There are three immediate questions to answer about the war that Israel has started with Iran, all of which lead to the most important of all: Can this achieve Israel’s stated goal of ensuring, once and for all, that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon?

If it can, then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s decision to launch Israeli jets against a much larger nation of close to 90 million people would, depending on the nature of the targets struck and level of civilian casualties, be justified on both strategic and moral grounds.

The destruction of Israel is a declared policy of the regime in Tehran and one it’s been acting on for decades. There’s no doubt, despite denials, that Iran’s uranium enrichment program is designed to produce weapons-grade fuel; it’s practically there, with a growing stockpile concentrated to 60%, a level far beyond any conceivable civilian use. So, even though Israel has a nuclear deterrent of its own, as a tiny “one-bomb” country it can’t take the risk of allowing such a hostile power to also have one.

But whether the air strikes can indeed succeed is a very big “if.” It’s more likely that Israel can do no more than delay Iran’s nuclear program by a few years. And if that’s the case, it becomes impossible to justify the certain bloodshed and unknowable consequences of starting this war, because it would at best gain no more than the diplomacy it displaced. Both the abandoned 2015 international nuclear deal with Iran and any agreement that might realistically have come out of US-Iranian talks that were due to resume on Sunday would do as much — only without loss of life, or the risk to regional stability and global markets.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Fascinantno dober primer, kako ameriško kapitulacijo pred Kitajsko prikazati kot ameriško zmago. No, v bistvu kot skupno zmago, kajti sicer bi si Xi morda lahko premislil. Kajti on drži vse adute v svojih rokah. Preberite Lutnickovo izjavo. Res fascinanten PR.

Jeffrey Sachs je spet odličen. Tako dobre analize vzrokov za rusofobijo ne boste našli nikjer. Je celo boljša of Mearsheimerja. Nujno poslušanje!

“Prijatelji Ukrajine” so tisti, ki uničujejo Ukrajino. “Prijatelji Ukrajine” so tisti, ki spodbujajo nadaljevanje vojne. “Prijatelji Ukrajine” so tisti, ki želijio na fronto poslati še več mladih fantov. Zakaj?

Odgovor nima nobene zveze z Ukrajino. Ukrajina je za njene “prijatelje” irelevantna. Odgovor se skriva v želji po oslabitvi Rusije. Zakaj? Ker je Rusija velika. Ker bi potencialno lahko ogrožala dominantni položaj ZDA. Ker je pred stoletjem in pol potencialno lahko ogrožala dominantni položaj

Ko danes razpravljamo o vzponu Kitajske, o njeni gospodarski, vojaški in tehnološki moči, pogosto spregledamo, da ima ta vzpon tudi zgodovinsko globoko zakoreninjen motiv: izbrisati boleč spomin na t.i. “stoletje ponižanja”. Gre za obdobje med letoma 1839 in 1949, ko je Kitajska izgubila svojo nekdanjo vlogo srednjega kraljestva (Zhōngguó) in bila razkosana, oslabljena in ponižana s strani tujih sil – zahodnih držav in Japonske. Kdor hoče razumeti sedanja ravnanja kitajskih oblasti glede suverenosti in (gospodarske, tehnološke in vojaške) neodvisnosti, mora kontekst poiskati v “stoletju ponižanja” Kitajske. Gre za ključno zgodovinsko obdobje, ki močno zaznamuje kitajsko kolektivno zavest in nacionalni ponos.

Začelo se je z opijskimi vojnami, ko je britanski imperij Kitajski vsilil trgovino z opijem, da bi uravnotežîno trgovinsko bilanco.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Evropska blaznost glede Rusije postaja neznosna za prenašati. Evropski politiki tekmujejo z bombastičnimi grozilnimi izjavami, da nas bo Rusija napadla čez 5 let. Ne, čez 3 leta. Ne, naslednje leto. Ali pa že jutri. Spodaj je jagodni izbor teh bombastičnih izjav iz letošnjega in lanskega leta:

