Trust me, western media is dishonest

I started this blog in June 2012 and the focus has remained on Geopolitics in South Asia and MENA. Over the years my conviction has got stronger that western media is dishonest. Since media is supported by conglomerates, especially ‘Military Complexes’ the focus remains on creating conflicts that can lead to proxy wars and ultimately sale of arms. Referring to two mantras: Presence of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and Iraq building weapons of mass destruction (WMD) may help the readers understand my assertion.

I am listing titles of some of my blogs and their links with a request o readers to spend a few minutes in reading these blogs and then decide does the western media publishes/ airs real stories or these are tweaked to achieve their ultimate objective of selling lethal arms to facilitate their military complexes working at the best capacity utilization.

To read details click the following links

Ten dumbest things propagandists want people to believe

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2023/10/ten-dumbest-things-propagandists-want.html

Dishonest western media not reporting correct situation of oil market

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2022/07/dishonest-western-media-not-reporting.html

Media in United States in the grip of intelligence agents

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2019/10/media-in-united-states-in-grip-of.html

Time to mend Saudi-Iranian relationship

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2019/08/time-to-mend-saudi-iranian-relationship.html

Trump acts touching insanity

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2019/06/trump-acts-touching-insanity.html

As world faces Armageddon, west seems leaderless

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2019/06/as-world-faces-armageddon-western-world.html

Western Media is Key to Syria Deception

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2019/05/western-media-is-key-to-syria-deception.html

Syria planning another chemical attack, another hoax call by the US

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2017/06/syria-planning-another-chemical-attack.html

Anti Iran stance of western media

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2017/01/anti-iran-stance-of-western-media.html

What are the motives behind alleging Russia of hacking US election?

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2016/12/what-are-motives-behind-alleging-russia.html

The Long History of Lies about Iran

https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-long-history-of-lies-about-iran.html

 

Ten dumbest things propagandists want people to believe

There is no denying to the fact that we live under an empire that’s held together by lies. Here are the top ten dumbest things the US-led propagandists want to believe.

1. The US war machine has been surrounding its top two rivals China and Russia with war machinery as an act of defense, rather than an extremely provocative act of aggression.

2. The war in Ukraine simultaneously was completely unprovoked, and just coincidentally happens to massively advance US strategic interests and therefore should be funded as much as possible.

3. Although all the other wars were based on lies and resulted in disaster, but that couldn’t possibly be the case for this current war.

4. The foreign policy of any country is determined by the elected government, even though the foreign policy remains the same regardless of who is in office.

5. It is only by pure coincidence that any country’s population remains in a perpetual 50–50 deadlock which prevents anyone’s votes from changing the status quo, and the status quo just happens to be perpetually frozen along lines that hugely advantage the rich and powerful.

6. The only reason anyone could possibly be critical of the most dangerous impulses of the world’s most powerful and destructive government is if they are a secret agent working for the enemies of that government.

7. The western empires that spent the last two decades murdering Muslims in the Middle East suddenly care very deeply about the Muslims in China.

8. Putin invaded Ukraine solely because he is evil and hates freedom, and that the western empires are pouring weapons into Ukraine because they love Ukrainians and wants to protect their freedom and democracy.

9. The foreign propaganda and influence operations are significantly manipulating the way westerners think and vote, but the plutocrats who fully control all the most influential platforms in the western world are not.

10. Countries need to be worrying about tyrannical enemies in Beijing and Moscow, instead of tyrannical enemies a lot closer to home.

 

US foreign policy driven by military complexes

It is believed that the top think-tanks operating in the United States, active in foreign policy sphere, receive financial support from the top US military complexes that include Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman etc.

For Years, the US administration has been claiming that the country’s foreign policy is centered on human values like democracy, peace, freedom, and respect to other nations.

However, Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft recently published a detailed report which concluded that the US arms companies play a substantial role in shaping the country’s foreign policy.

The Institute suggests that of 10 top American think-tanks which are active in foreign policy sphere, all of them receive financial support from American firms including Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman etc.

In this regard, Atlantic Council and Center for Strategic and International Studies receive more than a million US dollars from these companies annually. 

