Dmitry Medvedev Sums It Up

About two performances

  1. Yesterday there was a Message from the President of Russia to the Federal Assembly, in which, among other things, it was announced the suspension of our participation in START-3. An overdue decision, the inevitability of which I noted last year. A decision that was pushed by the war declared by the United States and other NATO countries to our country. A decision that will have a huge resonance in the world in general and in the United States in particular. After all, the American establishment has reasoned so far like this: we will shit on you everywhere and in everything, we will supply huge amounts of weapons to the Kiev regime, we will work to defeat Russia, we will limit and destroy you, but strategic security is a separate topic. It is not related to the general context of relations between the United States and Russia. She’s almost a sacred cow.

This conclusion is worse than a crime – it is a gross mistake of the Americans. A mistake born of their mania grandiosa. Their sense of superiority and impunity. After all, it is obvious to all reasonable forces that if the United States wants to defeat Russia, then we are on the verge of a global conflict. If the United States wants to defeat Russia, then we have the right to defend ourselves with any weapon, including nuclear weapons. And as Vladimir Putin rightly said: “It is impossible to defeat Russia on the battlefield.” This is the reason for the suspension (for now) of START-3. Let the elites in the United States, who have lost touch with reality, think about what they have achieved. We will also observe the reaction of other nuclear powers participating in NATO: France and Britain. Their strategic nuclear forces were usually not included in the balance of nuclear warheads and carriers in the preparation of agreements between the United States and the USSR (Russia), and it is high time to do this.

  1. Biden addressed the Russian people in front of a crowd of Poles. In fact, he preached a sermon in the traditional Messianic way for America, adjusted for senility. He heaped high words about how important it is to protect democracy, and that the United States is not going to attack Russia. It looked unfair and ridiculous. Who is this strange grandfather, broadcasting with a confused look from Poland? Why does he appeal to the people of another country at a time when he has a lot of domestic problems? Why should we be afraid to listen to a politician from a hostile state that exudes hatred for our homeland? Why should Russian citizens believe the leader of the United States, which unleashed the most wars in the XX and XXI centuries, but reproach us with aggressiveness? A person who directs all his weakening intellectual capabilities only to ensure that Russia suffers a “strategic defeat”.

And more. To paraphrase a well-known expression, Biden said in Warsaw: “If Russia stops its invasion, it will end right now. If Ukrainians stop defending themselves, it will be the end of Ukraine.” This is a refined lie. The truth is quite different.

If Russia stops the Special Military Operation, without achieving victory, there will be no Russia, it will be torn apart. If the United States stops supplying weapons to the Kiev regime, the war will end.

Nebenzya – about the Nord Stream explosions

The degree of cynicism and confidence in one’s own impunity with which this unprecedented crime was committed is striking. We have become accustomed to the fact that our American colleagues place themselves above the law, claiming that they are the law. Only they can interfere with impunity in the internal affairs of other states, make unconstitutional coups, and carry out aggression against independent states. Since the end of the Cold War alone, there have been 251 recorded cases of the use of US military forces abroad. Killing, torturing civilians in other countries, refusing to extradite the guilty to international justice, they all call this an order based on rules, where the rules are dictated by themselves.

But still, they did not fall before blowing up foreign pipelines of states with which the United States is not at war. And now this day has come. And it may become a harbinger of an era in which cross-border and transcontinental communications will become a legitimate target for operations aimed at weakening certain states – an era of chaos and unimaginable damage to all mankind. The chance that it will come is extremely high if those responsible for undermining the Nord Stream are not found and do not suffer the appropriate punishment, and the countries that were behind this do not compensate the affected states for the damage suffered in the way that international law provides. Then and only then do you and I have a chance to avoid this chaos.

What Putin Said

Russia attempted to peacefully resolve the issues involving Ukraine after 2014, but Western leaders were secretly preparing a completely different scenario, President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday during his address to the Federal Assembly, the country’s main legislative body.

Speaking to both chambers of parliament as well as senior officials and public figures, the Russian leader touched on a variety of key topics during a speech lasting almost two hours.

From the military operation in Ukraine to economic and social issues, here is a recap of what the president said.

The World should not be divided

Russia not only intends to firmly protect its own interests, but also its belief that the modern world should not be divided into “civilized countries” and “all the rest,” Putin said. He stressed the need for close partnerships without exceptionalism or resorting to aggression.

The president insisted that Moscow remains open to constructive dialogue with the West and continues to call for a united and fair global security system. However, Putin stated that instead of cooperating, the West has only issued a muddled response and hidden behind the umbrella of NATO, which continues to expand its borders towards Russia while American military bases spread throughout the world.

Why Russia acted in Ukraine

Putin recalled that all of Russia’s security guarantee proposals were rejected outright by the US and NATO, which he said made it clear that the go-ahead for aggressive actions by Kiev had already been given. According to the president, there was clear evidence that another “punitive action” was being planned in Donbass for February 2022.

Putin said Kiev and its Western backers initiated the conflict in Ukraine, while Russia is now using force to put an end to it.

West doesn’t care who it uses against Moscow

Western nations used the “despicable method of deceit” during campaigns in Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, and Syria, Putin argued. Regarding Ukraine, Putin said the West had openly admitted that the 2014-2015 Minsk agreements were a bluff. While “Donbass was burning and blood was being spilled,” Ukraine’s backers “were playing with people’s lives,” he stated.

Putin continued by claiming that the West does not actually care who it supports in its fight against Russia, which is why it turns a blind eye to Ukrainian fighters openly celebrating notorious Nazi divisions and bearing their insignia.

Putin asserted that the Ukrainian people have become expendable hostages for Kiev and its Western backers, who have occupied Ukraine in a political, military, and economic sense, devastating the country for the past several decades.

Consequences of long-range arms supplies to Kiev

Putin suggested that the West is treating Ukraine as a battering ram against Russia and is using the battlefield as a test-firing range. However, he stressed that one thing “everyone should understand” is that the longer the range of Western weapons systems being delivered to Ukraine, the farther Russia will be forced to move the threat away from its borders. “It’s only natural,” said the president.

West wants a global conflict

Western elites no longer hide their true intentions and are openly calling for a “strategic defeat for Russia,” Putin added. He accused them of trying to transform a local conflict into a global confrontation, but argued that Russia will “react accordingly” to any threats.

At the same time, Putin insisted that the West recognizes that it cannot defeat Russia militarily, which is why it is launching increasingly aggressive information attacks against Russian culture, history, the Orthodox Church, and other traditional values.

Sanctions have failed

The West has not only opened a military and information frontline against Russia, but also an economic one, according to Putin. However, its efforts have backfired and ultimately failed, despite attempts to spark inflation, crash the ruble, and blatantly steal Russia’s foreign exchange reserves, he added.

“Anti-Russian sanctions are only a tool,” Putin observed, claiming that the goal, as Western officials themselves have stated, is to “force suffering” upon Russian citizens. “But they miscalculated, and Russia’s economy proved much more robust than the West expected,” the president argued.

Russia is not just adapting to new realities but is bringing its economy to new frontiers and working with its partners on establishing a stable and secure system of international settlements, independent of the dollar or other Western reserve currencies, Putin explained.