• Putin could attack NATO in ‘5 to 8 years,’ German defense minister warns – Politico, Jan 18 2024
• Russia could attack a Nato country within 3 to 5 years, Denmark warns (archived) – FT, Feb 9 2024
• “Not if, but when”: NATO prepares for Russian attack on Finland, Baltics and Norway – Euromaidan, Jan 4 2025
• Russia could start a major war in Europe within 5 years, Danish intelligence warns – Politico, Feb 11 2025
• Putin is capable of attacking NATO country ‘next year,’ Zelenskyy warns – Politico, Feb 14 2025
• Will Russia attack Nato? Experts warn of invasion as early as 2027 (archived) – The Times, Feb 15 2025
• German intelligence warns Putin preparing Nato assault by end of decade – Standard, Mar 29 2025
• Russia Could Be Ready to Strike NATO in Two Years, New Report Says – Newsweek, May 15 2025
• Russia ‘could attack a NATO state by 2027 if a ceasefire is agreed in Ukraine this year’ as experts warn Europe ‘cannot assume that they have years to prepare’ for another war – Daily Mail, May 16 2025
• NATO at risk of Russia attack in next four years, warns German defence chief – LBC, Jun 1 2025
• Russia could attack Nato in five years, Rutte warns – Telegraph, Jun 9 2025
• Putin could attack Europe within three years, warns senior Nato official – Inews, Jun 10 2025

Vprašanje pri teh bombastičnih izjavah je le, ali gre za blaznost, ki izvira iz rusofobije ali pa za kalkulirano blaznost politikov, z namenom od davkoplačevalcev pobrati čim več denarja, da bi ga dali orožarskim podjetjem in da bi lahko politiki pobrali svoje provizije. Ker sem racionalen človek, se bolj nagibam k temu, da gre za kalkulirano blaznost politikov oziroma politično manipulacijo. Če želijo politiki ljudi prepričati, da se odpovejo socialni državi, šolstvu, zdravstvu in infrastrukturi, da bi namesto tega dvignili izdatke za oboroževanje za 3-krat – iz 1.5 % na 5 % BDP, morajo politiki tekmovati, kdo bo bolj glasno vpil, da bo Rusija že jutri napadla Evropo, če jim ne bomo dali več denarja za orožje.

In to je vso racionalno bistvo kokodakanja klike političnih manipulantov, ki trenutno vlada v Evropi. 

Največja ironija teh bombastičnih političnih manipulacij je, da politiki v isti sapi govorijo, (A) da je Rusija gospodarsko šibka, da je tik pred bankrotom, da je izgubila en milijon vojakov v Ukrajini, da je njena vojska v razsulu in da izgublja vojno v Ukrajini in (B) da bo Rusija napadla V. Britanijo (in vmes pokorila celotno zahodno Evropo). In ti politični idioti sploh ne opazijo nekonsistentnosti med A in B v svojih izjavah. Ali pa jim je malo mar za to nekonsistentnost, ker so “volilci itak neumni in je ne opazijo”.

Zato še enkrat: Rusija bi lahko napadla katerokoli evropsko državo pred desetletjem, lani, včeraj ali danes, ker ima hipersonične rakete, po potrebi opremljene z jedrskimi konicami, s katerimi lahko zadane katerokoli tarčo v Evropi na meter natančno, pri čemer nobena evropska država (in tudi ne ZDA) nima učinkovite protizračne obrambe, s katerimi bi lahko te rakete prestregle. In te učinkovite protizračne obrambe proti ruskim hipersoničnim raketam evropske države ne bodo imele niti čez 5 let, niti čez 10 let, niti čez 15 ali 20 let, ker v Evropi in ZDA ni znanja “nove fizike” za konstruiranje hipersoničnih raket, ki bi se lahko kosale z ruskimi. Torej lahko v Evropi vržemo v orožarsko brezno nekaj tisoč milijard evrov, pa se ne bomo sposobni ubraniti pred ruskimi raketami.

Čemu torej vse to politično kokodakanje, da moramo za 3-krat povečati izdatke za orožje, da bi se ubranili pred morebitnim ruskim napadom? Ker pričakujemo, da bo ruska vojska tako kot ob koncu druge svetovne vojne s tanki prodirala prek Ukrajine, nato Poljske, nato Nemčije, nato Francije do V. Britanije?! Resno? V dobi ruskih hipersoničnih raket, pred katerimi ni obrambe?

