Spodaj je dober komentar Arnauda Betranda o tem, da je Evropa vstopila v “stoletje ponižanja” in da si je za to sama kriva. To ponižanje se ni začelo z ekspanzionistričnimi izjavami Donalda Trumpa, da bo prevzel Grenlandijo, ali z njegovimi izjavami, da bodo evropske države morale kupovati več ameriškega plina, sicer jim bo nabil carine, ali z njegovimi izjavami, da morajo nameniti 5 % proračuna za nakup ameriškega orožja, ali pa naj se same branijo. Ne, začelo se je leta 1945, ko so so ameriške sile pod pretenzijo, da Evropo branijo pred Sovjetsko zvezo, vojaško “okupirale” Evropo (lahko sicer najdete kak drug izraz za nastanitev ameriške vojske in raket v vojaških bazah širom Evrope). Nadaljevalo se je z iniciranjem evropske integracije, kajti ta je v prvi vrsti ameriški projekt. Države članice so v tej evropski integraciji gospodarsko naredovale (vse do ustanovitve Skupnega trga leta 1995), toda ves čas so ostale vojaško, gospodarsko, tehnološko in politično podrejene ZDA.

Edini svetli točki, ki bi lahko pomenili preokret k evropski osamosvojitvi, sta bili izgon ameriških sil iz Francije leta 1966 in umik francoske vojske izpod poveljstva Naata (pod pritiskom francoskega predsednika Charlesa de Gaullea) in nasprotovanje nekaterih držav EU ameriškemu napadu na Irak leta 2003. Praktično pa skorajda v popolnosti zunanjo politiko EU določajo v Washingtonu. V Washingtonu zahtevajo, da morajo države, preden vstopijo v EU, najprej postati članice Nata. V Washingtonu de facto potrdijo članstvo v EU.

Najbolj drastično pa se je popolna podrejenost EU ameriški zunanji politiki pokazala v primeru brezrezervnega podpiranja ameriške proxy vojne v Ukrajini, podpiranja ameriško sponzoriranega izraelskega genocida v Gazi in razkosanja Sirije ter ameriške hladne vojne proti Kitajski. Vse troje v temelju škodi interesom EU, njenega gospodarstva in blaginji Evropejcev, kljub temu sedanja vodilna politična kasta v EU brezrezervno in servilno sledi ameriškim interesom na škodo evropskim.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Zgornji naslov je smiselno vzet iz spodnjega odličnega komentarja Patricie Marins (sicer odlične vojaške analitičarke).

In če se bo nadaljevalo v tej smeri, se bomo čez dve leti, ko v EU desne “suverenistične stranke” na oblasti zamenjajo ameriške politične cucke, pogovarjali o razpadu EU oziroma kako minimizirati negativne učinke razpada EU. Boste videli.

To je zadnja stvar, ki bi si jo jaz želel. Prvič, prostotrgovinsko območje je bila najboljša stvar, ki se je Evropi lahko zgodila po dizastru druge svetovne vojne. Spodbudilo je medsebojno gospodarsko sodelovanje in trgovino in Evropi zagotovilo visoko blaginjo, ker je ob prosti trgovini ohranilo suverenost razvojnih politik posameznih držav. Drugič, Skupni trg iz leta 1995 in skupne evropske politike, ki so iz tega sledile, so bila velika napaka, kajti skupne politike so ohromile razvojne možnosti posameznih držav in s tem rast in razvoj članic EU. Po uvedbi skupnega trga (1995) je EU začela trendno še hitreje zaostajati za ZDA. Tretjič, evro je bil katastrofa, prisilni jopič, ki je ekonomsko pokopal EU in z odvzemom monetarne in fiskalne suverenosti onemogočil vsakršne razvoje politike držav (če danes tega še ne razumete, boste čez nekaj let). In četrtič, vodstvo Evropske komisije z Ursulo vdL na čelu pa je z absolutno in popolno politično podreditvijo EU Ameriki ubilo projekt EU. Evropo je vrglo v gospodarski prepad in v roke ekstremnim populistom.

To pravim, ker imam rad Evropo in ker si želim, da bi evropske države v miru gospodarsko sodelovale in se bistveno hitreje razvijale in da bi Evropa ostala tretji gospodarski steber sveta.