New START suspended

Putin stated that Moscow is well aware of the West’s involvement in attempts by Ukrainian forces to strike Russia’s strategic aviation. This, coupled with “absurd” requests from NATO to be allowed to inspect Russia’s defense facilities within the framework of the New START nuclear treaty, leaves Moscow no choice but to temporarily withdraw from the agreement, the president announced.

via RT

War Criminal Biden in His Own Words

Biden in 2023: “The appetites of autocrats are not to be indulged. They can only say “no”. No, you won’t take my freedom. No, you won’t take my country. A dictator seeking to revive his empire will never overpower the love of freedom. Brute force will never break the spirit of freedom, and Ukraine will never become a victim of Russia. Never”.

Biden in 1999: “It was me who suggested bombing Belgrade. It was I who suggested sending American pilots to blow up all the bridges on the Drina. It was I who suggested taking all their fuel supplies. It was I who suggested all these actions.”

Recognizing The War Is Lost, The ‘West’ Seeks An Exit

via MOA

U.S. President Joe Biden is in Kiev today to rescue his lunatic project of destroying Russia by proxy war. But there is no good way to do that.

A review of ‘western’ media shows that the inevitable outcome of the war is now recognized. The only still open alternatives are to risk a large nuclear war or to retreat from ‘western’ dreams of its permanent hegemony.

Few ‘western’ officials will admit that the war is lost, that Russia has won in Ukraine. But it has. It had won the war when it successfully trapped the Ukrainian army into a war of attrition.

The Russian commentator Sacha Rogers writes (in Russian, machine translation):

This war has already been won (moreover, what is most offensive for various “unrecognized geniuses”, without their participation and contrary to their foolish ideas of how it should be won). It was won at the moment when, instead of a highly maneuverable war, our General Staff imposed a positional “standing” with an attrition war on the Armed Forces of Ukraine.Strictly by the textbook: Attrition warfare is a military strategy consisting of belligerent attempts to win a war by wearing down the enemy to the point of collapse through continuous losses in personnel and material.

Ukraine has already lost two armies and it is begging for a third one. But the ‘West’ is unable to deliver it:

Less than a quarter of the modern battle tanks the West has promised to Ukraine are likely to arrive in time to counter an anticipated Russian spring offensive.Kyiv is expecting its supporters to send up to 320 western tanks in total but estimates suggest barely 50 will reach the front lines by the start of April, prompting concerns they will not be enough to have a substantial impact on the fighting.

The recognition that the Ukraine has lost the war is creating a panic in those quarters that are committed to ‘western’ uni-polarity.

The Economist warns of the loss of the ‘West’s authority’:

Ukraine’s future still hangs in the balance—and is likely to remain uncertain for years to come. Mr Putin may accept a ceasefire at some point out of expedience, but his overhaul of Russian society is geared entirely towards aggression abroad and repression at home. Any conceivable end to the shooting will therefore require strong Western security guarantees and large and lasting transfers of arms and financial aid—almost as if a second, much bigger Israel had appeared on Europe’s eastern borders. Some European leaders argue that requires full NATO membership. If reconstruction of Ukraine were to fail, and its economy to falter, then Ukrainian democracy would start to fail, too.

Only a third of the world’s population lives in countries that have both condemned Russia for its invasion and also imposed sanctions on it, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit, our sister organisation. Most of them are close allies of America. The rest tend to see the war as a contest between autocrats and hypocrites.

Even countries that think that Mr Putin’s invasion was reprehensible might still conclude that Western power is on the wane if it fails to succour Ukraine. But given arms, money and political support Ukraine may yet prevail. Through courage and by the power of their example, the Ukrainian people have earned that chance. There could be no better investment in Western security.

An editorial in the Washington Post is blowing the same horn:

To allow an outcome that rewards the Kremlin in any way would be a moral travesty. It would also deal a potentially lethal blow to the principle on which Western stability and civilized international conduct rests: that sovereign states cannot be invaded, subjugated and subjected to mass slaughter with impunity.

(Ever heard of Yugoslavia? Or Iraq?)

To thwart Russia and safeguard Ukraine’s sovereignty, the United States and its European allies have little choice but to intensify their military, economic and diplomatic support for Kyiv. That means equipping Ukrainian forces with more decisive weapons and in greater numbers, imposing more aggressive sanctions on Moscow and galvanizing a more muscular international coalition to isolate and ostracize Russia.

That agenda is urgent; the status quo of relatively static battle lines is untenable.

In the New York Times one David French warns that America Can’t Go ‘Wobbly’ on Ukraine:

Yet the outcome of the war is simply too important — to America as well as Ukraine — to allow our support to falter. On the war’s anniversary it’s time for a concerted effort to persuade Americans of a single idea: We should support Ukraine as much as it takes, as long as it takes, until the Russian military suffers a decisive, unmistakable defeat.

On the one side of the current discussion you have those, see above, who think of the outcome of the war in absolute terms. The U.S. must win in the proxy war it has caused, no matter what. But there are alternatives. The will require to acknowledge that the short period of U.S. global hegemony has ended. The time for multi-polarity has come.

Count Secretary of State Anthony Blinken as one who is unwilling to admit that As soon as China ‘threatened’ to negotiate peace in Ukraine did he accuse it -without evidence- of aiding Russia in the war:

In his interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press,” which was taped on Saturday night for broadcast on Sunday, Mr. Blinken said the United States would soon be offering new information to demonstrate Beijing was “strongly considering providing lethal assistance to Russia.”

Mr. Wang has been using the conference in Munich as a platform to tell European leaders and diplomats that China is ready to bolster ties with them and to try to play a role in ending the war in Ukraine. In his public remarks on Saturday, he said that China would soon offer a peace proposal to stop the fighting. But Mr. Blinken warned in a separate event against the allure of cease-fires that Russia might exploit to regroup for new offensives.

China has not yet supported Russia in the war. But if Russia would seem to lose the war China would have to intervene. It would otherwise become the very next country that the U.S. would try to obliterate.

The U.S. fell into an escalation trap when it has allowed the Ukraine leadership to lead the country towards disaster:

By virtue of its decision, Ukraine, along with its closest partners in Poland and the Baltic nations, became the classic “trojan ally” — smaller countries whose desire for regional clout against the extant middle power (Russia) is predicated on their ability to persuade an external great power and its global military network (here, the US and, by extension, Nato) to step in militarily on their behalf. As we noted in our study, “this comes at great risk to the regional balancer and at great cost to the external great power”. For ultimately, the arrangement depends on “the threat of the use of force and military intervention” by that external great power, without which the regional balancer would fail.

That is exactly where we are. Ukraine’s pathological hater Vladimir Zelenski is leading the U.S. into an ever deeper commitment to win by ultimately destroying Russia.

But any direct confrontation with Russia would lead to nuclear war. The U.S. can not risk that. It is therefore pushing Ukraine to speed up its commitment to suicide:

As the fighting continues to rage, both sides of the Atlantic fear that Russia is finding its footing, Ukraine may be overmatched in certain parts of the east and south and the West’s pipeline of weapons will slow to a trickle. Biden leaves Monday for Poland to meet with President Andrzej Duda and other key NATO leaders. U.S. officials believe that Ukraine’s defense is about to hit a critical phase with Russia launching its much-telegraphed offensive. The Biden administration has urgently pressed President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s administration to consolidate its gains — and perhaps launch its own counterstrike.The White House has also told Zelenskyy’s team, per multiple officials, to prepare for the offensive now, as weapons and aid from Washington and Europe flow freely, for fear that backing from Ukraine’s European neighbors could be finite.

But the reality Biden will confront in Poland is that Zelenskyy has made clear that he will not negotiate until all of Ukraine’s territory is restored — all but ensuring that the war will stretch into the distant horizon.