The issue clarifies why most of American well-known think-tanks support the selling of arms to Ukraine, which is not the whole story.

According to the Quincy Institute report, more than 85% of the US media is in the long list of the recipients of the funds. The issue which unveils the fact that the US arms firms justify their inhuman aims by using the research and media tools.

Although different reports also refer to the fact that US arms’ firms use lobbyists for every member of the US Congress to advance their agendas in a desired way.

In this vein, it is not surprising to see that the US foreign policy has created historical catastrophes like the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

It is noteworthy that in the midst of the Ukraine war, the executive manager of the US firm Raytheon Technologies clearly said, “Geopolitical tensions of Eastern Europe carry profitable income opportunities for the company”.

From this perspective, it is fair to say that behind the well-designed foreign policy are the policy carvers which meet their goals at the expense of US citizens.

This once again confirms the fact that the distance between declared and practical goals of the US foreign policy is from the earth to the sky.      

 

 

Saudi Arabia-United States: Cracks have developed in the marriage of convenience

For decades United States has kept Saudi Arabia subservient to its ‘Foreign Policy Agenda’. However, it was only a cover up the real objective was to keep the largest oil producer under its thumb.

The story began with the discovery of oil in the Kingdom by a US oil giant leading to an agreement that the first customer of its oil will be United States and in exchange the super power will be responsible for the security of the kingdom, precisely the rulers.

When King Faisal, used oil as weapon, the immediate result was his assassination. To keep the rulers constantly under the fear, US coined a mantra after the Islamic Revolution in Iran, “Iran is a bigger threat for Saudi Arabia as compared to Israel”; the prime objective was to sell arms to the Kingdom.

One may recall that Iraq was pampered to attack Iran and the war continued for a decade. There are indications that Saudi Arabia was the biggest financer of war.

The attack on Iran was aimed at stopping its oil export and keep oil prices high to ensure higher revenue for Saudi Arabia, but most of it was extorted by selling arms. The war was followed by imposition of economic sanction on Iran, which are there for more than four decades.

Having Iran pushed out of oil trade, the next target was Iraq. One may recall that the reason for the economic sanctions on Iran was its alleged involvement in the production of atomic bomb. Using the same strategy United States raised a hoax call “Iraq is producing weapons of mass destruction (WMD)” and attacked Iraq. The war is still going on in Iraq and its oil export has remained negligible.

In the meantime to achieve self sufficiency in oil production, United States kept on implementing its “Shale Oil and Gas plan”. During this time oil prices were kept high to achieve two objectives: 1) sell more arms to the Kingdom and 2) lure Saudis to invest in the development of shale technology in the United States.

While United States, may have achieved both the target, Russia emerged as a “Game Spoiler”. It attained the status of one of the biggest oil producers. Russian-Chinese alliance not only changed the composition of oil markets but also influenced the geopolitical landscape.

To tighten its grip on Saudi Arabia, United States implicated the Crown Prince, to be precise defecto King, in a murder case. Donald Trump went to the extent of saying, “If United States takes its hands off the Kingdom will not survive for more than a few weeks”.   

Around the same time United States decided to take an exit from Afghanistan. There was a loud and clear message that Middle East, particularly, Saudi Arabia are no longer area of interest for United States.

This message became louder with the inculcation of Russia-Ukraine conflict and supply of billions of dollars latest and most lethal arms to Ukraine and imposition of economic sanction on Russia.

All these events indicate that the foreign policy of United States is governed by the owners of oil companies (commonly known as seven sisters) and military complexes.

The world also knows the role played by United States in the creation of turmoil in Libya and Venezuela.

Please allow me to sum up my narrative at “United States is no longer considered a trust worthy friend; it installs and topples governments in countries to support its Foreign Policy Agenda”.

 

 

Unveiling the real face of United States

The United States has been involved in hundreds of wars, invasions, coups and conflicts around the globe, yet it claims to be the flag-bearer of the international fight for freedom, liberation and human rights.

Even a cursory look reveals that in addition to its crimes, atrocities and attempts to divide countries, Washington stands accused of seditious acts through a widespread social media campaign and its embassies around the globe have been censured for their role in destabilizing different regions of the world.

