Another Ceasefire...

A ceasefire agreement has recently been enacted in Syria between Russia, the Syrian government and its allies, and the US and their trained militant monkeys.

This is the second such agreement after the one enacted in February of this year basically failed due to the inability, or refusal, of the US to separate the so-called ‘moderate,’ western-sponsored head-choppers from the violent, fundamentalist head-choppers.

Unfortunately with this second agreement, the same problem persists: mainly that the US is unable, or unwilling to separate the militants it supports from the militants it doesn’t support. Whatever the reason for this is, it is clear that the US signed this latest agreement in bad faith.

The US still supports those groups who have made it clear that they won’t separate themselves from the jihadi types, and won’t honor the ceasefire. The US regime also tries to muddy the waters so that the groups it doesn't support appear as if they're part of the 'moderate' opposition.

This lays bare the fact that the US ‘war on terrorism’ is nothing but a farce, and always was. How can the US win such a war when it supports various terrorist groups linked to Al Qaeda and Al Nusra?

The US has no intention of honoring this agreement. Like with the last ‘ceasefire,’ it only wants a temporary lull in fighting to regroup and resupply their favored terror gangs, which were on their way to being annihilated by the Syrian army and its allies.

It seems that every time the Syrians and Russians are almost close to a total victory, the US suddenly screams for a ceasefire, humanitarian aid, and trots out some fake atrocity propaganda to make Syria and Russia look bad. 

Why is it that anyone is even giving the US any consideration in Syria? After all, the US is operating there illegally, is the aggressor, and supports terrorist militias. Would the US regime allow foreign-sponsored, anti-government militants to take over parts of the US, and then agree to ceasefires with the foreign sponsor of the militants? Would it bargain away control of its own territory?

Every square inch of Syria belongs to the Syrian people, and must go back under the Syrian government’s control. This is not negotiable. There can be no Balkanization of the country; no ‘safe zones,’ or sectarian state-lets. This is illegal, and cannot be allowed under any circumstances.

No ceasefire in Syria will work until the US regime gives up its plans for regime change, and stops all support for terror groups within Syria. Until then, any and all ceasefire agreements are meaningless, and only serve to keep the western-sponsored militant vermin around, and Syria in perpetual chaos.

US Health Care Crisis

One of the clearest and atrocious pieces of evidence that exposes the US as a place where human lives don’t matter is its broken and failed for-profit healthcare system.

The US spends more money on healthcare than any other nation, yet has some of the unhealthiest people.

This is due to the private for-profit healthcare system controlled by private health insurers.

Not only that, but thousands of Americans die needlessly every year due to either not being able to afford health insurance, or because the health insurer denied needed care that would’ve kept the person alive.

The US health care system is not only dysfunctional; it is criminally-negligent.

Hundreds of billions of dollars flow into the private, for-profit health insurance companies from individual, employer, and government coffers, yet the accessibility and quality of care is a big problem.

Whenever anyone demands single-payer, government-funded healthcare, there is immediate howling from for-profit insurers and hospital chains about ‘socialism,’ ‘government death panels,’ and all sorts of lies are then put out by these healthcare cartels and their paid media and special interest lobbyist whores to fool people into thinking that government must stay out of healthcare, and that private for-profit healthcare is the only good option.

Yet the evidence says otherwise. The government-funded Medicaid system delivers better care with much less overhead than the private, for-profit system does. Contrary to popular belief, it is the private for-profit healthcare system that is wasteful and forces people to face ‘death panels’ which deny their care.

When it comes to Obamacare, it is a dismal failure. What it basically does is force people to buy private health insurance that is still unaffordable, and of questionable quality. To add insult to an already bad injury, it punishes people by making them pay a penalty for being unable to afford private health insurance. This is just plain fucking disgusting!

But even though the US healthcare system is bad, many Americans have been convinced by false stories and fake evidence that socialized healthcare is much worse.

Well, if that’s the case, then how come virtually all the countries in the world have socialized form of health care? And why doesn’t any other country want a US-style health care system?

Whatever the flaws of a socialized health care system may be, it is still far better than the for-profit US-style healthcare system (if you can call it that).

Some years ago, when the effort to enact Obamacare was starting, the for-profit healthcare crowd trotted out a Canadian lady with a convincing sob-story about how horrible Canada’s socialized healthcare system is.

The story went like this: The lady was diagnosed with a brain tumor. The doctors in Canada then put her on a long waiting list for surgery, something like 4-5 months.

The lady freaked out and went to the US to get her surgery. Then the for-profit insurance cabal enlisted her for their campaign against government-funded healthcare by running TV ads featuring the Canadian lady tumor victim telling her story about how terrible the Canadian healthcare system, and socialized healthcare in general, are for making her wait so long to get surgery.

But what was conveniently, and deliberately, not said about the Canadian lady’s medical situation was that the tumor that she was diagnosed with was benign, not life threatening, and she could’ve easily waited those months, gotten her surgery in Canada, and lived.

Another argument that the for-profit healthcare cartel puts forward against government-sponsored healthcare is that it puts people on long waiting lists, and that people needlessly suffer, and may die before their wait is over.

But let’s use some common-sense here.

Long wait times in countries with ‘socialized’ healthcare systems aren’t simply due to the system being socialized.

A country with a socialized healthcare system automatically gives everyone, rich and poor, equal access to healthcare. It doesn’t leave anyone out.

This naturally means that more people will now be in line for health services. So yes, everyone will have to wait longer. That is just a natural consequence of equal access to health care.

Also, regardless of whether a health care system is private or socialized, there are only so many doctors around, and they have to balance their workloads. There aren’t hundreds of doctors within a particular hospital or clinic. There are also resource and time limits. No hospital, whether private or public, has hundreds of laboratories, MRI machines, operating rooms and thousands of hospital beds available for each and every person all the time.

Besides, Americans also have to contend with long wait times for medical procedures within the private, for-profit healthcare world in the US.

It would be interesting to see how long Americans would have to wait for healthcare services in the US if everyone in the US had health insurance. I guarantee that even that Canadian tumor lady would take her ass back to Canada super-fast and wait for her surgery there, if this was so. Her wait in Canada would be a short blip compared to how long she’d have to wait in the US!

To drive the point home, let’s just compare the populations of Canada and the US:

Canada= 35.16 million (as of 2013) 
US= 318.9 million (as of 2014) 
 
So which country would make one wait longer to receive health care if the citizens of both countries had equal access to health care?

Of course wait times in the US would be longer.

So I rest my case.

Granted, countries with public, government-funded health care systems aren’t perfect. They also face some of the same constraints as private, for-profit systems.

But socialized healthcare systems are still far better than private, for-profit systems, mainly because they include everyone automatically. They don’t cater just to those able to afford health insurance, and ignore those who can’t.

The truth is, that those who know about how the US for-profit health care system works don’t want it at all, regardless of their complaints against their native ‘socialized’ healthcare systems.

The fact is that all these scary stories and other bullshit spread around within the US by the for-profit healthcare cartel against socialized healthcare are simply about protecting the for-profit healthcare cartel’s profits. That’s all that it was, is, and ever will be about for these filthy creatures.

A socialized healthcare system would threaten their profits and personal wealth, so they will fight it tooth and nail. They will make up all sorts of absurdities, lies, and nonsense to prevent it. They will trot out malcontents with sob-stories taken out of context, and cherry-pick information to serve their self-serving, greedy interests.

But what can be done to fix the broken healthcare system within the US that is failing so many, and consigning them to unnecessary pain and even death simply because they cannot afford to pay for health care?

1. Medicaid must be made to cover everyone, rich and poor, 100%; no exceptions. Income must also be eliminated as a determining factor for healthcare eligibility once and for all. Everyone is universally covered. If you pay taxes, you are 100% insured from the cradle to the grave.

2. Eliminate private insurers altogether. Hospitals and clinics can stay in private hands, but prices for services, medicine and other items are negotiated to be realistic, and waste in the form of unnecessary services is eliminated. This will significantly reduce expenses not only for the government and individuals seeking care, but also the overhead expenses of hospitals since they will need much less staff to process payment requests to only one entity- the US government- and only have to follow one set of rules. This is how it works in Canada, and the majority of Canadians are happy with it. 