“We’re in this for the long-haul and it’s going to grind on for quite some time,” said Rachel Rizzo, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Europe Center. If Western support starts to fade away, “there’s no denying that it will have an effect on both the outcome and the length of the war.

You don’t say …

The ‘West’ is going wobbly because it can not provide enough for long enough to give the Ukraine even a small chance to win the war:

“We will continue to try to impress upon them that we can’t do anything and everything forever,” said one senior administration official, referring to Ukraine’s leaders. The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomatic matters, added that it was the administration’s “very strong view” that it will be hard to keep getting the same level of security and economic assistance from Congress.“’As long as it takes’ pertains to the amount of conflict,” the official added. “It doesn’t pertain to the amount of assistance.”

The critical nature of the next few months has already been conveyed to Kyiv in blunt terms by top Biden officials — including deputy national security adviser Jon Finer, deputy secretary of state Wendy Sherman and undersecretary of defense Colin Kahl, all of whom visited Ukraine last month.

CIA Director William J. Burns traveled to the country one week ahead of those officials, where he briefed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on his expectations for what Russia is planning militarily in the coming months and emphasized the urgency of the moment.

Faster please, is what the U.S. is telling Ukraine. Hurry up because we will soon have to end our support.

But the Ukrainian army does not have the material and manpower ready to launch some kind of counter offense that would have a chance to be win the war. It doesn’t even have enough to regain some significant territory.

The third army it would need would have to be much stronger than the two armies it has already lost. And its not coming.

So what is the ‘West’ going to do? Deliver more wonder weapons?

President Biden is set to travel to Poland this week to discuss Western efforts to help Ukraine resist Russia’s invasion, as pressure builds on his administration to provide Kyiv with F-16 fighter jets. Poland’s prime minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, said in a weekend interview with CBS’s “Face the Nation” he believes that eventually “there will be fighter jets from the West” — as was the case with other advanced weapons whose provision was “unimaginable” when the war began.

I have news for Mr. Morawiecki. The first F-16 flew in 1974. To think that 50 year old airplanes will have a chance against Russia’s first class air defenses and fifth generation fighter planes is lunacy.

Fighter planes are flown by using trained reflexes, not by conscious decisions. Pilots get trained for that. Once those reflexes are adopted to a specific plane, and its philosophy, it takes years to retrain them for a different one. Ukrainian pilots in F-16s anytime soon is wishful thinking.

But maybe Poland, in its futile bid to be Ukraine’s savior, can convince its own pilots to suicide themselves in an environment that is saturated with Su-57s fighter jets and S-400 air defenses. Or it can send its own army to the front. The U.S. would surely welcome another country’s commitment to suicide for the greater good of its dollar hegemony.

But I don’t think that it will come to that.

The U.S. needs an exit strategy from the war. To recognize that the only alternative is total war and nuclear annihilation, as the Economist, WaPo and NYT opinions imply, is the first step to developing one.

America’s Dirtiest Secrets

by Larry Romanoff via Unz Review

This essay is the Introductory Chapter to a new series of E-books which will very soon be published on bluemoonofshanghai.com.

When I began doing my historical research in earnest perhaps 20 years ago in Shanghai, my interest was driven by primarily two things: one was the incessant American propaganda flooding the world, and particularly China, with an entirely unjustified air of moral superiority that masked all of the American crimes and atrocities committed over centuries. The second was the irritating flood of negative propaganda about China, filling the print and airwaves about China’s mostly imaginary inferiority to the exceptional Americans. From this, I intended to write a series of articles, and perhaps a book or two, that illuminated the opposite side of these two pictures. This is an oversimplification, but my research and writing interests were limited to an attempt to rectify the standard narrative of “China bad; US good”.

But near the beginning of this enterprise, I encountered a statement that said, “The history of the world is the history of the Jews.” That remark registered on me and remained in my memory because it startled me and because it made no sense to me at the time. However, as I progressed with my research into things Chinese and American, I would occasionally encounter references to Jews but, at the time, I had absolutely no interest whatever in the Jews, and I initially would delete those references. In my mind, I had a clean story line which I was pursuing and those increasingly occasional references to the Jews were contaminating my story line and confusing my approach. But eventually I had to realise that the references to the Jews were not contamination but were in fact the real story line.

As one example, I was researching the opium travesty inflicted upon China by – as we were all taught – “the English”. But as I delved deeper into the historical record, I was surprised to discover that “the English” had nothing to do with the opium (except as military enforcer) and that the entire opium landscape was 100% Jewish, primarily Rothschild and Sassoon, with Kadoorie and a few other families. Those families may have held British passports, but they were all Jews and not “Englishmen“. This is also true of the HSBC bank which was created solely to launder the Jews’ drug money – a talent in which it still specialises today. The same pattern appeared to evolve in almost any historical topic I chose to investigate. I was, as we all were, taught, indoctrinated, propagandised and browbeaten to believe that the Russian Revolution was really Russian, and I was very surprised to learn that it was 99.9% Jewish, and that “Russians” had nothing to do with it except as victims. Similarly, I was taught the two World Wars were caused by Germany and that gallant little England prevailed over an evil enemy, but was again surprised to learn that it was the European Jews who contrived mightily to bring about both World Wars, that in fact Germany resisted war until the very end, and was the victim of a massive hate campaign by the Jews who wanted it destroyed.

In an earlier essay, I ended with these words:

The Boer Wars were a British story, but the manuscript was written entirely in Jewish handwriting. In like fashion, the two World Wars, the British East India Company, the unconscionable looting, famines, and slaughters of India, and China’s opium century with its vast atrocities of slaughter, misery, and slave-trafficking, were “British stories”, but the manuscripts for these were also written entirely in Jewish handwriting. Similarly, the stories of Yugoslavia, Greece, Iraq, Libya, and Syria today are “American stories”, but these also were written entirely in Jewish handwriting.


The blithe optimism demonstrated by the planners of the invasion of Iraq is still capable of taking one’s breath away. (Photo: Lisa M. Zunzanyika / Flickr Commons). Source

This is where we are today. These several volumes were originally to be titled, “America’s Dirtiest Secrets”, but that title no longer strictly applies because there is no sensible way to separate the actions of the Americans from their Jewish masters who gave the orders. For example, we know the media stories of the US hijacking of Iraq and believed this was done to remove a dictator. But our perception is severely altered when we learn the invasion was done entirely on Jewish orders, that the so-called “Provisional President” of Iraq – Paul Bremer was a Jew and was taking all his orders from the Jews in the City of London, and that further those Jewish bankers have confiscated all of Iraq’s assets and are taking – free – more than 2/3 of Iraq’s oil. Likewise, we were taught it was the British military (with a bit of French help) that looted the 10 million priceless artifacts from China’s Summer Palace (the Yuanmingyuan) and then utterly destroyed it. But again, our perception changes when we learn the British did so under the orders of the Jews Rothschild and Sassoon, and that a great many of those priceless artifacts ended up in Jewish hands and remain there to this day.


