In the US enclave of Ramstein, one of the many remaining pieces of Germany still held by the US, even this many years after the Second World War ended, countries which invested in the war with Russia on Ukrainian soil are meeting to discuss the way their war is going. We all remember well, I hope, how Lloyd Austin, the man from Raytheon turned secretary of war in the Biden administration, forecasted that NATO would bleed Russia 'white' at the start of the 'SMO'-phase of the conflict. A simmering conflict which grew a pair of wings in 2014, when the US and willing European politicians regime changed Ukraine to turn it into a vassal. A conflict which had been waiting in the wings since 2008, when George Bush jr invited the unwilling country to become NATO's pawn in a planned war with Russia.
To phrase it like that is likely to get me listed as a 'Putin Puppet', even though I never met the men, and do not maintain any kind of contact with people from the Russian Federation, nor do I get paid to write. I pay all the bills for maintaining this blog myself, contrary to many 'NAFO'-warriors, regulated propaganda outlets masquerading as legitimate news-sites, and commercial vlogs and blogs out there. Yet these do provide inspiration, and some provide news which is not available elsewhere. Less so these days, with any news from Russia being suppressed in the mainstream media on this side of the new 'Iron Curtain'. In other words, I do read information provided by Russian, and staunchly pro-Russian sources on 'X' and elsewhere, but I'm not discussing my points of view with any of them. Same as information provided by mainstream sources.
On 'X' I'm frequently challenged by staunchly pro-Ukrainian 'NAFO'-warriors, and I always try to reply in a polite, respectful manner, addressing the issues in a 'matter of fact' way, offering proof of what I'm claiming to be true through sources which can be found on the internet, and in publicly available books. My own analysis of the war, and the politics around it, is my own. It may appear to be in-line with what others are saying, more in particular people you may 'meet' through following the links provided, but I may disagree with them 'tomorrow', and on their reading of subjects they provided 'yesterday'. Someone may be a 'fascist', a 'communist', or some other moron, but he or she could be correct on something important. 'Don't judge a book by its cover'.
As such I cannot expect you to accept my analysis and take it for the Gospel-Truth, and that is not why I'm adding my two-cents. I'm merely trying to make sense of a world gone mad. I came to distrust everything coming out of Ukraine after the leadership in that country took it upon themselves to tell the people behind the 'Deep State'-map to fall in line, or end up in the trenches with the rest of the cannon-fodder, or something along those lines. I do understand why the leadership felt the need to do that, because everything is coming apart at the seams for Ukraine. The mainstream media in my country heralded this new Ukrainian offensive in Kursk the other day, but withheld their 'progress-reports', because there was none. There is a fair chance that Russia will wrap it all up in Kursk before the Trump inauguration, and I get this feeling they are almost 'toying' with those poor Ukrainian soldiers, while Zelensky spoke highly at Ramstein of Kursk as being Ukraine's 'finest hour'.
Meanwhile, I'm scanning the horizon to see how this conflict might end. I was watching a prediction by Kurt Volker, former US ambassador with NATO, which is an American outfit, so why do they need an ambassador, but never mind. He volunteered that the challenge was to get the Russians to come to the table, while he told the viewers of that emission that Zelensky was willing to talk. Tell me, please, is he not aware of the fact that Ukraine embedded in its constitution that talks with Russia are off limits as long as Russia is still holding parts of Ukraine? While Russia keeps telling everybody that they have no objections to talks, if the representative of Ukraine is 'legit'? Which is referring to the simple fact that Zelensky overran his term without new elections, and any deal with him may be considered illegitimate at any future date. So why even talk to him? Moreover, at this stage Russia made it crystal clear that any deal has to be based on Russia's proposals, which would leave Ukraine out of NATO, NATO out of Ukraine, and without the 'Oblasts' the Russians now consider Russian territory, because Ukraine, as a country, 'betrayed' them three times in a row.
First in 2014, when they allowed Victoria Nuland to install a puppet regime. Then again over 'Minsk'. And thirdly in 'Istanbul'. That is not how the regime in Kiev is looking at it, nor NATO, but Trump recently made 'noises' that sounded like he understood why the Russians are 'pissed', and distrust NATO, as well as the US. In the end it really doesn't matter who's side you are on, because all diplomacy went out the window under Biden. What is left is 'Gunboat Diplomacy', with NATO's 'Gunboat' close to exhaustion. Volker, and others like him, do acknowledge that NATO and Ukraine reached the end of the line in this 'conventional' war, which they want to 'freeze', so as to 'switch' to hybrid and economic warfare. Why would Russia agree to that?
As simpleminded as it sounds, but those holding on to that idea insist that Russia is close to collapse, and Trump opening up the tabs to produce more oil and gas, in order to reduce the price of those commodities to levels 'bankrupting' Russia, will make them come crawling to the table and beg for mercy. To begin with, where will Trump find the oil and gas to pump in sufficient quantities to spoil the market? In Canada, Alaska and Greenland, perhaps, in many years from now, and at staggering costs which will render that project look like an arterial bleeding. Present capacity is nowhere near sufficient to even come close to pull that one off. Or he invades Venezuela, doing what the NATO-countries accuse Russia of doing in Ukraine, but without any acceptable excuse whatsoever in international law. At least the 'SMO' was tailored to be sold as an 'R2P' mission, after 14.000 people in the Donbas died as a result of Kiev's bloody civil-war which followed on the heels of the 2014 coup. No doubt Trump has no qualms about that, and his European 'Yes-men', and 'Yes-women' will back him up. But apparently Maduro recently armed the people after yet another coup-attempt was intercepted with foreign 'specialists' arrested, and Venezuela may prove to be a quagmire if Trumps moves in using the military. More in particular if he sends the 'Woke'-units which have been all over the news these past four years, which are everywhere in the US at all services, now struggling to extinguish a blaze in LA with shopping bags filled with water, and no functioning strategy, because the Fire Department gave everything they had to Ukraine. Like the military.
Save for going nuclear, which Trump previously alluded to as something he would have done in 2022 if he had been Joe Biden, I think Trump would be wise to stay away from seeking a confrontation with Russia and China under the circumstances. Militarily, economically, or 'hybrid'. His safer choice is taking on Canada, Panama and Denmark. And far more rewarding than coming to the rescue of what is left of Ukraine. Both Canada and Denmark are 'Pussies' in a military sense, and both countries rely on American weapons to boot. No need to go to war with them, but 'strong-arming' them to come and see it his way may be more than enough to get what Trump is seeking, territory rich enough to support his 'MAGA'-plans, at a fraction of the costs in money and blood of what taking Russia by force would cost the US. Like Kissinger used to say: 'The US doesn't have permanent friends, or enemies, just interests'. Dealing with the Russians and the Chinese shouldn't be impossible, since both countries are in the same league, or they wouldn't be pushing for a return to a multipolar world.