3. If the US regime isn’t willing to socialize medical care altogether, then it must put into place stringent regulations as far as private health care goes, and enact price-controls to ensure people aren’t being fleeced, so that everyone can afford it and is included. The Netherlands has such a system, and it seems to work.

The US spends more money on the military, wars, and interventions than any other country. So money is clearly not the issue.

If the US put as much care into healing people as it does toward killing people, then the US would have the absolute best health care system in the world in which no one is left out.

The 'Liberal' Media

Throughout the years, there has been much confusion about the state of the media in the US.

From right-wing and conservative circles, we often hear the accusation of the ‘Liberal media.’

According to these circles, the mainstream media in the US is ‘liberal,’ meaning that it’s opposed to ‘conservative’ values, like God, guns, is pro-LGBT, supports abortion, is against the death penalty, war, military spending, wants socialized medicine, etc.

But in reality, the mainstream media isn’t liberal, and never was. The accusation was, and is, a myth.

Any news outlet, commentator or author who doesn’t serve as a propaganda and disinformation whore for the US regime and their corporate buddies is automatically branded as ‘liberal.’ This is done to discredit and shut down anyone who tries to present unpleasant and embarrassing facts about the US regime’s illegal and questionable deeds.

The phrase ‘Liberal media’ today refers to any news source which is openly critical of cherished US myths and delusions.

The truth is that the mainstream media in the US is neither liberal nor conservative. At most, there are liberal and conservative media niches within the US, but in general the media in the US is corporate media. This is the most accurate phrase to use, and it best reflects the reality of what, and who controls it.

Add to that the fact that certain media outfits are wholly-owned subsidiaries of defense companies. So to find out whose interests are being served, one must follow the money.

The corporate mainstream US media will toe and promote the US government propaganda line because their parent companies or owners have a vested financial interest in doing so.

The US government grants the mainstream media access, privileges, business, various favors, and protections from accountability that ultimately enrich the media owners’ fortunes. In return, the media owners use their control over the airwaves and news print to shill for, and defend disastrous and vile US government policies, especially when it comes to US foreign policy. They also lie for the US government.

It’s simply a case of one hand washing the other.

Notice how the mainstream media is always pro-war; how it amps up threats on cue from the State Dept.; how it goes into full demonization mode against any foreign leader that the US regime doesn’t like for whatever reason.

It doesn’t matter whether it’s a democratic or Republican-led regime; the charade continues regardless.

There is also a stunning absence of impartial investigative journalism into government policies and actions, and of individuals that have caused serious problems for the country. No hard questions are asked by the mainstream media journalists of US politicians at all.

This cannot be the result of simply incompetent journalism. These journalists know how to do their job. Just look at how they conduct themselves when interviewing any representative or leader of a country that is an ‘officially designated enemy’ of the US. These journalists suddenly flip on the courage and ask very hard-nosed questions, are condescending, and practically level accusations and threats against that foreign leader on-air. But such courage and confrontational behavior is totally missing when these same journalists interview an Obama, Hillary Clinton, or some other US regime representative. In these situations, these journalists suddenly forget how to do their job.

So there’s got to be something going on. And that something is the reality that the US mainstream media is willingly self-censoring itself for the benefit of the US government, in return for business and favors.

After all, if someone owns a TV news channel and a factory that makes bombs, what do you think will be promoted on that news channel? Will that person promote peace and non-intervention, or war?

It’s not hard at all to see what their priority will be.

No matter how wrong and illegal a war is, that owner will make sure that a pro-war angle is followed exclusively; that pro-war government officials and ‘experts’ are the only ones allowed on-air, that pro-war messages and propaganda prevails, that patriotic and militaristic themes are constant. A critic of the war, maybe two, may be invited on the channel, but only to be ganged up on, ridiculed and skewered by the pro-war ‘patriots’ for ‘entertainment’ purposes. We saw this in the run-up to the illegal war on Iraq in 2002-2003.

After all, the owner of the TV station will make millions, or billions from the sale of the bombs that will be used in that war.

The US doesn’t have a free mainstream media. It is censored and controlled for the most part, and important facts are being suppressed. A US news outlet that actually says what is really going on is usually obscure and ignored, or is labeled as ‘Liberal.’

Just the Facts!