Professor Lindemann (left) on an inspection with Churchill, 1941

In similar fashion, we were all taught about the famous British aviator “Bomber Harris” who won eternal fame for the incendiary carpet-bombing of countless dozens of German cities like Dresden, creating firestorms that incinerated millions of German civilians in one of the world’s greatest wartime atrocities. But again, our perception is severely altered when we learn that it was a Jew named Frederick Lindemann, sent by the Rothschilds as an “advisor” to Churchill, who brought with him the notion of carpet-bombing civilians with incendiary bombs, and that Churchill simply obeyed his Jewish masters in executing this program to help effect “the total destruction of Germany” that the Jews wanted. In like fashion, we were taught that the US dropped the atomic bombs on Japan to hasten the end of the war and “to save lives”. But again, our conceptions are thrown in disarray when we learn that it was a Jew, Bernard Baruch, ostensibly “the most powerful man in America” at the time, who not only chose Japan as the target for these bombs, but also personally selected the cities to be incinerated. Our conceptions are even more challenged when we learn that Baruch’s motivation may well have been retaliation to both Japan and Nagasaki for their expulsion of all the Jews prior to the war. (See End Notes)


Phan Thi Kim Phuc, burned with napalm at age of 9. Source

And with both Europe and especially with Vietnam, in the application of napalm for incinerating civilians, it was indeed the Americans who extensively applied napalm during World War II, in “vast but historically-deleted genocidal incendiary attacks both in Europe and on Japanese cities, as well as during the wars in Korea and Vietnam”. But it was a Jewish chemist named Louis Fieser who developed napalm in a secret laboratory at Harvard University in 1942, and America’s Jewish masters who engineered its use on civilians. Even worse, in Vietnam, the locals discovered they could evade incineration by diving into any body or container of water to extinguish the flames. But it was another Jew, again at Harvard, who engineered the infusion of napalm with white phosphorus, which cannot be extinguished once lit, and will burn a man right through to the bones even under water. In all cases, the Americans did the dirty deeds, but they were “just following orders” from their Jewish overlords.


Independence Day, 1942: the first field test of napalm, behind Harvard Business School. Photograph courtesy of Harvard University Archives/ Louis Fiester, The Scientific Method<

And we realise, as with all such events in the past, that the American military is, just as the British military was doing in the past, functioning as “The Bankers Private Army”. And thus, in real terms, there is no sensible way to separate the actions – the “Dirtiest Secrets” of the Americans – from the “Dirtiest Secrets” of the Jews who issued the Americans and British their marching orders. We cannot disassociate the Mafia boss from his own orders executed by his own underlings.

And thus, while in these books we will be apparently (and superficially) examining America’s Dirtiest Secrets, there will in almost every instance be a distinct under-layer of Jewish influence and control. It is true we will see a few occasions or events where the Americans appeared to act independently – as in the hijacking of Hawaii – with no apparent evidence of Jewish involvement, but these are very few. And so, what we are really discussing and exposing in these pages are the Jews’ Dirtiest Secrets, and we will see that in virtually every instance the Jews operate admirably and very efficiently with what they call “A Gentile Front”, with some non-Jew apparently in charge but with a full complement of Jews in the background instigating, inciting, and ordering Gentiles to execute their plans.


The censorship board. George Creel is seated at far right. Harris & Ewing/Library of Congress. Source

One striking such example you will read about is US President Wilson’s Creel Commission, which perpetrated an astonishingly intense propaganda campaign designed to create a “white-hot hate” for Germans and lead Americans into a World War no one wanted. Creel was selected by Wilson’s Jewish handlers, quite likely by the so-called “Colonel” House, who was a Jew and whose real name was Huis, but it was the Jews Lippman and Bernays who were actually in control of the entire effort. This Jewish manipulation was so effectively done that Creel became the lightning rod for all the historical disapprobation while Bernays is celebrated today as “The father of public relations” in America. In fact, Bernays, the nephew of Sigmund Freud, was the Father of War Marketing, a template invented and executed by the Jews in the most despicable manner imaginable.

In many cases, these situations include historical events that have been so deeply buried by the Jewish media and Jewish book-publishing industries that perhaps not one person in a million has any knowledge of their existence. One such situation consists of the unremitting and unconscionable atrocities inflicted on Germany and the German people during – but especially after – both World Wars, atrocities committed primarily by the Americans but done under the orders of their Jewish masters. This was so widespread – and so true – that today it is illegal in Germany for anyone to even attempt to research atrocities committed against Germans. The reason is that anyone attempting such research would quickly discover that it was the Jews who were responsible for all those atrocities, by both hate propaganda and direct influence, and the Jews naturally don’t want those truths escaping confinement. Thus, the German government was forced to pass a law rendering illegal any investigation into such matters, and most German people today have no knowledge of the incredible betrayals and atrocities inflicted upon them by the Jews. They are instead taught by Jewish-authored books and by Jewish university professors, aided immensely by the Jewish-controlled mass media, that it was Germans who inflicted atrocities on the Jews.


‘We Hated What We Were Doing’_ Veterans Recall Firebombing Japan – The New York Times

Another such example is the incendiary carpet-bombing of nearly 100 Japanese cities– long after Japan had agreed to surrender – carried out by the American Curtis LeMay and resulting in the deaths of about 50% of the population of all those cities, done in the same manner as the Jews arranged for Germany and with the same blood-thirsty determination to utterly destroy Japan and the Japanese as they had for Germany and the German people. This immense and unconscionable atrocity, which resulted in the deaths of at least 10 million civilians – almost all women and children – was so heavily excised from history, including the re-writing of all Japanese history books, that almost no one in Japan has any knowledge of it, and no one outside Japan either. The excision in this case was so total that even Japan’s national population statistics were completely forged, fabricated, and re-calculated after the war, to entirely bury the fact of one of the greatest war-time atrocities in history.

The Japanese also do not research atrocities committed against Japan because they have been taught by their Jewish masters, as in Germany, the same things and for the same reasons. Nobody today in Japan has any knowledge of the involvement of the Jews in their destruction. This is not to dismiss atrocities that were indeed committed by the Japanese against others, but to illuminate the fact that the Jews committed much worse atrocities against the Japanese, and yet have such near-total control over the media, over book-publishing, and over the government itself, that these events have been totally excised from the historical record and the knowledge is deleted from the world’s consciousness. Again, this condition is much abetted by “the Gentile Front” where the Jews used the Americans to perpetrate these horrendous crimes while remaining hidden in the background. And again, let’s not forget that it was a Jew – Bernard Baruch – who chose Japan as the victim for the new atomic bombs and who personally selected the cities to be incinerated, almost certainly done as punishment for Japan’s prior eviction of all the Jews.

It would be of use to you to read two of my previous E-books on Propaganda and the Media[1]

and Bernays and Propaganda[2]

, to help gain an appreciation of some of the methods used by the Jews to ensure silence (and ignorance) about past events. One of the tenets of propaganda is that we have a powerful tendency to believe the first thing we read or hear about a topic, especially if those statements are repeated a number of times. Later, even when faced with incontrovertible proof, facts that cannot be disputed, proving that our now-accepted beliefs are in fact false, we are surprisingly reluctant to change our minds, and we will “hesitate and waver and continue to believe there must be some other explanation”. Our minds are apparently unable to accept that we have believed lies.

This is important because the Jews use this to great advantage to pre-empt the discovery of their atrocities and prevent rational thought. Typically, if knowledge of their past crimes is showing signs of escaping historical confinement, the Jews will use this propaganda tactic to “get there first”, with some Jewish author quickly writing a book or treatise on the subject that is replete with lies and falsified history that attempts to exclude the Jews from involvement and, if at all possible, to blame the victim.

When the truths of China’s opium travesty were beginning to creep out of the sarcophagus and into the daylight of public knowledge, a Jewess named Julia Lovellwas there with a book titled Opium War in which Jews are not even mentioned and which she categorised as a “tragic-comedy”, the hundred or so million Chinese being killed by the Jews apparently being funny to her. But a great many Americans and others, unfamiliar with the true circumstances and never having read anything else, will tend to believe this woman’s despicably false version of events and the Jews will perhaps be spared exposure.