Vso to politično kokodakanje  je žalitev za inteligenco povprečnega državljana Evrope.

Evropski politiki nam lažejo direktno v obraz s praznimi grožnjami. Ker nas želijo zmanipulirati, da bi jim dovolili razmontirati socialno državo, šolstvo, zdravstvo in infrastrukturo, da bi ti manipulantski politiki lahko naš, davkoplačevalski denar preusmerili v orožarska podjetja in pridobili provizije zase. Samo za to jim gre.

The Miracle on the Han River ended with the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. As the twin spectre of capital flight and currency speculation descended on South Korea, the Won lost half its value. The govt had to go hat-in-hand to the IMF for a $58 billion emergency bailout.

The US Treasury-influenced IMF made Korea eat austerity like it was a spendthrift 3rd world basket case despite the fact the crisis was caused by a private-sector led liquidity freeze. Korea was in fact in excellent fiscal shape.

In national solidarity, women donated gold jewelry to pay down the debt. 200 tonnes of wedding bands, heirloom jewelries etc were collected to be melted down. But it was nothing compared to what Korea suddenly owed.

Korea’s social contract broke. There was no longer the expectation of lifetime employment and stability. Suicide spiked. The generation of “IMF Kids” who came of age after the crisis lost their faith in their national destiny. The hellish, hypercompetitive Korea of Parasite and Squid Game was all downstream from that moment.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Politiki, ki vodijo EU in NATO in ki trdijo tovrstne nesmisle, da je potrebno povečati obrambne izdatke na 5 % BDP, sicer se bomo morali začeti učiti govoriti rusko, so nevarni lažnivi manipulanti z neko svojo agendo.

Ja, Rusija lahko uniči London ali V. Britanijo. Potrebuje zgolj nekaj hipersoničnih orešnikov (in Britanija nima in tudi čez 15 let ne bo imela učinkovitega protizračnega sistema, ki bi orešnike lahko zaustavil). Toda, da bi zasedla in pod okupacijo držala celo Evropo, da bi lahko prišla do V. Britanije, bi Rusija potrebovala desetletja in desetine milijonov vojakov. In zakaj bi Rusija nenadoma to želela storiti?! Kaj bi imela od tega? Kaj bi Rusija imela od tega, če pa lahko V. Britanijo kadarkoli izbriše iz obličja zemlje zgolj z enim ukazom? In kaj bi Rusija imela od tega, če pa lahko namesto uničenja Britanije s prodajo energentov, surovin, umetnih gnojil in hrane Britancem na civiliziran način zagotavlja blaginjo svojemu prebivalstvu?! In to na bistveno bolj civilixziran način, kot je to počela V. Britanija s svojimi kolonijami, na čelu z Indijo.

Tisti politiki, ki trosijo takšne manipulacije, bodisi delajo za orožarsko industrijo ali pa se bojijo, da se bodo ob normalizaciji razmer razkrinkale njihove laži iz zadnjih treh let.

Tem lažnivim manipulantom je treba reči odločen NE in jih poslati na smetišče zgodovine.

I feel that deep down, they [the Ukrainian side] are better than they want to appear. They even want to say something, but they can’t. I saw the opposite… Two-thirds of their delegation is in military uniform. They are military personnel. I look into their eyes. First of all, they are no different from Russians. They are exactly the same. I see in their eyes a reluctance to fight. They don’t want to fight and they don’t want to send their soldiers to their deaths.

They remind me a little of top managers hired by some giant corporation. They can make some decisions, but for fundamental ones, they have to consult with the board of directors.

I would divide the Ukrainian people, the Ukrainian army, the soldiers, and those who suffer the most, those who are close to the front line and are under attack in one way or another, and a small part of the ruling elite. It seems to me that the Ukrainian leadership is beginning to remind me of Latin American dictators to some extent.

They were also good guys once, when they came to power and promised a lot during the elections. But then they gradually turned into dictators. And in order to remain in power forever, you need a constant enemy. You need a war that does not threaten you personally. And this war does not threaten your families either. Because all your families are abroad, with British passports, and they are doing very well. And you can no longer control the situation without war.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Bolj nazorno se ameriške kapitulacije ne da pokazati: