Cuban Missile Crisis 2.0 incoming?
The American authorities would act “decisively” if Russia deployed its military to Latin America, the White House said on Thursday, following suggestions that Moscow could station some of its troops in Venezuela or Cuba.
United States National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan called the idea “bluster in the public commentary” and noted that the deployment of Russian military infrastructure to Latin America was not a point of discussion at the recent Russia-US Strategic Stability Dialogue in Geneva.
“If Russia were to move in that direction, we would deal with it decisively,” he said, responding to a question from a journalist.
The US opposition to Russian troop placement in the Americas may raise some eyebrows in Moscow, which has repeatedly complained about US armed forces being located near Russia’s western frontier.
Ya think? The US has troops all around the world. We are practically on Russia’s doorstep. Hell, a big part of the reason Russia wants to invade Ukraine is that they’re afraid Ukraine is going to join NATO, and America is determined to keep pushing NATO eastward towards the Russian border.
We really don’t have a leg to stand on here. We cannot seriously be complaining about Russian troops in our hemisphere when we have troops in their front yard, backyard and side yard.
The suggestion that Russia may send troops to Latin America came during an interview with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov on TV channel RTVI. When asked about the possibility of deployment, Ryabkov could neither confirm nor deny that it is in the Kremlin’s plans.
“It’s the American style to have several options for its foreign and military policy,”he said. “That’s the cornerstone of that country’s powerful influence in the world.”
“The president of Russia has spoken multiple times on the subject of what the measures could be, for example involving the Russian Navy, if things are set on the course of provoking Russia, and further increasing the military pressure on us by the US,” Ryabkov continued. “We don’t want that. The diplomats must come to an agreement.”
Ryabkov met with US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman on Monday to discuss Russian proposals on security guarantees, including, among other things, a demand for the end of NATO’s eastward expansion. Washington has rejected Moscow’s proposal as a nonstarter.
What Russia is doing in floating the idea of establishing troop presence in the Western hemisphere is essentially exactly what they perceive America to be doing in its refusal to stop the eastward NATO push. They see us as encroaching on their turf, so they’re going to encroach on our turf. Simple as that.
And now we move on to the latest development in this story: the US government is now claiming that Russia is planning to carry out a false flag attack of some kind and use it as a pretext for invasion:
The U.S. has information that the Russian government is planning a “false-flag” operation to rationalize an invasion of Ukraine, a government official said Friday.
“We have information that indicates Russia has already pre-positioned a group of operatives to conduct a false-flag operation in eastern Ukraine. The operatives are trained in urban warfare and in using explosives to carry out acts of sabotage against Russia’s own proxy-forces,” the official said, confirming a CNN report.
“Our information also indicates that Russian influence actors are already starting to fabricate Ukrainian provocations in state and social media to justify a Russian intervention and sow divisions in Ukraine,” the official said. “For example, Russian officials and influence actors are emphasizing narratives about the deterioration of human rights in Ukraine and the increased militancy of Ukrainian leaders.”
It’s rare for the U.S. government to publicly release intelligence information in real time, especially about a high-value target like Russia, a longtime U.S. adversary. The unusual disclosure came as the Biden administration has sought to pre-empt Russian tactics, which during previous conflicts have obscured the facts and made it more difficult for the U.S. and its allies to hold Moscow accountable.
My first takeaway here is that it’s quite a big deal that the US government is admitting that false flags are real things that happen, and that wars can and do start because of false flags. Of course, we all know that it’s only other countries that orchestrate false flags as pretexts for wars. The US government would never do such a thing…
As for the story itself, I really don’t see the big deal. Russia is obviously going to invent some pretext for invasion, and they don’t care whether we know it or not. The US claiming it knows what Russia is up to is not going to compel Russia to back down.
The only thing I can think of is that the US is bringing this up to provide justification for stronger sanctions and/or direct response against Russia. In other words, it could be a false false flag. Gin up some anti-Russian hysteria in America to give the government more justification to respond as it pleases. Because it’s obviously not going to dissuade Russia from attacking Ukraine.