Toda paradoksalno, tisti, ki imajo Evropo res radi, očitno morajo njeno upravljanje vzeti iz rok sedanje kaste ameriških političnih cuckov, da bi Evropo spet naredili veliko.

___________

I have been reflecting on whether President Trump is serious about Greenland, Panama, and Canada.

However, there are two things I can take from this:

1. With this discourse, Trump validates much of Putin’s rhetoric and I would even say that, in terms of words, he is going beyond Putin, clearly showing alignment with the Russians. He even blamed Biden and NATO for the Russian invasion.

No European leader has spoken out to contradict him. Trump has taken upon himself the criticisms for Putin’s territorial ambitions and, as I mentioned in another article, these are the first steps to rebuilding the relationship with Putin, while simultaneously buying time against the Chinese. He seems to know exactly what he is doing.

2. Another point is that no European leader has defended their Danish brethren, showing a canine subservience throughout the continent, which resembles a pack with heads bowed.

Criticize or not, Trump has a project based on his perspective, but he has a project. And what is Europe’s project? The continent needs deep reflection, which goes beyond the military field.

Today, who is capable of leading Europe?

It is a very difficult moment for Europe, in terms of energy, industry, sovereignty, military, and politics. There is a crisis in nearly every field and I feel populism is flourishing. Europe still has a way of life to teach the world, and I hope they can emerge from this crisis.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Ko “teorije zarote” postanejo resničnost

German journalist Patrik Baab, one of the few Western media representatives who visited new regions of Russia, shared his thoughts on the ongoing armed conflict in Ukraine.

Q: What is your realistic assessment of whether the territories will be reconquered by Zelensky?

Baab: No.

Q: Why?

Baab: There is no scenario, no military scenario, in which Ukraine will win this war. And in my assessment, the West will also lose this war.

Q: So, NATO will lose in Ukraine?

Baab: Yes, economically, militarily, and morally.

Q: Sorry to interrupt, but will this be a more dramatic defeat than Afghanistan?

Baab: Yes, absolutely. The war in Ukraine will be the catalyst for the decline of the West and the collapse of the United States as a hegemonic market. This is the core from which everything will flow. And Putin knows this. The West doesn’t want to see this and is reacting, in my opinion, inadequately.

Q: But why do you think the Russians will win? Where does your confidence come from?

Baab: Because the Russians have a five- to ten-fold advantage in artillery and missiles. They have more weapons, more soldiers, and they rely on the time factor. They know what they want, and their goals are clear. They’re doing what the Russians always do: they are not in a hurry. Like in Kursk, they allow the opponent to move into the room and then gradually close it.

V velikih ameriških medijih, na čelu z Washington Postom in New York Timesom, že tri leta vztrajno podpirajo nadaljevanje vojne v Ukrajini in vztrajno agitirajo proti mirovnimi pogajanjem. Zanje nikoli ni pravi čas. No, v tem zadnjem uredniškem komentarju v Washington Postu ob priznanju visokih ukrajinskih izgub življenj poudarjajo, da “Ukrajina stežka preživi še eno leto te uničujoče vojne“, nato pa v istem dahu odkrito priznavajo, zakaj bi bil konec vojne v Ukrajini slab: ker bi bil slab za ZDA. Mirna slaba rešitev bi “spodkopala ameriško kredibilnost” in “usmerila jezo Ukrajincev na zahodne podpornike, ki so jih izdali“.

Torej, uredništvo Washington Posta, priznava, da Ukrajina ne more preživeti še enega leta vojne, kljub temu pa so proti mirni rešitvi vojne, ker bi to škodilo ameriškim interesom. Hkrati pa ne ponujajo nobene alternative. Kaj nam to pove o “strastnih podpornikih Ukrajine”? Pove nam, da jim je vseeno za Ukrajino in življenja Ukrajincev, mar jim je le za ameriške interese. Prav zaradi tega razloga se je začela ta vojna in Ukrajinci so plačali ceno te ameriške “igrice” s svojimi življenji in ozemljem.

Spodaj je odličen komentar v MoA.

______________________

The Washington Post editors have long argued for prolonging the war in Ukraine.

