Some things to consider before encouraging World War III.

Is Ukraine worth sending our men and women to die overseas in a war against Russia?

While we may have – and probably should have – passionately held views on the horrible situation unfolding in Ukraine, it’s vital that those opinions be well informed. Passion and cluelessness are a very bad and very dangerous combo. The more serious the issue, the more important it is that we have well-founded reasons for believing what we believe, especially when the issue requires us to make life-or-death decisions. Since NATO directly joining a war against Russia would basically be the beginning of World War III, and World War III would have great potential to go nuclear, supporting such a plunge into such a war is a life and death decision on a massive scale that should preclude us from making or supporting such a decision casually.

So what should we make of the war in Ukraine?

More specifically, should we favor direct US or NATO involvement in that war?

If we’re going to allow ourselves to be led into World War III over the Russian invasion of Ukraine, we should have a solid, well-researched understanding of what inspired the Russians to invade Ukraine. And if we’re going to understand what inspired Russia to invade Ukraine, we are going to have to understand at least five points:

1. The nature and behavior of NATO. NATO is a military alliance formed in opposition to Moscow. This military alliance is US-dominated and has been expanding toward Moscow for decades. This expansion will be chronicled in detail below.
   
   
2. Ukraine’s role as a tool of the US-led Globalist West. – Back in February of 2014, Paul Craig Roberts posted a helpful and to-the-point article simply titled Washington Destabilized Ukraine. The article is both prophetic and a very good history recap (as of 2014). I highly recommend checking it out while remembering that he wrote it over eight years ago.
   
   
3. Ukraine’s identity as a deeply corrupt and “Nazified” state. – In 2021 Ukraine was ranked #120 out of 180 countries monitored for corruption by Transparency International. The country is also relatively loaded with outright Nazis and Nazi sympathizers, including the infamous Azov Battalion which is headquartered in Mariupol (which is why Russia has focused on Mariupol since the beginning of the war).
   
   
4. Ukraine has waged a brutal war on pro-Russian regions since 2014. – After the US-orchestrated overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected (but intolerably Russia-friendly) President, protests erupted in pro-Russia regions of Ukraine. By April of 2014 the newly installed pro-Globalist/West government began to put the hammer down on these pro-Russian separatist regions. In December of 2021, after seven years of war on the pro-Russia region, Russia expressed concern that Ukraine had deployed half of its army (125,000 troops) against the separatists.
   
   Whatever we might think of it, this long Ukrainian war on these pro-Russian regions has killed many thousands of people and has been cited by Russia from the beginning of the war as a primary reason for invading.
   
   
5. Ukraine is hosting US-funded bioweapon labs. – You may have heard of a certain US-funded bioweapon lab in China that produced a certain bug that somehow found its way into the world and caused trouble. It made some headlines, so you might recall what I’m talking about. Now consider how Russia might feel if it was to become aware of US-funded bioweapons labs operating in Ukraine. For more on this aspect of the story, I highly recommend Glenn Greenwald’s coverage, starting with this article in which he eviscerated the laughably moronic narratives attempting to spin this into a defensible position for the US while also exposing a key member of the Globalist Clown Show, Victoria Nuland (who will pop up again below).
   
   

The last four of these five points – the ones focusing on Ukraine as opposed to NATO – must be considered while constantly remembering that Ukraine directly borders Russia, and in a major way. The shared border between the two is massive (over 1,200 miles).

US citizens would be well-served to consider what it might be like to have a country like, let’s say China, advocate for Mexico to be included in a China-led military alliance created in direct opposition to Washington DC.

We might also take a moment to honestly ponder other worthwhile and instructive hypotheticals, like:

• What if a China-led anti-US alliance was discovered to be funding or operating bioweapon labs in Mexico or Canada?
   
• What if a China-led anti-US alliance decided to routinely dispatch naval fleets to patrol the Gulf of Mexico or base a major fleet there permanently? (For those wondering why we should be asking this, it should be noted that NATO has been poking around quite a lot in the Black Sea for a while now.)
   
• What if a China-led military alliance funded and supported the overthrow of a democratically elected government in Canada or Mexico so that a pro-China government could take its place?
   
• What if a China-led military alliance spent the last twenty years or so expanding by adding member nations that were closer and closer to the US mainland, and were now advocating for Mexico or Canada to be added as a member of that anti-US military alliance?

These are quite reasonable hypotheticals to compare with the real-world situation in which Russia finds itself.

Of the many laughably baseless bits of anti-Russia propaganda being spewed by the Globalist-controlled West’s politicians and media outlets, the most idiotic of them all has been that the Russian invasion was “unprovoked”.

Unprovoked?!

When, after many decades of encroachment and open provocation of Russia through NATO expansion and other overtly illegal activities (some of which will be chronicled below), we arrive at a place where NATO threatens to incorporate a very large country directly on Russia’s border, we cannot be surprised that Russia would view this culmination of hostile, threatening behavior as an existential threat. And that’s before we even get to the bioweapon labs.

One thing we need to understand is that it is utterly reasonable for Russia to feel existentially threatened in this scenario.

