential enemy) is at their doorstep. They've been invaded so very many times. And they have no good natural defenses to protect them.

That said, I do not think Russia is in the right here, but I will give them the basic courtesy of not mischaracterizing their position. Sadly many do these days, and nobody wants to give their side of this. (I'm not accusing you of doing that, but I am saying a lot of people aren't getting the whole story.)

Putin always accepts half a loaf. I suspect he'll eventually make a peace offering taking Dunbas and the Ukrainians will have to take it. They are only resisting now with huge amounts of help from us. That won't go on forever nor should it.

I believe the Ukrainians have basically lost this war unless other countries actually go in militarily and not just with aid. In other words, the war has to expand or Ukraine will have to make a deal.

And that deal will have to include a vow not to join NATO or the E.U. That is Russia's dealbreaker.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 12:00 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 1298 words, total size 8 kb.