Another such situation occurred when the truth of the mysterious depopulation of Easter Island was beginning to escape confinement. That truth seems to be that it was Jewish slave traders who kidnapped virtually the entire population of Easter Island as slaves to work their guano mines in Peru. Immediately upon this leakage, a Jew named Jared Diamond from the University of California was there with a book explaining that the Easter Islanders simply had some violent disagreement among themselves and killed each other off. Diamond was ridiculed by other academics for his foolish theory that “had not a shred of evidence to support it”, but his book wasn’t written for academics. It was written for the great unwashed of the US who had no knowledge of these events and would likely accept Diamond’s false version. And once again, the Jews might be spared exposure.

The same thing happened again when details began to emerge and leak about the Holland Tulip Bubble having been entirely staged by Jewish ‘bankers’, what with their futures market and all the rest, and not at all a “public mania” as we have been told, but a deliberate attempt to take advantage of public greed and gullibility and empty half the bank accounts in Holland. Once again, immediately on the risk of these leaks becoming public there was a female Jewish author on hand to write a “definitive” work on the topic which oddly made no mention of Jews, but furthermore claimed that no financial losses had occurred to anyone. In fact, this Jewess solemnly claimed that she had access to all the records in Holland and that through the most diligent search she found records of only a few people in Holland who had gone bankrupt during that time, and all those were bankrupt due to “property speculation“ and nothing to do with tulips. In real life, that so-called “bubble“ bankrupted probably half the people in Holland, but once again the Jews are there to pre-empt the truth and to propagate an entirely falsified version of history to protect themselves from exposure.

I have written elsewhere that at least 90%, and maybe even 95%, of everything that you know, or think that you know, or that you believe to be true about history, is wrong. To re-state another way, if we were to take the history of the entire world for the past 500 years and condense it into a history book of 100 pages, at least 50 of those pages would be blank. This is the amount of history – almost entirely involving the Jews – that has been so thoroughly excised from the historical record that it has literally evaporated from human consciousness with almost no living persons having any knowledge of it. And of the remaining 50 pages in this book, probably 45 are so extensively Photoshopped, sanitised, twisted, with crucial details omitted, that they are largely a work of fiction. And of course, anyone attempting to open this historical sarcophagus and expose the contents, is denounced as a deranged revisionist spreading misinformation. And, if the Jews are at all mentioned in this “revisionism”, we have the added attraction of being labeled an “anti-Semitic, holocaust-denying, Nazi Jew-hater”. Most of those souls attempting this historical illumination have very often paid with their careers, their reputations, their bank accounts, sometimes with their freedom and, in some cases, with their lives. These Mafia overlords in the City of London, the Khazar “so-called” Jews, are today just as brutal, savage, and filled with contempt for humanity as they were 1,000 years ago.

David Edwards was quoted in the “Third World Traveler“ as having written:

”Even open-minded people will often find themselves unable to take seriously the likes of Noam Chomsky, Edward Herman, Howard Zinn and Susan George on first encountering their work; it just does not seem possible that we could be so mistaken in what we believe. The individual may assume that these writers must be somehow joking, wildly over-stating the case, paranoid, or have some sort of axe to grind. We may actually become angry with them for telling us these terrible things about our society and insist that this simply ‘can’t be true‘. It takes real effort to keep reading, to resist the reassuring messages of the mass media and be prepared to consider the evidence again.”

This is the condition we face today in dealing with these recovered historical truths. In the case of the Jews, they know the truth but are frantic and nearly desperate to keep it buried and under confinement, which is why they so vengefully and viciously attack en masse whenever these facts emerge into daylight. With the Americans, their ignorance of their own nation’s criminality is founded on a blind faith and conviction based on a century of clever Jewish propaganda that is almost always flatly contradicted by the facts. But even citizens of the victim nations – like Germany – suffer enormous shock and disbelief when confronted with the historical truths of their own country, because the Jews and the Jewish media have for nearly 100 years browbeaten them with a totally false historical narrative. Friends sent to German acquaintances my articles on the Jews’ 1933 worldwide boycott of Germany and some related items, with those Germans replying that they found even those brief articles too painful to read at one sitting because, while the evidence was incontrovertible, it contradicted everything they’d been taught all their lives about themselves and their country, and the shock of learning that the things they “knew” were all lies, was emotionally too painful to bear.

At the same time, the world has been subjected to a century or more of outrageously false positive propaganda about the Jews, an almost incomprehensible volume of rose-tinted misinformation about the Jews as the world’s impoverished, misunderstood, persecuted “chosen ones“. In truth, there is little about the Jews and Israel today that is not based on fabricated historical mythologies, buried history, biased presentations, facts twisted so badly as to be often unrecognisable. Probably 95% of what the world knows about the Jews, their history, their massive crimes spanning centuries, their astonishing contempt for both humanity and truth, their conduct in international affairs, is not only wrong, but violently wrong. And to the same extent, the world has also been subjected to enormously and brutally false negative propaganda and misinformation about other nations – about the Jews’ victims, an equally incomprehensible volume of black-tinted information whereby the Jews typically seek to blame their victims for the atrocities perpetrated against them.

These buried historical truths are the content of my books and articles, the history of the world (or parts of it) as it really was, and is, harsh provable truths and documented realities without the vast carpet of propaganda, jingoism, and misinformation that Jewish media power has used to blanket and blind the world for well over a century.

END NOTES

The incendiary bombing of German working-class neighborhoods was planned in detail by the Jews. Since at least the early 1900s, Rothschild had owned most of the armament and munitions factories in Germany. It was through those that he supplied Japan (and Russia too) with the weapons for their war in 1905. During the Second World War the Jews didn’t want all their factories bombed to rubble when the Allies began flying over Germany. Their solution was to kill all the factory workers instead but leave the factories untouched. And it was the Jew Frederick Lindemann, sent by Rothschild to Churchill as an advisor, who brought the scheme to him. We have records of Lindemann’s submission of his plan to the war cabinet urging this method and suggesting that “greater flesh-incineration-per-bomb could be achieved” that way. This is further documented by a memo dated March 30, 1942, from Lindemann to Churchill that resulted in those intense terror-bombing campaigns of German civilians. The working-class neighborhoods were high-density, with these incendiary munitions creating natural intense firestorms that incinerated virtually every living thing in many of them. The British and the Americans, obeying the plans of their Jewish leaders, executed one of the most barbaric and inhuman atrocities of the war.

As I discuss in my essay on Japan, where the same was done there, the country’s population statistics were heavily forged, fabricated, and recalculated after the war to bury the evidence of these atrocities. I am almost certain the same was done with Germany. I haven’t the resources or time to delve into this with Germany, and researching atrocities against Germans is now illegal in Germany, but it is almost a certainty that Germany’s population statistics were massaged in the same was as those of Japan, to hide the truth. There had to have been many many millions of civilians killed in these raids, which were nothing more than an inhumanly deliberate attempt to depopulate Germany. And this doesn’t include the normal war casualties nor the 12 million to 15 million German civilians killed after the war from execution, starvation and migration, nor does it include Eisenhower’s Death Camps nor the perhaps additional million civilian deaths from Operation Paperclip.

*

Mr. Romanoff’s writing has been translated into 32 languages and his articles posted on more than 150 foreign-language news and politics websites in more than 30 countries, as well as more than 100 English language platforms. Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new anthology ‘When China Sneezes’. (Chapt. 2 — Dealing with Demons).