The US is a land of contradictions and deceptions. To figure out what the truth really is, you have to simply take what is being said by the US regime and rotate it 180 degrees. Then you’ll have the truth.

The US regime has been suffering some pretty bad failures lately. The Turkish coup didn’t work out, and Aleppo, the largest Syrian city which for the past five years has served as a depot and clearinghouse for US-sponsored criminal goon squads, is about to be liberated by the Syrian forces and their allies once and for all.

Nevertheless, the perception and illusion of US success, and that all its policies are worth it has to be maintained. But there are no real principles or meaning behind US military power, it's just military power for the sake of US economic hegemony. The pentagon goons know they're full of it, and can't really do half of the things they say they can on paper and TV. The US regime can fool people with talk of 'defending freedom and democracy' and all that; the individual soldier can believe in it. But in reality it's not about any of this. Behind all US noble intentions are hidden lies and dishonorable aims. And that's why the US won't succeed in the long-run; no country can.

That's what this NATO and US world hegemony is all about: money. The US system needs a constant influx of plunder to keep itself afloat. Without new slaves the US economy will die, as we are witnessing now. This is why the US is so desperate to subjugate Russia and China. Without those two economies under the US regime's thumb, the US cannot survive much longer in the shape it's now. The US can't squeeze much out of their old vassals; they've been pretty much tapped out.

The US in the decades ahead has two choices: continue on trying to dominate the world and eventually crash and burn and lose its influence and power to others, or start rolling back its empire and wars now, and retain some influence.

Also, what we see is Russia and China sitting there and not invading and bombing countries and overstretching themselves, while the US is. This will result in the inevitable US imperial overstretch and fall. Then Russia and China just step in. This is why the US is so keen on provoking Russia and China into a conflict.

The US must keep everybody down at its level, or worse, or it will fall.

Killer Cops and Cop Killers

The US has been wracked lately with killer cops and cop killers striking back.

After overzealous, inbred cops tackled and shot unarmed people, there has been a rash of 9/11 calls and ambushes of cops by armed, angry blacks.

In the last 4 years, the number of unarmed people being killed by cops has reached unacceptable limits.

Videos of these shooting almost always show an unarmed person being shot, either while standing, running away, or after being tackled to the ground. In these cases, those shot weren’t armed and not even resisting arrest.

This increasing knee-jerk, homicidal behavior by cops is another sign of a sickness that pervades US society. There is no excuse or defense for this.

We can thank the skewed and psychopathic laws that allow cops to react in such excessive ways and not being punished, vast majority of the time.

We can also thank the increasing militarization of the US police forces by having them receive training from Israeli police.

The Israeli police operate in a violent apartheid state which occupies and represses Palestinians. The Israeli police forces are trained killers; they’re taught to kill, not protect. They protect by killing.

They also racially-profile Arabs as standard operative procedure, and are allowed to shoot Arabs with impunity. This defective policing culture is today being transmitted to US police forces against blacks.

This is absolutely not the right way to train US police, and all police departments must cease all training involving Israelis.

These cops who get shot by angry people deserve zero sympathy. This is the price they pay for their idiotic counterparts who shoot people for no good reason. It doesn’t matter if that particular cop who was killed never pulled a gun on anyone. The lesson has got to be learned.

These shootings of cops are a natural and understandable move. After all, the courts let these killer cops off the hook, or with light punishment. So where is the justice in that?

Hopefully, this targeting of cops will make them all think twice before pulling out their gun and shooting someone for no reason.

You do not pull a gun on someone unless they are clearly seen pulling a gun, or some other weapon on you, period!

That these cops continue to do so shows that it is not simply their personal decision. They are taught, and told to do this. And if they do these things repeatedly all over the country, then they were also told that they won’t be punished. It doesn’t matter what the police chief says or if they ‘resign.’ The laws and operating procedures have still not changed.

And why is it that with all the technology in existence today, no one has bothered to come up with a weapon that administers a non-lethal, albeit very painful projectile?

Why does someone necessarily have to be killed? Why not just incapacitate them to such a degree that they simply will not be in a state to react, but still alive to face justice?

This tit for tat murder of cops vs. civilians is getting serious, and may even start some type of a race war or insurrection, if it continues.