It is often alleged that the United States itself was founded on violence against the indigenous people of America and since then it has survived on instigating violence with its hegemonic dreams and hopes of global hegemony following the collapse of the British Empire.

Over the past two decades Washington has had its eyes on West Asia with the disastrous invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as its support for Takfiri terrorist groups in countries such as Syria and Libya and in particular Iran.

It has since expanded its warmongering approach towards Eastern Europe with the aim of containing rising superpowers such as Russia. It has also pinned its hopes on China’s domestic issues such as Taiwan, Hong Kong, Tibet, Xinjiang and elsewhere with the hope of containing the rising economic and military power of Beijing. In essence, what is very clear is that wherever there is a US presence, there is also insecurity and no stability in that part of the world.

President Joe Biden claims the US will free Iran. Speaking at a campaign speech in California recently, he said, "Don't worry, we're gonna free Iran". The reality is, as noted by Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, Iran was freed from US captivity by toppling the Pahlavi regime. 

"I am telling Biden that Iran was freed 43 years ago," Raisi said in reference to the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

It is also important to note that the Iranian people were free in 1953 before the American CIA and British MI6 orchestrated a coup that toppled the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq and replaced it with a puppet regime to loot the country’s large oil and gas resources.

This is something both Washington and its Western allies publicly acknowledge. The reality is that the US has been trying to repeat the exact same scenario in Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. It has no interest in freedom or the livelihoods of Iranian people. Experts say human rights are observed in Iran more than the United States where minority groups, including Black Americans, face systematic discrimination.

The US claims it wants to free the Iranian nation while at the same time it has imposed the harshest ever sanctions on Iranian people that have caused the majority of the country's population to suffer. American sanctions prevented and continue to prevent patients suffering from serious diseases, such as cancer or rare skin diseases, to gain access to vital medicines by banning money transfer from Iran. This is under the name of "US freedom".

American widespread support for riots in Iran over the past few weeks have also led to the brutal death of police forces. This is the freedom and human rights that America seeks to spread and preach about. 

The closer the United States approaches Iranian borders or any other border in West Asia and beyond, the more insecurity grows in that country. And the US has dozens of military bases surrounding Iranian borders but an independent Iran has proven it has the capability to prevent the Pentagon from toppling the Islamic Republic because of Tehran's military might.

The governments and kingdoms that have linked their own national security interests (knowingly or unknowingly, willingly or unwillingly) to the US have been toppled because of their lack of sovereignty.

In cases where they have not been toppled, the US is stirring sedition and divide nations. This policy of spreading instability helps American arms manufacturers make lucrative profits from weapons deliveries, as has been witnessed in many countries, such as Cuba and other Latin American countries and more recently to Syria, Libya, Ukraine, etc.  

The US State Department has demanded that North Korea refrain from taking any defensive measures to protect its territory, and instead engage in dialogue. This is while the United States has hundreds of warplanes buzzing around North Korean borders in joint war games that have been extended and which Pyongyang views as a rehearsal for an imminent invasion. North Korea has test-fired ballistic missiles in response to these war games and Pyongyang, unsurprisingly, has been denounced by Washington for stirring up trouble.

The US is allowed to hold the largest ever war games next to North Korea with the deployment of B-1B strategic bombers but the North is not allowed to test its own missiles to protect its territorial integrity.

The US Navy missile-guided destroyers and other warships including US warplane carriers and strike groups regularly sail in the South China Sea and expect China to remain silent, which by the way Beijing has exercised praiseworthy patience with its diplomatic approach to the US provocations. A reflection of how one country is not after seeking military confrontation and how another has a warmongering approach under the pretext of spreading freedom that nobody even requested in the first place.

Critics argue that the delusional idea that Washington can provide security guarantees for another country can’t be further from the truth. The fact of the matter is, as history has shown and proven, the US only looks after its own interests, makes lucrative profit from its military adventurism and once these America’s interests are gone, so are the alleged security guarantees that Washington once promised to provide for certain governments and rulers and kings.

 

Why is the US avoiding penalizing 9/11 facilitators?