His full archive can be seen at

https://www.bluemoonofshanghai.com/ and https://www.moonofshanghai.com/

He can be contacted at:

2186604556

NOTES

[1] Bernays and Propaganda

https://www.bluemoonofshanghai.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/BERNAYS-AND-PROPAGANDA-.pdf

[2] Propaganda and the Media

https://www.bluemoonofshanghai.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/ENGLISH-PROPAGANDA-and-THE-MEDIA.pdf

US vs Russia Artillery Fire Power

The United States currently produces 14,000 155mm artillery shells per month, and plans to increase this to 90k in 2024.

Russia, meanwhile, produced 1.7 million until beginning of 2022, increased their rate to 3.3 million in 2022, and further plans for 5 million per annum by 2024. If the reports of China moving to directly supply lethal aid are accurate, the firepower advantage of the RuF will grow wider yet.

Meanwhile, NATO countries have transferred to Ukraine 1,170 air defense systems, 440 tanks, 1,510 infantry fighting vehicles, 655 artillery systems since December 2021, according to the data of the Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation.

Most of this equipment has already been destroyed, the department added.

Not a Minute to Lose

via Gilbert Doctorow

Yesterday Russian television (Sixty Minutes) showed video recordings taken at the opening of the Munich Security Conference. Stomach churning scenes of Nancy Pelosi kissy-kissy with Annalena Baerbock, of everyone gladhanding Ukrainian Foreign Affairs Minister Dmytro Kuleba and Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov. The Ukrainian delegation to the Conference forms the second largest after the USA. Thirty U.S. Senators! The organizers have found worthy replacements for Sergei Lavrov: Khodorkovsky and Kasparov, who no doubt would be given central roles in any puppet regime installed by Washington in the event the Russians lose the war.

This surely was the single biggest concentration of evil in one building on our planet.

Today in the morning I watched a BBC feature news report on their own British soldiers of fortune fighting in Ukraine. Incredible. These degenerates are lionized. The only thing missing was distribution of medals to them by King Charles. That surely will come in a week or two.

Let us be clear about it: day by day this war in and about Ukraine is taking on resemblance to the Spanish civil war which preceded the outbreak of WWII. Russians are quietly reporting the existence of foreign volunteers serving on their side, including 16 Finns! And the North Koreans are said to have offered to send up to 200,000 soldiers to serve on the Russian side.

Meanwhile Euronews was reporting on the plans for a war crimes tribunal to be set up in the Hague in July. The purpose of this kangaroo court will be to enable the transfer to Ukraine of the seized assets of Russian oligarchs and of the 350 billion in Russian state reserves that are now frozen. By any measure this would constitute a declaration of war by the whole of Europe against Russia. In this context, the 8 billion dollars destroyed in the Nord Stream pipeline bombings look like kid stuff.

Oh, yes, this morning I find that the Iran Press TV video I recorded yesterday is blocked. Try it to see if it works in your area: http://www.urmedium.com/c/presstv/122019

Regrettably, it is clear we are in the antechamber before the onset of a generalized war when all hell breaks loose. There is not a minute to lose to bring out the fire extinguishers.

I wish the speakers and attendees of tomorrow’s Rage Against the War Machine demonstrations in Washington, D.C. and in San Francisco bon courage. The general public must be roused from its apathy. There is not a minute to lose.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2023

‘China and Ukraine: A Time for Truth’


For understanding what is happening in the world today, as the Sino-Russian partnership displaces American power globally, this chart is fundamental.

The ultimate means of a nation to wage war and exert economic influence successfully is its industrial capacity. In this vein then it’s notable that:

▪️China alone matches the Western Bloc of the United States and Europe in productive output.

▪️ When joined by Russia, this becomes a decisive industrial output advantage paired with the necessary resources to power this vast manufacturing base.

▪️ Russia alone is 2x the size of France in terms output, and is also larger than Germany. Metrics like nominal GDP are entirely data mirages in this vein.

Simply put, Europe lacks the means to contain Russia and the U.S. can’t be everywhere at once, especially given it and Europe are objectively in relative decline at a minimum. The entire world order is changing before 

Today U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) delivered remarks at the Heritage Foundation in a speech entitled, “China and Ukraine: A Time for Truth.” The discussion focused on developing a defense policy that prioritizes our biggest threat, China; challenges to the consensus on Ukraine; and safeguards for Americans at home.
Remarks as prepared can be found below.
image001_0.png

China and Ukraine: A Time for Truth

Three years ago, in October of 2019, I went to visit Hong Kong. 

It wasn’t a standard, ceremonial sort of visit. In fact, the State Department wasn’t a big fan of my going there at all. 

I went there in the midst of major protests against the Chinese government. Beijing had originally promised the people of Hong Kong that, once the city passed into Chinese control, it would keep its unique freedoms. “One country, two systems.” Or so it went. 

But that was a lie. 

As soon as it could, the Chinese Communist Party cracked down on Hong Kong with a draconian “national security law” to crush any dissent. Xi Jinping’s way would be the only way. 

I wanted to see what was happening for myself. 

When I was there, I saw cars blazing in the streets, and protestors calling to “free Hong Kong.” I heard the explosions. I saw Chinese riot police, facing off with young men and women struggling for freedom. 

I made friends there. Many of them went to prison, like Joshua Wong and Jimmy Lai. 

I’ll never forget that trip. Because there I was able to see, firsthand, the nightmare that the Chinese Communist Party offers the world. 

In the Hong Kong crackdown, we saw the real face of Chinese tyranny. We all may see it again soon in Taiwan. 

And we may not be able to do anything about it. 

It’s not popular to say that openly. Dozens of lawmakers and experts and talking heads have claimed an invasion of Taiwan simply won’t happen—or if it does, that we can prevail. That China will be too afraid to challenge us or won’t. 

Instead they prefer to tell a familiar and comforting story, where winning the Cold War meant that we could—police the world for all time. 

They want us to believe that our military might is infinite, that American power faces no real constraints, and that we ought to use it to reshape the world. 

They want us to believe we can fight an endless proxy war in Ukraine. And somehow, this won’t impact our ability to deter China from invading Taiwan. 

Curiously enough, this story of American omnicompetence isn’t really partisan. It’s told both by neoconservatives on the right, and liberal globalists on the left. Together they make up the “Uniparty”—the D.C. establishment that transcends all changing administrations. 

It’s hard to challenge the Uniparty. They’ve gotten very good at telling their favorite story. That’s why anyone who questions them gets called “anti-American” or “Vladimir Putin’s puppet” from a hundred different quarters. 

But today, I want to tell you something else. I want to tell the truth. 

And the truth is that Americans have been sold a bill of goods. Our current foreign policy isn’t working. 

It is not working for the American people. It’s cost many of them their jobs, their towns, their communities—all thanks to the bad trade deals that we were promised would make us all richer. 

That didn’t work out so well for the people of my state. Or for anyone who witnessed their manufacturing job shipped overseas. 

But our current foreign policy isn’t even working according to its own standards. It’s falling apart at the seams, with the Uniparty doing its level best to patch it together by cutting blank checks to other countries. 

None of that is enough. Because we’re simply overcommitted, caught in the grip of an ideology of liberal empire. Our Uniparty ideology tells us we’re on the right side of history, and tough tradeoffs don’t exist. 

We have a lot of military power on our side. But it isn’t deployed where it should be, and the world is about to face the consequences. 

So let me share another truth: As things stand right now, if China invades Taiwan in the next few years, they will likely prevail. 