Same Old S*it

The on-going US election season has exposed a dirty truth about the US political system that most didn’t see before; although one still had to pay good attention to what was going on to catch it.

The truth is that there is not one lick of difference between the Democratic and Republican parties.

Consider the evidence.

Late in 2015 and early in 2016, when the Republican field of candidates was still well-stocked, the media, political pundits, and Republican Party ex-officials were falling over themselves to condemn Donald Trump.

The status-quo was up in arms against him, and even long-time neo-cons were lining up to denounce him as ‘dangerous’ and ‘wrong’ because Trump didn’t see eye-to-eye with them on foreign policy and US hegemony.

At the same time, these Republican neo-con operatives were also lining up to support Hillary Clinton, because they felt that she will continue the current broken and failed US policies of war and intervention.

This paradoxical behavior of veteran Republicans and arch neo-cons toward Trump and Clinton proves that when it comes to US hegemony, military power, regime changes and interventions, both parties are in total agreement.

This exposes the divide between the democrats and republicans as a cruel farce. They both aspire to the same things.

It exposes the Democratic Party as not the party of peace and progress, but warmongering and aggression, just like their republican counterparts.

These people in congress owe their wealth and influence to this system, so they will always go with the flow.

Don’t believe this? Look at what Bernie Sanders did recently. He capitulated to, and endorsed Hillary Clinton for President, after all that we know about that evil witch’s criminal behavior. There people don’t have any principles; it’s all just a game for them.

Fast-forward from January of 2016 to the Republican National Convention In July 2016, and what do we see and hear?

Creatures such as Rudy Giuliani and others, who were absolutely against Trump 5-6 months ago, are now taking to the convention floor and are endorsing Trump left and right with flowery speeches.

So, what happened? How did Trump go from ‘dangerous’ to the best choice in so little months?

Was there a private meeting where Trump was finally ‘scared straight?’ Or are these opportunists just playing nice in the hopes of getting favors from Trump, if he wins.

The US political system is a one-party circus. It all comes down to who will get to feed at the public trough for the next four years.

Electing any of these people is only going to make things worse. Voting for either Hillary or Trump is useless. These people won’t fix anything.

Better to stay home on election day with a 12-pack and relax.

The Lies and Fears of NATO

The NATO summit has just ended in Warsaw, and it seems like the US pimp Obummer, together with his European whores, are still stuck on stupid.

The conference was one big PR exercise in covering up internal divisions and serious operational problems that recently came to light after the Anaconda military exercise held in Poland. The knee-jerk communique was also the result of Russian political, diplomatic, and military successes against the US and their terrorist pals in Syria.

The final communique at the end of this anti-Russian circle-jerk was as follows:

‘In its final communique NATO accused Russia of “provocative military activities in the periphery of NATO territory” and “willingness to attain political goals by the threat and use of force”. The alliance said Moscow’s actions “are a source of regional instability, fundamentally challenge the alliance, have damaged Euro-Atlantic security, and threaten our long-standing goal of a Europe whole, free, and at peace.”’ 1

It is a statement of hypocritical proportions. NATO has expanded three times since 1999, up to Russia’s borders and now complains that Russia is ‘threatening’ NATO states that it borders?

And are not NATO’s actions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and elsewhere a source of instability?

The NATO cabal seems to always be 180 degrees from reality.

NATO also has the conceit and arrogance to criticize Russia of invading countries! Yes, the US and company have no conscience of their own, or a very bad memory. Such an accusation is also a very sick joke, and an insult to all those victims of US invasions, torture, and oppression in Afghanistan, Somalia, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, and elsewhere.

How many countries has the US attacked, invaded, and occupied in the last 25 years? How many has Russia? Hands down the US is the record holder here for the greatest amount. Russia stands at zero. 

What happened in the Caucasus in 2008 was started by ex-Georgian President Shaakashvilli-even according to a EU report on the matter. Crimeans voted in a free referendum to rejoin Russia at a time when Ukraine had no legally-elected government. In both cases, there was no Russian coercion in defiance of the wishes of the populations of those regions, but in harmony with them. Russia didn’t invade those countries and overthrow governments, like the US has done in Ukraine end elsewhere.