Today marks the anniversary of “the strangest incident” which plunged the world in turmoil. Some quarters say the US administration has kept the ‘facilitators’ immune and avoided taking any punitive measures against them.

The lack of any action by Washington in pursuing the inquiry displays utter disregard to killing of people in Afghanistan and Iraq.

This explains lack of US interest in seeking any justice for the millions of civilians killed by its bombing in          Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, and elsewhere. One may recall that the US had waged two wars on the pretext of fighting terrorism. 

Both of which went horribly wrong with civilians paying the price for the policies of hawks and arms manufacturers in Washington. They thrive on the US military adventures abroad or other conflicts that the US supports with constant arms supply. 

The billions of dollars spent on two invasions in the aftermath of 9/11 made the world less safe and could have been invested domestically instead to eradicate the many problems plaguing America such as homelessness, child hunger, poverty or even the country’s outdated infrastructure. 

Last year, President Joe Biden administration came under strong pressure by 9/11 family members, survivors and emergency responders to declassify an earlier FBI report, summarizing an investigation into the attacks. 

In a sign of how fed up the 9/11 families had become, Biden was told he would not be welcome at the 9/11 memorial events unless he fulfilled a pledge to be more transparent than other presidents. 

In what was an expected U-turn, the American president travelled to Saudi Arabia this year, asked for greater oil production and recently approved a multi-billion-dollar arms deal to the Kingdom. 

In 2017, the US clinched deal with the Saudis worth US$350 billion. The trade is simply too lucrative and would not be possible if ties to Saudi Arabia are broken.

America has made accusations against others over the 9/11 attacks, including Iran, something which is quite laughable and touching on borderline stupidity. However, it is not unexpected from the US officials, who have blamed Iran for just about everything. 

The accusation against Iran is more for domestic audience and aimed to make up for Washington’s failures in genuinely addressing the attacks with any tangible results.

What is even more regrettable is that people of Iraq and Afghanistan had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks but were made to suffer for 20 years after their land was invaded and occupied by American forces. 

20 years later, the US chaotically withdrew from Afghanistan; but in a severe blow to humanitarian efforts in the country, the White House has frozen seven billion dollars of Afghan funds. 

 

 

Dying Ukrainians Thriving US Military Complexes

It is becoming evident that the United States has succeeded in initiating an anti-Russian mood in Europe through an unprecedented information war. At this time it is difficult to assess who is the winner and who is the loser. In my opinion the winners are arms suppliers, especially the US military complexes. 

I also believe the biggest losers are people of Ukraine, Europe and in fact the entire world. Parts of Ukraine are in ruins and millions of people have been displaced. In the seven decades since the destruction caused by World War II, Europe managed to establish itself as a region of peace and development, but United States has imposed a proxy war on it, which is not in its interest.

Ever since Russia-Ukraine conflict started, the United States has sent billions of US dollars military aid Ukraine to fight its proxy was against Russia. The massive arms transfer includes a wide range of weapons, from anti-armor missiles to helicopters and beyond.

With the constant flow of news about the war, it can be hard to keep track of all these weapons packages. However, Responsible Statecraft has put together a timeline of every arms shipment that has been announced since the war began.

Before having a look at this timeline, it is important to note a couple of things. First, this list only contains publicly announced information. The Pentagon has admitted to sending at least one type of missile that was never mentioned in their press releases, so there’s reason to believe that this list is not exhaustive. Second, there are two different sources for these lethal aid packages. One, which has made up the vast majority of transfers to date, is known as a “presidential drawdown.” This means that the White House and Pentagon agree to send weapons to Ukraine from the US stockpiles, after which DoD can use the funds to replenish their stocks by purchasing new arms from defense contractors.

Biden has used this authority in an unprecedented 18 times to send weapons to Ukraine, with most of the funding coming from money that Congress has set aside to arm Kyiv.

The other source of weapons is the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI). This is a special fund within the Pentagon’s budget that is used to purchase new weapons from contractors rather than drawing from existing stockpiles. Transfers from these funds do not require additional approval from Congress.