In November 2022, when Ukraine was in a good position to negotiate an end to the war, they argued against it:

Mr. Zelensky and his supporters in the West undoubtedly understand that peace talks might eventually be necessary, his commitment to victory notwithstanding. And yet to declare that, or even imply it, before the time is right — before Ukraine’s armed forces have exhausted every opportunity to regain occupied territory — would convey slackening commitment. And that, in turn, can only convince Mr. Putin that time is on his side and that he should prolong the fighting.

Since then Ukraine’s armed forces have exhausted every opportunity to regain occupied territory – and failed. Russia was then and is now convinced that time is on its side.

Now, finally, the editors acknowledge that their war against Russia in Ukraine is lost. But they still insist that this can not be allowed to be formalized in a ceasefire or peace treaty.

While they are stomping their feet they fail to present an alternative:

Ukraine risks losing the war. A Trump-imposed bad deal would be worse. (archived)
A settlement that dismembers Ukraine and rewards Putin will undermine U.S. credibility.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Spodaj je radikalni pogled ameriškega republikanca Davida Goldmana, sicer pomočnika urednika časopisa Asia Times. Njegov pogled je, da evropski “liberalni strahopetci” (v mislih ima liberalne in zelene politike) niso sposobni zagotoviti Evropi lastne varnosti in da lahko to naredijo zgolj “suverenistične” stranke (ki sovpadajo s skrajno konzervativnimi strankami), ki so trenutno v hitrem vzponu. Te se vse po vrsti zavzemajo za konec vojne v Ukrajini, hkrati pa tudi za ponovno vzpostavitev naborniške vojske in oblikovanje bolj obsežnih lastnih vojaških sil, ki bi lahko zagotovile lastno varnost Evropi.

Tega komentarja ne objavljam, ker bi se z njim strinjal ali ne, pač pa, ker Evropo tako vidijo ameriški konzervativci in ker bo – naj nam bo to všeč ali ne – Trump Evropo prisilil, da gre v tej smeri zagotovitve lastne vojaške varnosti. In evropske “suverenistične” stranke mu bodo pri tem pomagale. Neka kolateralna korist od tega vsekakor bo – večja avtonomija oziroma suverenost Evrope. Ki pa bo seveda prišla s svojo ceno.

________

My advice to President Trump on how to deal with the mess in Ukraine is simple: you should pull the plug on the Biden Administration’s flailing European peanut gallery. Your friends and allies in Europe want to shoulder the burden of their own defense, but they don’t want to pour money down the drain and risk World War III in Ukraine. Get an immediate ceasefire in Ukraine, a war which no sane European wants to fight, and let the sovereigntist parties of the New Right mop up the globalist Left. They believe in their countries and will fight to protect them, unlike the Brussels liberals cowering behind the skirts of Mother America.

Ending the war won’t happen without an agreement to keep Ukraine neutral and out of NATO. The Deep State will try to convince you that NATO can’t afford to back down on eventual Ukraine membership, and that Russia is bleeding out and ready to fold. But the opposite is true: Europe’s willingness to defend itself depends on a revival of nationalism and the ascent of the sovereigntist parties on the Right. Freeze the fighting and deliver a political victory to European patriots whose watchword is “Make Europe Great Again.”

Nadaljujte z branjem→

In zakaj je zloraba socialnega omrežja za politična sporočila in propagando problematična samo takrat, kadar ne koristi interesom zahodnih držav?

Macron on Musk: “If someone had told us ten years ago that the owner of one of the world’s largest social networks would support a new reactionary international and directly interfere in elections, including in Germany, I wouldn’t have believed it. Who could have imagined such a thing?”

In other words, when the very same social network was called Twitter and was directly used not just for interfering in elections, but also for organizing “color revolutions” and the “Arab Spring”—essentially regime changes in a number of countries—Paris was not only unconcerned but actively fanned the flames and supported these processes. It didn’t even bother them that this later triggered the migration of hundreds of thousands of refugees to Europe, including to the Fifth Republic, sparking an unprecedented rise in extremism and terrorism.

Let’s be honest! The events in Egypt and Tunisia are still called the Twitter Revolutions. And let’s not forget Zuckerberg, who played his own role with his platform during those events.

Nadaljujte z branjem→