by Diego Fusaro
Now, the Pentagon candidly lets slip that, should Kiev lose the war, NATO would need to throw its hat in the ring against Russia. This piece of news is splashed across the front pages of all the major, best-selling newspapers. I invite you to ponder the sheer disregard for logic embedded in the statement just mentioned.
Why on earth should NATO engage in war with Russia if the buffoon Zelensky loses his battle with Russia itself? Is Ukraine by any chance a member of NATO or the European Union? Not that we’re aware of, unless we’re mistaken. Sure, Washington and Brussels have been bending over backwards to get Kiev into both NATO and the EU, but fortunately, that hasn’t happened yet.
So, why should NATO ever consider going to war with Russia if Kiev were to lose? The only answer that spontaneously comes to mind is as follows: NATO would consider going to war with Russia because, in truth, it’s something it has wanted for quite some time, a kind of preordained choice, if you will. To such an extent that it seems, in many respects, that the liberal-Atlanticist West is doing everything in its power to find a casus belli and justify to the public opinion a war with Russia that may have been decided upon a long time ago.
It’s somewhat reminiscent of the wolf in the fable with the lamb, accused of muddying the water even though the lamb is downstream and the wolf upstream. We’ve been told for weeks that Russia is ready to invade the Baltic states and NATO, without ever, to our knowledge and barring any errors, providing the slightest shred of evidence. It really seems like they’re pulling out all the stops to sugarcoat the pill and prep the public opinion for some kind of preemptive war, portrayed as an unavoidable necessity in the face of a Russia they zealously claim is eager to invade and occupy the West.
To us, however, it appears that the reality is quite the opposite: it’s the dollar civilization that, since the nineties, with the Soviet Union no longer in the picture, dreams of reducing Russia to a colony, a scenario that, by the way, seemed to be actually happening first with Gorbachev and then with Yeltsin. The animosity towards Putin stems precisely from the fact that he changed course, defending the reasons for an independent and sovereign Russia, unwilling to submit to the dollar civilization.
We’ll see how things unfold, but in the meantime, the situation is anything but reassuring. And we must hope for a strong and sovereign Russia and China, independent and united, capable of withstanding Washington’s imperialism and keeping alive the idea of a multipolar world.