Following is a timeline of major weapons shipment or funding announced since February 24, 2022

---

August 08

The Pentagon announced that it will send $1 billion worth of security assistance to Ukraine via presidential drawdown, including:

— HIMARS ammunition (This is an acronym for High Mobility Artillery Rocket System. These mobile missile launchers can fire a wide range of munitions, including rocket artillery and short-range ballistic missiles.)

— Artillery ammunition

— Javelin missiles and other anti-armor weapons

---

August 01

The Pentagon announced an additional $550 million of security aid via presidential drawdown, including:

— HIMARS ammunition

— Artillery ammunition

---

July 22

The Pentagon announced that it will send $270 million of military aid to Ukraine, with $175 million authorized via presidential drawdown and the other $95 million coming via USAI funds. This included:

— Four additional HIMARS 

— HIMARS ammunition

— Four Command Post vehicles (These can be used as a tactical operations center or an armored ambulance, among other things.)

— Tank gun ammunition

— Phoenix Ghost drones (These are a type of “loitering munitions,” or a weapons that can wait in the air for extended periods of time before attacking a target. This was created by the United States for use in Ukraine.)

---

July 08

The Pentagon announced an additional $400 million of military assistance via presidential drawdown, including:

— Four additional HIMARS

— HIMARS ammunition

— Artillery ammunition

---

July 1

The Pentagon announced that it will send $820 million of security aid, with $50 million authorized via presidential drawdown and the remaining $770 million coming via USAI funds. This included:

— HIMARS ammunition

— Two National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS) (This system launches missiles to defend against various types of aircraft, including drones.)

— Artillery ammunition

---

June 23

The Pentagon announced an additional $450 million in military assistance via presidential drawdown, including:

— Four HIMARS

— Artillery ammunition

— Grenade launchers

— Patrol boats

---

June 15

The Pentagon announced an additional $1 billion in lethal aid, with $350 million authorized via presidential drawdown and $650 million coming from USAI funds. This included:

— Howitzers (This is a popular long-range artillery weapon.)

— Artillery ammunition 

— HIMARS ammunition

— Two Harpoon coastal defense systems (These launch missiles that fly just above the surface of the water to attack planes and ships.)

---

June 01

The Pentagon announced an additional $700 million in military assistance via presidential drawdown, including:

— HIMARS

— HIMARS ammunition

— Javelin missiles and other anti-armor weapons

— Artillery ammunition

— Four Mi-17 helicopters (These can be used for transport or combat.)

---

May 19

The Pentagon announced $100 million in lethal aid via presidential drawdown, including:

— Howitzers

On the same day, Congress passed a $40 billion aid package for Ukraine, roughly half of which was earmarked for military assistance.

---

May 06

The Pentagon announced $150 million in military aid via presidential drawdown, including:

— Artillery ammunition

---

April 21

DoD announced $800 million in further aid via presidential drawdown, including:

— Howitzers

— Artillery ammunition

— Phoenix Ghost drones

---

April 13

The Pentagon announced that it will send an additional $800 million in military assistance via presidential drawdown, including:

— Howitzers

— Artillery ammunition

— Switchblade drones (This is another form of loitering munition.)

— Javelin missiles and other anti-armor weapons

— Armored personnel carriers

— 11 Mi-17 helicopters

— Various types of explosives

---

April 06

The Pentagon announced an addition $100 million in aid via presidential drawdown, including:

— Javelin anti-armor systems

---

April 01

DoD announced that it will send $300 million in lethal aid using USAI funds, including:

— Laser-guided rocket systems

— Switchblade drones

— Puma surveillance drones

— Anti-drone systems 

— Armored vehicles

---

March 16

The Pentagon announced that it will send $800 million worth of military aid via presidential drawdown. The exact contents of this package are unclear, but it likely included Mi-17 helicopters, Javelin missiles, and Stinger anti-aircraft missiles.

---

March 12

The White House announced that it will send $200 million in lethal aid via presidential drawdown, including:

— Javelin missiles 

— Stinger missiles

---

March 10

Congress approved $13.6 billion in aid to Ukraine, roughly half of which was earmarked for military assistance.