I will say it again. 

We stand at an inflection point today. And it is time for a real change. 

It is time to adopt a truly nationalist foreign policy.
*        *        *
We hear a lot these days about something called the, “rules-based international order.” Politicians, and so-called experts, invoke it whenever they want us to send another few billion dollars overseas. 

Now, the “rules-based international order” isn’t some kingdom of heaven. It is a kind of American liberal empire. It’s founded on the assumption that, if we set up the economic rules of the game just so, the people at the top get a lot richer, and maybe that’ll trickle down to everybody else. So it goes. 

And as an added bonus, we’ll eventually make the world over in the image of New York and Silicon Valley. Free minds and free markets, or something like that. 

Once upon a time, this sounded good. But it was a bad plan from the start. 

All the way back in December 2001, we admitted China into the World Trade Organization. The Uniparty wanted to believe that this would make us all richer, that we could offshore jobs and import cheap junk without undermining our own prosperity. 

They also wanted to believe that maybe we could democratize China. Maybe, if we brought China into the global economic order, horrors like Tiananmen Square could be a thing of the past.  

That was a catastrophic mistake. 

“One country, two systems” wasn’t China’s first broken promise. After joining the WTO, China cheated. The Chinese Communist Party took full advantage of its access to global markets to enrich itself, but simultaneously shielded its own economy from foreign competition. 

Americans paid the price. Good, blue-collar jobs—jobs that once provided American workers with a living wage—were siphoned off overseas. 

Meanwhile, the Chinese Communist Party got rich as the Chinese economy boomed. They built their military on the backs of America’s middle class. Now, that military—not only massive but increasingly modernized—is poised for a cross-Strait invasion of Taiwan. 

What did our leadership do while all this was happening? Exactly the wrong things. 

While China was prospering and American towns were withering away, the Uniparty set its sights on the Middle East. We heard a lot about making the world safe for democracy, about how American blood and treasure could turn these nations into images of the West. 

That imperial project failed. It failed disastrously. We invested billions of dollars there and lost hundreds of American lives, all while China rose unimpeded. And the people responsible are all still members of the D.C. establishment in good standing. Nobody was ever held accountable. 

In the end, regime change didn’t work. 

But the Uniparty doesn’t learn. And now we’re hearing their same siren song again. This time it’s about Ukraine. If only we send a few more weapons, send a few more billion dollars …we’ll really have a rules-based international order. 

Maybe we should do some more nation-building. Maybe we can even force a regime change in Russia. All ideas the Uniparty is excited about. 

They’re nonsense. They’re the wrong ideas at the wrong time. 

The only problem is, we should have seen the threat of China coming years ago. But the Uniparty didn’t. And they still aren’t taking it seriously, even now. 

Right now, we have Uniparty leaders and former NATO brass telling us that defending Ukraine is basically the same thing as deterring China. That if one dictator is allowed to seize territory by force, it’ll embolden others, and so stopping Vladimir Putin is basically the same thing as stopping Xi Jinping. 

This is the Uniparty’s magical thinking at work. It’s rooted in the fanciful idea that if we want to stop tyrants, all we need to do is show them we’re not afraid. That if we stand up to one bully, all the others will just slink away. 

That’s Hollywood. That’s not reality. 

In the real world, we have limited military resources, and our adversaries know it. 

The Chinese Communist Party understands that if our resources are tied up in Ukraine, those are resources we can’t use to deter a Taiwan invasion. As Napoleon said, “If you want to take Vienna, take Vienna.” China wants control of the Indo-Pacific, and we must stop them there. 

And yet Congress has poured billions of dollars into Ukrainian defenses, at a time when the American people are still dealing with sky-high inflation. And there’s no end in sight. 

That’s not the core problem, though. The core problem is that our actions in Ukraine are directly affecting our ability to project force elsewhere. Specifically, to deter China in the Pacific. 

Let’s consider our position. 

For starters, the more U.S. resources we devote to Europe, the fewer we have available to strengthen deterrence in the Pacific. For some things, like heavy armor units, that may not matter much. But it matters a lot for the capabilities we need to deter China from invading Taiwan. 

Both Ukraine and Taiwan require many of the same weapons, including things like Javelin and Stinger missiles. 

And our industrial base is strapped for capacity. That’s because we need to draw on many of the same suppliers for the defense of both Ukraine and Taiwan. 

We’re doing our best to increase production, but that will take years. 

All of this means that when we pour our military power into Ukraine, that decision comes at a cost. 

As a result, we cannot meet Ukrainian, Taiwanese, and our own military requirements all at the same time, for the foreseeable future. 

In other words, we can’t do everything. 

And, frankly, we shouldn’t have to. Some of the world’s wealthiest nations are our allies in Europe. But right now, we’re the only ones doing the heavy lifting. 

In fact, we’ve sent more weapons to Ukraine than all of Europe has, combined. And those choices are weakening us in the one place—the Pacific—where we require strength. 

The Uniparty’s way is not sustainable. It is a path to failure. 

And this is why China is now positioned to strike with overwhelming force and seize Taiwan. 

Invading Taiwan has been Xi Jinping’s goal for years. He wants control of the Pacific. He is determined to cement his place in Chinese history. 

Less than six months ago, before the Chinese Communist Party’s Congress in Beijing, Xi declared that “the historical wheels of national reunification and national rejuvenation are rolling forward, and the complete reunification of the motherland must be achieved[.]” 

We know this. But we haven’t taken him seriously enough. 

And if we don’t stop him – if we can’t – nothing we do elsewhere will matter much.
*        *        *
So what happens, if we wake up tomorrow and an invasion has begun? What can America do about it? 

Once again, let’s assess our strategic position—this time in the Pacific. 

Well, we’ve got plenty of aircraft. But they’re concentrated at a small number of air bases, which makes them easy targets. And China has invested in weapons and sensors that we haven’t fielded, undercutting our air power advantage. 

We have carrier strike groups. But it’s not clear how they’ll help us defeat a Chinese invasion. China has built up defenses designed to neutralize them early in a fight, or keep them so far away they won’t be useful. 

We do have an undersea advantage. But we’ve only got so many submarines, we’ve only got so many torpedoes and other weapons to fire from them, and we’ve only got so many places to reload or refit them. Those are hard limits. 

We’re also at risk ourselves, especially our forces in Guam. Guam isn’t well defended against China’s missiles—to say nothing of Chinese special operations forces. 

And I haven’t even mentioned China’s nuclear arsenal, which of course is always looming in the background. Meanwhile, our own military space architecture is dangerously vulnerable, and our logistics forces are already overstretched. 

So let’s suppose the worst happens. Suppose China invades and seizes Taiwan. We try to stop it, but our forces are defeated and the island is lost. 

What would that mean? 

If China conquers Taiwan, Xi and the Chinese Communist Party will view it as a world-historical victory. They will see it as the dawn of a “Chinese century” that puts the lie to America’s promise of liberty. 

And Americans will confront a new, terrifying reality. 

Every American will feel it. The price hikes and disruptions we’ve seen in recent years will pale in comparison. 

Product shortages will be commonplace—shortages of everything from basic medicine to consumer electronics. According to some estimates, a war over Taiwan would send us into a deep recession with no clear way out, since huge swaths of our economy run on Taiwanese semiconductors. 

But the economic consequences are just the start.  

If China takes Taiwan, it will be able to station its own military forces there. It can then use its position as a springboard for further conquest and intimidation—against Japan, the Philippines, and other Pacific islands, like Guam and the Northern Marianas. 