We don’t have to agree with that assessment to understand it. We don’t have to agree with it to see it as reasonable. We might even completely disagree about the threat being that serious, much less existential, but we must admit that Russia’s perception of the threat as serious or even existential is not irrational or unreasonable. And we absolutely must seriously consider these things as mature, thinking, responsible adults if we are going to even consider allowing ourselves to support the Globalist-owned, Nazi-drenched side in what could easily become a nuclear World War III.

We can’t allow ourselves to be emotionally manipulated and played as ignorant lemmings to be led by the nose into supporting potentially a worldwide mega-war. Thinking these things through and treating all available facts seriously is not optional. It’s necessary.

So let’s roll through some simple, relevant points related to our five areas of concern,

starting with a timeline and context for the NATO military alliance’s long-running expansion toward Russia:

• September 12, 1945 – World War II ends.
  
  
• ~March, 1947 – The Cold War begins.
  
  
• April 4, 1949 – NATO is founded to create a counterweight to Soviet control and military presence in central and eastern Europe after World War II.
  
  
• November 9, 1989 – The fall of the Berlin Wall.
  
  
• February, 1990 – The U.S. promises Moscow that NATO will not expand “one inch eastward” of Germany. While in recent decades many attempts have been made to rewrite history and dismiss this promise, even the L.A.Times has chronicled the reality of the “iron-clad guarantee” that the U.S. made regarding NATO expansion.
  
  
• December 31, 1991 – The Soviet Union formally dissolves into fifteen independent countries.
  
  
• March 12, 1999 – NATO accepts Czech Republic membership. (The Czech Republic is east of Germany.)
  
  
• March 12, 1999 – NATO accepts Hungary as another east-of-Germany European member.
  
  
• March 12, 1999 – NATO accepts Poland as another east-of-Germany European member.
  
  
• March 29, 2004 – NATO accepts Bulgaria as another east-of-Germany European member.
  
  (I’m not listing each of these new NATO memberships separately to be a jerk or to be annoying. I’m listing them separately because they each constitute a major development that could very well be perceived as “provocative” by Moscow, especially since NATO was literally formed to oppose Moscow and Moscow was promised that NATO would not expand east of Germany.)
  
  
• March 29, 2004 – NATO accepts Estonia as another east-of-Germany European member.
  
  
• March 29, 2004 – NATO accepts Latvia as another east-of-Germany European member.
  
  
• March 29, 2004 – NATO accepts Lithuania as another east-of-Germany European member.
  
  
• March 29, 2004 – NATO accepts Romania as another east-of-Germany European member.
  
  
• March 29, 2004 – NATO accepts Slovakia as another east-of-Germany European member.
  
  
• March 29, 2004 – NATO accepts Slovenia as another east-of-Germany European member.
  
  
• April 1, 2009 – NATO accepts Albania as another east-of-Germany European member.
  
  
• April 1, 2009 – NATO accepts Croatia as another east-of-Germany European member.
  
  
• June 5, 2017 – NATO accepts Montenegro as another east-of-Germany European member.
  
  
• March 27, 2020 – NATO accepts North Macedonia as another east-of-Germany European member.
  

With that backdrop of anti-Moscow NATO expansion in mind, let’s roll through just a handful of key events from the past nine years of US-led manipulation and (ab)use of Ukraine as a tool of anti-Moscow aggression:

• February 4, 2014 – Victoria Nuland’s infamous “F*** the EU” recording is leaked and posted online (here’s a YouTube version). The recording chronicles two U.S. officials (Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt) basically hashing out who the U.S. wanted to install atop Ukraine’s government after a U.S. sponsored overthrow of the existing democratically-elected government.
  
  The Guardian covered the situation this way at the time:
  
  “The frustration of the Obama administration at Europe’s hesitant policy over the pro-democracy protests in Ukraine has been laid bare in a leaked phone conversation between two senior US officials, one of whom declares: “F*** the EU”.
  
  The US state department did not directly confirm that the leaked audio clip posted on YouTube captures the voices of the top US diplomat for European and Eurasian affairs,Victoria Nuland, and US ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt. However, the department’s spokeswoman Jen Psaki said that Nuland, who made the disparaging remark about the EU, “has been in contact with her EU counterparts and of course has apologised for these reported comments”.
  
  In an attempt at damage limitation, US officials tried to turn focus onto Russia, suggesting that Moscow had leaked the audio recording . . . ”

It’s interesting to see good ol’ Jen Psaki in the mix there, isn’t it? And right in the middle of an attempt to blame the Russians for the whole thing…classic!

• February 22, 2014 – Ukraine’s democratically-elected President Viktor Yanukovych was overthrown.
  
  

• March, 2014 – After the successful regime change and overthrow of the elected President in Ukraine, protests took place in the Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts (political subdivisions) of Ukraine, collectively known as the Donbass.
  
  
• April, 2014 – The newly minted pro-Globalist/West Ukraine government goes to war against separatists who won’t swallow the Globalist-sponsored regime change that has just occurred.
  
  Article continues here.

Click here to read the full article (for free).

This is the first half of my third article posted at Substack.

You can receive full articles directly in your inbox by subscribing at Substack.