---

February 25

The White House announced that it will send $350 million in military aid via presidential drawdown, including:

— Anti-armor weapons

— Small arms

---

 

Finding reasons behind the US support for war in Ukraine

Biden Administration could have avoided pushing Ukraine into war in the first place by not inviting Russian immediate neighbor to join NATO, but it chose the war. Many are of the view that it was not for any love for the people of Ukraine.

Is it because it is a country populated by white people? In 1994, President Clinton did nothing while genocide of Tutsi ethnic Rwandans was going on in Rwanda resulting in the deaths of some 500,000 to 662,000. Was that utter neglect because those were black people?

Or is it because there is a considerable number of Ukrainians living in the United States who would vote for Biden’s reelection in 2024?

Or is it because usually a war president gets reelected?

Or was it that Biden wanted to look “macho”, a president who cowed down Russia?

Or are Biden administration and the Pentagon pursuing the policy suggested by recent Rand Corporation thesis to break up Russia by weakening it by this brutal war?

Or are he and the democrats paying back the ‘defense’ contractors—for their donations to the Democrats during elections-- with billions of dollars in profit by this war?

The Rand Corporation’s April 2019 article on Russia recommends that we should overextend and weaken Russia by directly addressing its vulnerabilities, anxieties, and strengths, exploiting areas of its weakness while undermining Russia’s current advantages.

Further it states that “Russia’s greatest vulnerability, in any competition with the United States is its economy.” It seems the reason; United States has embarked upon provoking Russia to invade Ukraine.

United States is using double edged sword: 1) weakening Russia militarily by this proxy war and 2) weakening Russia economically by brutal sanctions ever imposed on a country.

The US administration government has doled out more than US$54 billion in arms and other categories. It is anticipated that more will come as the war drags on.

These billions in donation to Ukraine, a country that is 9,181 kilometers away from the United States and has no strategic value to the United States.

These billions are not coming from president or politicians; this is taxpayers’ money. The taxpayers must ask the government, why to donate such huge amounts to a country which has done nothing for America?

President Biden’s son, Hunter Biden supposedly made US$11 million from 2013 to 2018, being made member of Board of Directors of Ukraine gas company, Burisma, though he had no knowledge of gas production, refining or transportation.

Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Michell McConnel, Jill Biden and others went and paid visit to Zelensky and his wife. Why so much love and respect for Ukraine and its president?

The US provocation of Russia resulting in this brutal but avoidable war will go down in history as one the most irresponsible and reckless act committed by the United States, a foreign policy blunder that could trigger a nuclear war between Russia and the United States.

 

Russia-Ukraine conflict: A US manufactured crisis

Few people today ask the most important question about the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Many people want America to stay out of the fight, but even they don’t ask the vital questions.

Why does the world face a crisis today? Why has a border dispute between Russia and Ukraine escalated to the point where people fear nuclear war?

The answer is simple. The United States, under the leadership of President Joe Biden and the forces controlling him, has done this and, by doing so, brought the world to the brink of disaster. As always, the great Dr. Ron Paul gets it right: “Three weeks into this terrible war, the US is not pursuing talks with Russia, instead of supporting negotiations between Ukraine and Russia that could lead to a ceasefire and an end to the bloodshed, the US government is actually escalating the situation which can only increase the bloodshed.

“The constant flow of US and allied weapons into Ukraine and talk of supporting an extended insurgency does not seem designed to give Ukraine a victory on the battlefield but rather to hand Russia what Secretary of State Blinken called ‘a strategic defeat.’

“It sounds an awful lot like the Biden Administration intends to fight Russia down to the last Ukrainian,” wrote Paul. ”The only solution for the United States is to get out. Let the Russians and Ukrainians reach an agreement. That means no NATO for Ukraine and no US missiles on Russian borders? So what! End the war then end NATO.”

Let’s look at an analogy that will help us understand Paul’s point. For years, the Ukrainian government has attacked an area in the Donbass region that has seceded from Ukraine and formed an independent, pro-Russian, republic. Just before Putin moved against Ukraine, Ukrainians increased the scale and scope of their attack.

Rick Rozoff describes what they did, “Two-thirds of Ukrainian army servicemen have been amassed along the Donbass contact line, Eduard Basurin, spokesman for the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) militia, said on Thursday.