Our grandparents fought and bled to liberate those islands during the Second World War. Now they’re under threat again, from a new imperially-minded power. 

As Asia’s new reigning power, China could restrict U.S. trade in the region—perhaps block it altogether. Maybe we’ll be allowed in, but only on terms favorable to China. 

China exploited the trade system once before. They can do it again. 

There’s more. We recently witnessed a Chinese spy balloon cruise across the American heartland.  But things can get much worse. 

Imagine a world where Chinese warships patrol Hawaiian waters, and Chinese submarines stalk the California coastline. A world where the People’s Liberation Army has military bases in Central and South America. A world where Chinese forces operate freely in the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean. 

This is a dark future. And it is an increasingly plausible future. 

But it is not an inevitable future. 

There may still be time to chart a different course—if our leaders have the resolve to do so.
*        *        * 
That different course is a nationalist foreign policy. A foreign policy in the spirit of Alexander Hamilton and Theodore Roosevelt. 

A nationalist foreign policy places America’s interests first. And deterring China from seizing Taiwan should be America’s top priority. 

That means our defense spending should be concentrated on deterrence in the Pacific. No more “divest to invest” in the Indo-Pacific. No more unfunded priorities from INDOPACOM. Instead, we should be stockpiling weapons, dispersing our forces in the Indo-Pacific, and accelerating late-stage development of space, cyber, and other critical capabilities, like the B-21 strategic bomber. 

None of this is news, but we’re years behind schedule. 

Strengthening deterrence in the Indo-Pacific means scaling back our military commitments elsewhere. That brings us to Europe. 

What we need is a new burden-sharing arrangement within NATO. Our NATO allies should lead in arming Ukraine. And they should also take responsibility for defending Europe itself, relying on the U.S. only for extended nuclear deterrence and a few other capabilities. 

This will free up American resources for deterring China. It’ll also ensure that NATO allies can deter Russia or defend themselves with limited U.S. support if our forces are drawn to a crisis or conflict in the Pacific. 

This is vital because, as our own 2018 and 2022 National Defense Strategies made clear, we can’t fight and win major wars in Asia and Europe at the same time. 

What concrete steps can we take toward this new burden-sharing arrangement? 

First, we should cut off U.S. military aid to Ukraine, until our European allies step up. That won’t happen so long as we’re doing their job for them. 

Second, we should clarify the stakes for our European allies. They should know we won’t be able to fully defend them if a conflict with China breaks out. We must make clear that, given the Chinese threat and the need for deterrence, we will be forced to withhold forces from any direct conflict with Russia. So even if U.S. forces aren’t at war in the Pacific, Europe still can’t count on us like they used to. 

We should begin reducing U.S. force levels in Europe. And we should keep cutting, until we’re supporting NATO’s defenses with only those capabilities we don’t need to deter China, and with our nuclear arsenal. Our European allies can make up the difference. They must take the lead in Europe’s conventional defense. 

This is what a real burden-sharing arrangement looks like. This is how we safeguard our interests in Europe, while also deterring China in Asia. 

Finally, the United States should arm Taiwan. But U.S. aid should be conditioned on Taiwan increasing defense spending and embracing an asymmetric defense strategy. If Taiwan won’t defend itself, how can they expect Americans to fight and die on their behalf? Taiwan must step up too. 
*        *        *
The Uniparty isn’t going to like this message. They’ll probably call it “Russian propaganda,” or some other hogwash. 

But when I first came to the Senate, I took an oath. I swore to “well and faithfully discharge the duties” of my office. I take that oath very seriously. 

And to me, faithfully discharging the duties of my office means defending America. 

Not something called the “rules-based international order.” I mean America. 

It also means telling the American people the truth. Even the hard and painful truth. 

This is the heart of a nationalist foreign policy—clear-eyed realism, in the service of the American people. 

Changing our course will not be easy. It will take sacrifices. And it will require difficult choices. 

But America has risen to countless challenges before. And I believe we can do so again. 

Right now—today—we can start looking reality in the eye. We can stand up to the threat that we—and Taiwan—currently face. We can make those difficult choices. 

We can choose truth over comfort. 

And for the sake of the world our sons and daughters will live in, I pray we will.

What Happens If Ukraine Falls?

By George Friedman cofounder of Stratfor- via Geopolitical Futures

I recently wrote about Russian preparations for a major offensive in Ukraine: a pincer movement that would close Ukrainian forces in from the north and the south. There is now general discussion of such a move by Russia in the next months, albeit configured in many different ways, most different from mine. Still, the important issue is whether Ukraine can defeat such an attack. Over the past year, Ukraine has fared much better than expected, and Russia much worse. But major powers have the luxury of early stumbling, their size giving them the resources needed to recover from early defeats. The successes of weaker powers sometimes die on the vine. And though Russia could, in theory, hold on and send Ukraine reeling through sheer stamina, doing so would be a move of last resort. Such is the uncertainty of war.

Belarus seems to be thinking of entering the war, and though its utility is limited, its knowledge of the balance of power in Ukraine could be beneficial to Moscow. Russian aircraft – and intelligence operatives, I suspect – are now operating in Moldova, and Romania, its neighbor and occasional protector, is on alert. Anxieties are high. France and other European countries have ordered their nationals to leave Belarus, and the U.S. has warned its citizens to leave Russia.

If the Ukrainians can no longer resist effectively, and if the flanks represented by Belarus and Moldova are opening a path to Poland and Romania, what will the United States do? Europe will follow Washington’s lead, for better or worse. The worst-case scenario, of course, would be the war that was avoided during the Cold War. That war never happened because Russia did not have the power to engage and defeat NATO and its U.S. benefactors. The Russians were not prepared to attack given the risk of failure and the riskier, albeit unlikely, possibility of a nuclear exchange.

Still, the U.S. must consider the risks of intervention. If Russia occupies Ukraine, it would effectively border Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and Romania. It’s no secret that President Vladimir Putin, an ex-KGB operative, considers the collapse of the Soviet Union a geopolitical catastrophe, which means he may well see the collapse of Russian power in Central Europe equally lamentable. A return to the borders of the Cold War after defeating Ukraine would go far in redeeming Russia’s geopolitical position. And it would raise the question of whether and when Russia would press farther west. It would put Europe in a position it never conceived it would be in: living with a hostile and powerful enemy at its border, and a not-always-predictable America guaranteeing its frontiers.

Now, as always, Russian occupation of Europe would threaten U.S. control of the Atlantic – something for which Washington fought two world wars. Under those circumstances, it would more easily justify direct American intervention. After all, it would be able to maneuver more easily in Ukraine, and it would have a network of allies near and needy.

If Ukraine’s defenses crumble, the U.S. would have to make some rapid decisions (or rapidly implement decisions already made). It could send forces into Ukraine to try to force a Russian retreat, or it could decline combat. Directly engaging Russian troops with limited force can be a long, painful and uncertain engagement. But accepting the outcome opens the door for Russia to rearrange Europe again. A second cold war would be a necessary but undesired outcome. Reinforcing Ukraine before its collapse would therefore be the lower risk and cost option.

If Ukraine falls, the U.S. will be forced to engage Russia. Fighting directly in Ukraine will be a choice, which means doing so will be politically painful. Presidents are rarely rewarded for avoiding a threat that has not yet materialized, even if it’s inevitable.

I am not predicting the imminent fall of Ukraine, of course. I’m simply gaming out all the options if it does fall. Prudence – and the coming Russian offensive – demands it.