Obummer also has the gall to boast that he is the least war-like president, and less interventions happened under his watch than under previous US regimes. Surely, the millions of people made lifeless or miserable by Obama’s criminal interventions feel better about him not destroying as many countries as his predecessors.

By the way, if Obama managed to destroy a few less countries than his rotten predecessors, we can thank Putin’s diplomacy and courage for this. It is he who stared down the US from bloody imperial misadventures in Iran and a total destruction of Syria.

It is NATO that is threatening Russia. It is NATO that is expanding and building bases on Russia’s borders, not vice versa.

Are we to believe that the movement of Russian military forces on Russian territory is a threat, but US military exercises and bases in countries bordering Russia are okay?

NATO is long past its expiration date. It should’ve been mothballed after the fall of the Soviet Union. But it has been artificially kept on life-support; always coming up with some lame excuse to justify its unnecessary and destructive existence.

Wherever NATO goes, it causes mayhem. It looks for enemies, and when it can’t find any, it creates them. This is all done to keep itself alive, and keep taxpayer money going to weapons peddlers.

The fact that this NATO summit was held in Warsaw is no coincidence. It was done deliberately as a reaction to the new Polish government’s earlier criticism of the EU and its changing of the supreme court and media laws that sidelined pro-EU shills.

Worried that Poland may seek an independent course, the nervous EU and US threw the Poles a bone in the form of a small US military base and a reiteration of the US ‘commitment to Poland’s defense' from an imaginary Russian threat.

The Poles, always the cowardly Russia-hating push-overs when it comes to the west, were mollified, and will now shut up. Because as we know, these bases and ‘protection’ most likely came with strings attached, even if the media doesn’t tell us.

Poland has been strangely mute on any further EU criticisms lately. So we can pretty much see what happened behind the scenes.

There is also no doubt that the Polish government, regardless of political party, as well as the Polish military, are staffed with US agents and bought Polish spies. After all, if Germany found US spy cells within its own government in 2014 and 2015, Poland surely has a nest of them.

This also explains the stupid, Russophobic foreign policy of Poland, which has been one of the main losers from the sanctions Russia passed on the EU. A free, independent Poland led by real, courageous patriots who put Polish interests first would not work overtime to keep Russia as an enemy, but would come to some sort of an agreement with it. 

It is also a fact that countries like Poland serve only as a NATO frontline and buffer zone to slow down and occupy the enemy in the event of war, and give the US time to organize a defense of Western European states. That is E. Europe's role, as a firewall and sacrificial cow, and as a potential front.

What is also worrying is the official NATO communique in its entirety. It certainly throws a lot of red flags, and if read between the lines, it issues ominous warnings to the world.

Countering imaginary Russian threats is only the tip of the iceberg for the North Atlantic Terrorist Organization.

They plan to go further, with things like natural disasters, famine, human rights violations, discrimination against women and children, as well as internal political unrest in any country as an excuse for NATO’s involvement. Even internal policies of governments that US doesn’t like will be deemed as ‘threats’ ripe for NATO’s involvement, even if those policies don't threaten any other countries.
 
NATO is the main threat and danger facing Europe and the world, not Russia.

It is an organization that throughout its existence had the goal of keeping Russia and the rest of Europe divided and not at peace.

When it saw that this division was disappearing, it stirred up the Ukraine mess to provoke Russia and scare its European vassals into line with Russophobic paranoia to make them cough up more money for the US military-industrial complex, and pass sanctions on Russia.

This of course was done by the US to hurt the EU as well as Russia. The US wants to keep its bloody boot on Europe’s throat indefinitely, and not allow it to become economically better than the US. After all, the EU is a competitor of the US regardless of the ‘trans-Atlantic unity’ drivel regurgitated by US regime and their European vassals.

But Instances of true US ‘friendship have shown themselves whenever any EU country acts outside of US orders. France, UK, Hungary and others were threatened with law-suits and sanctions themselves if they refuse to follow US orders, or dare to separate themselves from US grip. Such is US friendship.

NATO is an organization which seeks to stifle independence in Europe and keep the continent under US control, despite the damage that this causes to individual European countries, and regardless of the fact that this contradicts European interests. In fact, according to the NATO communique, NATO aims to make its policies the policies of the EU itself. It seeks to basically control the EU, and make itself inseparable.