“Another three brigades are on their way to Donbass, which is 20,000 to 25,000 troops more. The total number will reach 150,000, not to mention the nationalists. This is about two-thirds of Ukrainian Armed Forces’ personnel,” Basurin said on the Rossiya 1 television channel (VGTRK) on Thursday.

Ukrainian troops are stationed along the 320-kilometer front line, he said.”

Unlike what has just happened, the Ukrainian attack did not result in US sanctions on Ukraine. There were no meetings of the UN to condemn Ukrainian aggression. There was no talk of world war. On the contrary, the Ukraine government used American weapons in its attack and asked America for more weapons to continue their attack.

Let’s listen to Rozoff again, “The Armed Forces of Ukraine used the American anti-tank missile system Javelin in the hostilities in Donbass. This was announced by the head of the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine Kirill Budanov in an interview.

“Budanov said that ideally, the US would help deter any Russian incursion, through additional military aid and increased diplomatic and economic pressure, including more sanctions against Russia and the seizure and blocking of Russian banking accounts.

“Also, in addition to US aid already promised and delivered, including Mark VI patrol boats, Javelin anti-armor systems and AN/TPQ-53 light counter-fire radar systems, Ukraine seeks additional air, missile and drone defense systems and electronic jamming devices, Budonov said. Patriot missile batteries and counter rocket, artillery and mortar systems are on Ukraine’s wish list.

“The AN/TPQ-53 systems were used to great effect, Ukraine military officials have previously reported. Budanov said the Javelin systems have also been used against Russian forces. Those, along with Turkish-manufactured drones, used against Russian-aligned separatist artillery troops, have a significant psychological deterrent value, said Budanov.”

The US should have not have shipped arms to Ukraine. Doing this made the situation worse. But for what we’re saying now, it doesn’t matter what you think of the policy. The key point is that because there was no international outcry and no sanctions, the matter remained a local fight. If Biden and his team had reacted to the so-called Russian invasion in the same way, the matter would have remained a local quarrel. Russia and Ukraine would have made a deal and that would be that.

The neocon warmongers and other defenders of democracy, who unfortunately include some deluded libertarians object. Don’t we have a duty to resist aggression? The answer is clear, No, we don’t. We do not have a duty to evaluate every foreign quarrel and assess who is at fault. We do not have a duty to require leaders of regimes we, or rather our masters in Washington, don’t like to accept existing boundaries of countries as unchangeable. We should reject the false doctrine of “collective security,” which makes every border dispute a world war.

The great American historian Charles Beard recognized what was wrong with “collective security” in the 1930s. In his article, “Giddy Minds and Foreign Quarrels,” he asked: “On what … should the foreign policy of the United States be based? Here is one answer and it is not excogitated in any professor’s study or supplied by political agitators. It is the doctrine formulated by George Washington, supplemented by James Monroe, and followed by the Government of the United States until near the end of the nineteenth century, when the frenzy for foreign adventurism burst upon the country.

This doctrine is simple. Europe has a set of ‘primary interests’ which have little or no relation to us, and is constantly vexed by ‘ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice.’

The United States is a continental power separated from Europe by a wide ocean which, despite all changes in warfare, is still a powerful asset of defense. In the ordinary or regular vicissitudes of European politics the United States should not become implicated by any permanent ties. We should promote commerce, but force ‘nothing.’ We should steer dear of hates and loves. We should maintain correct and formal relations with all established governments without respect to their forms or their religions, whether Christian, Mohammedan, Shinto, or what have you.”

Beard then responded to those who wanted to scrap our traditional policy of non-intervention with “collective security”. In the rest of the world, outside this hemisphere, our interests are remote and our power to enforce our will is relatively slight. Nothing we can do for Europeans will substantially increase our trade or add to our, or their, well-being. Nothing we can do for Asiatics will materially increase our trade or add to our, or their, well-being. With all countries in Europe and Asia, our relations should be formal and correct. As individuals we may indulge in hate and love, but the Government of the United States embarks on stormy seas when it begins to love one power and hate another officially.”

We should heed Beard’s wisdom today. Otherwise, the world may go up in flames.