Or it could just be a ploy to distract people from the constant string of failures by the Biden administration on the domestic front.
The broader takeaway from this whole Russia-Ukraine situation is that it shows just how little respect Russia has for the US government at the moment. Max Abrahms elaborates:
Exactly. Notice how we never heard anything about Putin preparing to move on Ukraine during Trump’s presidency. Putin moved into Ukraine and seized Crimea during Obama’s presidency, and now, with Biden, the Russia-Ukraine talk is heating up once again.
That is not a coincidence. Putin is keenly aware that what he can get away with doing is heavily dependent on both who’s in charge in America, and how strong the American administration is at the time.
He invaded South Ossetia in Georgia in 2008 when the Bush administration was deeply unpopular over the Iraq War, and dealing with a spiraling financial crisis. He knew he would encounter little to no resistance from the US.
Now he senses that Biden, aside from being braindead, is both deeply unpopular and surrounded by people who are incompetent, woke and weak. This is a slam dunk for Putin.
However, the Biden administration is a wounded animal. Never underestimate a desperate government in a situation like this. They might just see a war as a way to rally public support and seize even more tyrannical emergency powers.
You might be thinking, “There’s no way they would garner public support for this war! Nobody wants it!” That’s true right now. But false flags can be game-changers. What if the US government stages a false flag of its own? What if the government is planning on using a war as an excuse to really go after domestic political dissidents on the grounds that they’re subverting the war effort and operating as a fifth column? It’s unlikely, but I wouldn’t rule anything out. War could be seen as a last resort option to turn around this faltering administration.
A few final points:
- America has no reason to be involved in this border dispute on the other side of the world. I’m not sure if it’s the behind-the-scenes business the Bidens have in Ukraine that’s driving this, or the typical American empire “We Must Meddle In Everything” mentality (or a combination of the two) but we should not be involved in this Ukraine situation.
- America is a paper tiger. Our military is being taken over by wokeness, our government itself is being taken over by wokeness, and so are our corporations. Wokeness is weakness. And on top of that, the vast majority of the nonwokes in America have zero appetite for any more foreign wars. Americans are tired of being the global police, by and large. We have “Empire Exhaustion” or whatever you want to call it. Sure, we have a big, bad military with state of the art weapons and technology, but no matter how strong your military is, it’s almost impossible to win a war when your heart isn’t in it. This is why America has lost wars in Afghanistan, Vietnam, Iraq and Korea over the past 70 years.
- Russia and China understand that America is fundamentally weak. We may look tough on the outside, but on the inside, we’re beaten and broken. A war that does not have the public’s support is likely doomed to failure, especially against a worthy adversary.
- A multipolar world is preferable. The American imperialist regime is in desperate need of a check; another nation(s) that can look us in the eye as an equal. After having virtually unchecked world hegemony for the past 30 years, our ruling class has grown mad with power and they need to be put in their place. This is why I support a multipolar world in which no nation has true hegemony. Think of it like business: monopoly is bad, healthy competition is good. It will be a good thing if the US government’s monopoly on power in the world is broken.
- Now, you might respond that a multipolar world could increase the odds of great power conflict, but I don’t see it that way. I see it as a situation where the great powers are more likely to be on their best behavior and less likely to become tyrannical if they know there’s someone just as big and tough out there that can stand up to them when they get out of line. The only thing I’d really be worried about is a 1984 situation where the world is dominated by an oligopoly of nations: Oceania (US/Western Europe), Eurasia (Russia), and Eastasia (China) all colluding with one other. But I don’t see this happening in real life. China and Russia hate us too much.
My prediction for this whole Russia-Ukraine situation is that eventually Russia will invade and get what it wants, and the US won’t do much in response. We might arm Ukrainian forces, but that’s about it. We are not going to go to war with Russia over Ukraine.
At least I hope not.