This hitching of NATO policy to the EU is most likely a face-saving measure caused by the BRExit fallout. This is also a desperate move by NATO keep other countries who are thinking of leaving the sinking EU ship within the union.

But regardless of the PR rhetoric and talking points about NATO ‘unity,’ there are disagreements among NATO members when it comes to Russia and other policies.

Also, some members don’t like and trust others. Greece and Bulgaria don’t trust Turkey; Bulgaria even going as far as rejecting the creation of a NATO Black Sea fleet on its territory.

Certain German politicians, as well as France and Italy disagree with anti-Russian policies and don’t see Russia as an enemy. Most of Germany, and other western European states don’t want their troops to be sent to defend Poland or the Baltic states.

But regardless of NATO’s public rhetoric which is only for the cameras and the useful idiots, NATO in reality knows it must cooperate with Russia, and privately these NATO honchos say the opposite when behind closed doors with Russian officials. Russia seems to understand this, or else it would react in stronger ways to NATO’s bullshit.

Even though Russia isn’t interested in war and confrontation, it seems like NATO wants to create the false perception that Russia is. A Russia that wants war only exists in the warped imaginations of the NATO cabal and their useful idiots in the media and the public.

There are cracks within NATO itself. They can setup their bases, stage color revolutions, and cry wolf against Russia, but NATO is not, and never will be in a state to attack Russia. In such an event, NATO’s performance is at best questionable.

It is quite doubtful that NATO would be able to fulfill its mandate of protecting everyone. That would mean the expansion of limited men and materials which would grind to a halt once member countries start dropping off. At best, NATO may inflict some limited damage on Russia, but it would suffer damage to its European member states, and loss of allies after Russian military moves in.

It is doubtful what would happen within the individual NATO states when faced with a Russian invasion. Studies have shown that most of the NATO troops in those countries would most likely flee, surrender, or be destroyed quickly. The peripheral NATO countries also are poor, and would be unable to afford resupplying themselves indefinitely, especially when supply routes are closed in the event of a war. It must be understood that all these weapons purchases by Poland and other E. European states are for parades and the news media photo-ops.

NATO may start out with some strong moves, but once Russia starts rolling, E. Europe would be left for dead, and the US and their western European allies would most likely roll back and just defend western Europe. It is highly doubtful if US, France, Britain would protect Poland in the event of a Russian onslaught. They failed to do so in 1939.

And in case anyone thinks that Japan and S. Korea would hit Russia from the East, forget it. Russia is watching them close, and then there’s the big elephant in the room named China. North Korea with its nukes is also there, ready to defend itself.

So any war between NATO and Russia would end in a stalemate and some sort of an agreement. Some NATO members would be taken out of NATO, most likely permanently, by any agreement between Russia and NATO after the dust settles.

Such a campaign may even be the end of NATO itself, as the member countries would realize that NATO’s protection is ineffective.

It can be said with a high degree of certainty that in a NATO-Russia confrontation, there would be no victor. Both sides would reach a point where the initial destruction would be too scary, and both sides would move to halt military operations by some agreement. NATO would most likely lose more than Russia, mainly current E. European member states. Russia only stands to lose whatever territory it may gain by its military operations.
And as recent history has shown, the US is always ready to compromise and halt fighting when it starts to suffer setbacks.

Of course, these are scenarios that would most likely come to pass if a hypothetical war between NATO and Russia was strictly conventional. If it goes nuclear, then there’s no point of discussing the results, as there would be nothing left to talk about or salvage. 

Russia will use nukes if overran; NATO knows this. Therefore, no victory can be had. In such a scenario, US missile shields would be as useless as bottle rockets.

These NATO honchos most likely know all this in the back of their minds, and it drives then nuts when they go to sleep at night. All these military exercises, PR shows and meetings, and anti-Russian demagoguery just serves to mask the weakness, fear, and helplessness of this useless organization.

It is also a reaction to the frustration of the US inability to run roughshod throughout the world as an unopposed hegemon due to Russian political, diplomatic, and military brilliance.





1. https://www.rt.com/news/350434-nato-war-russia-warsaw/