Website voor mensen die niet klagen

An essay on policing the world

Basically NATO succeeded in recapturing the larger part of the Kharkov Oblast, while losing its grip on the people in Europe, the UK and the US, and any standing it had left in the world after a flurry of lost wars since the start of this century. Worse, this recapturing didn't require any fighting, since Russia withdrew its forces to defend a much shorter, and easier to defend front defined by the Oskol river in that particular 'area of interest', while NATO appears to have lost 'momentum' elsewhere, after Russia struck a dam at Kryvyi Rih, emptying the basin next to the city, and flooding the Ingulets river, flushing the pontoon bridges the Ukrainian army used to establish a bridgehead for its Kherson offensive down the toilet. Cut off from supplies, and with no chance to retreat, those soldiers are toast according various military commentators. 


Again, I'm no 'military analyst', prying apart the force strengths and weaknesses, anticipating on future moves on the battlefield. I'm looking at the 'Bigger Picture'. After all, the military are subordinate to the people in charge of planning developments meant to serve the interests of the people in a sound society. Clearly, in a sound society, the military deserve respect, and cannot be 'Ordered Around' to 'serve' without paying attention to their professional insight. 'Tuning' the system takes planning, clear orders, and trust. 


While planning the entire economy is not possible, planning for war certainly is, although the best preparation requires a lot of attention to detail to avoid costly mistakes and cost-overruns. That is not the way NATO operated. Not after the collapse of the Soviet-Union in any case. From that moment on it considered itself the police force of the entire globe, which basically meant that it became an autonomous power ordering the politicians around. NATO began to prey on the people, primarily in the US, spending money as if there was no tomorrow, greedy to buy every 'gadget' and 'service' the military-industrial complex produced, very much like Eisenhower predicted in the early sixties. 


Now, from my perspective, as a proud European, relishing the wealth and cultural depth created after the Second Wold War, I'm shocked to see how easy it is to destroy all this wealth to serve a military organisation which is a horrendous failure in almost every respect. To be sure, I'm not blaming the 'Rent-Seekers' and 'Fetishists' with their insatiable love for weapons, preying on the productive people, but the productive people for prostituting themselves. It didn't happen overnight. It grew, but it is accelerating, and the devastation it causes is growing by the minute. Now, I've stated on the Dutch language part of this blog, many years ago, that all my criticism had to be understood as an attempt to prevent a fatal outcome of increasingly unsound policies, and this switch to an 'Empire-state-of-Mind', with the elected representatives of the people as 'managers/caretakers', subordinate to a unipolar NATO/'Davos'-crowd doing the planning. 


In Australia an artist painted a huge mural depicting Ukrainian and Russian soldiers hugging. The authorities made him paint it over to remove the 'offending' image, and demanded apologies. It signals that NATO (and its 'five eyes' allies) are determined to fight to the bitter end, which may come much sooner than anyone seems to think, because NATO is in disarray. Very much like police-forces in large parts of the western world, no longer able to cope with all the demands from the 'Higher-Ups', spreading resources thin, while various 'stakeholders' reap the benefits from unlimited funds being poured into a broken system. A wide array of 'woke', and ever changing laws given priority over fighting 'ordinary' criminals, now seen as 'victims' to boot, was the straw that broke the camel's back a long time ago, and the animal is suffering beyond our wildest imagination. 


How this devious development came about is for historians to sort out, if we manage to survive this ordeal. The EU, lead by the former minister of war from Germany, serving NATO, and not the Germans, or the Europeans, with a second in command who brought us the MH-17 disaster and escalation by not blocking commercial airliners departing from Schiphol to fly over Ukraine, knowing full well that aircraft at higher altitudes were targeted, as revealed in Holland right after the fact, is on a path to self-immolation for all the wrong reasons. I do understand that no race is ever finished before the line which marks the end of the circuit is crossed on the last lap, and surprises are possible until that moment, but the wheels are coming off as we speak. 


NATO is struggling to produce enough ammunition for its war in Ukraine, while already producing nowhere near the amount Russia has to throw at Ukraine. Finding suitable new recruits is impossible since they fail entry-tests, or refuse to show up in exchange for food-stamps. Moreover, while the 'leadership' is cheering for Ukraine, support among the people of the NATO-countries is fragile, or absent. The people understand what they are expected to say when asked how they judge the situation in Ukraine, and what they think about Russia, in order to be on the safe side, but they show no interest beyond reading the headlines. They hardly know anything about the country, apart from the fact that the guy in military fatigues demanding more guns is of 'Jewish Origin'. Which is sufficient in our 'woke' universe, where 'Identity' is everything, to tell them how to vote. 


The countries which assembled in Samarkand last week are a different lot entirely. It included Turkey, a NATO country, on the verge of being sanctioned by the EU and the US because it refuses to order its banks to cut ties with Russia, while reaching out to Assad to come to an understanding. A similar fate is threatening Hungary, which the non-elected officials in Brussels consider to be 'undemocratic', after Orban won a landslide victory recently, because 'democracy', as defined by 'Brussels' and 'Washington' is not about what the people want. It is about imposing their 'Rules' and 'Values'. The countries assembled in Samarkand approach the geostrategic stress from a different perspective altogether. They may have their differences, and even armed struggles between members, but they are united in their desire to compete and trade so as to create wealth for their people. As such it is a far cry from what NATO is about, since they do not form a military alliance. In a way it is less stable, and it is obvious that NATO is doing whatever it can to take advantage of the differences among them, offering support in exchange for 'Rent' to be paid to the 'Policeman-of-the-World'. But that ship has sailed.

Go Back