“Knowing the psychological thinking of the West, it seems the West are eager to send their weapons to Ukraine as if to taunt Putin to engage in stiffer conflict
The chairman of the all-powerful Russian security council warned last week that should the North Atlantic Alliance try to retake Crimea which it annexed last February 20, 2014, that action could trigger the possibility of World War III.
Such statement is rather blunt, coming as it did from one who once served as Russia’s president from 2008 to 2012.
The statement coincided with the meeting of the defense chiefs of NATO headed by US Defense Secretary Llyod Austin at Ramstein, Germany and by the defense secretaries of the 50 NATO member-countries and by the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky with his defense minister Oleksii Reznikov.
The meeting is the eighth and is intended to shore up the US objective of destroying Russia.
Analyzing the situation, it is said the strategy is to destroy Russia in a proxy war using its intricate alliance with NATO to militarily and economically deplete the resources of that country.
Once the tripping has been reached, the US will join the conflict to deliver the final coup d’ grace so to speak.
The neocons are still hoping there will be a repetition of the fall of the Soviet Union that happened on December 26, 1991.
The US has been applying the system of progressive involvement in Ukraine.
First, US is conditioning the world, through NATO, that it can deter Russian aggression.
Second, the US can never invoke the past actuation of Ukraine like the systematic cleansing of the inhabitants in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions who are mostly Russians but focuses on Russia’s violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity to whitewash the Nazi-dominated atrocities in the region.
Third, the progressive supply of arms gives to the US the image of fighting a defensive war in Ukraine, thus generating for the war-monger neocons to increase the supply of arms in the name of fighting for “democracy” and “freedom.”
As the war progresses in Ukraine, the US is able to project a defensive position to the world.
Gradually, the US is able to raise those arms that could match the sustained arms which Russia freely sends to its troops in Ukraine.
As the war progresses and the resistance gets tougher and casualties exceedingly grow, both conflicting parties desperately try to secure arms proportionate to the intensity of the conflict for each side to gain an upper hand with the US and its NATO allies ultimately hoping to eject Russia in all the territories it annexed and occupied.
The hope to win in the war against Russia is the greatest gambit the US military industrial complex is doing to keep open the inertia of supplying arms to the unwinnable Zelensky government.
It is a proxy war paid wholly in blood by the Ukrainians.
Some selected member-countries from NATO began to send light arms, anti-tank weapons to ward off the alleged Russian invasion.
Light weapons and financial support freely flowed to sustain the Zelensky government, again in the name of freedom.
Later this evolved into supplying Ukraine with helicopters, and patrol boats and even enlisting foreign fighters to act as mercenaries.
At one point when the US could sense it would be defeated, the US ordered through its faithful mongrel UK to sabotage Nord Stream 1 and 2, even bombed the Kerch bridge in a desperate attempt to force Russia to retaliate against Germany who then was hesitant to join EU in imposing oil sanction against that country.
No country today has admitted sending mercenaries to join the fight against Russia, fearful it could economically demean their status as financier of the war in Ukraine.
For a country to admit sending mercenaries in a proxy war is to openly declare war with Russia, and nobody is brave enough to admit that.
Today, there is practically no limitation on the kind of weapons and armaments from countries supporting Ukraine in their fight against Russia.
The kind of arms and weapons the US and NATO are willing to provide Ukraine is not guided by morality or measured by the degree of destruction said weapon could inflict on the civilian population but the fear by both sides to inflict the same degree of destruction.
This explains why NATO today is at a loss on whether to supply Ukraine with their main battle tanks.
They know that to supply Ukraine could change altogether the dimension of the war.
It might even serve as game changer for the US and NATO.
UK, as usual, was the first to send its “challenger” tanks.
Followed by the delivery of their hand-me-down tanks supplied by countries from the former Eastern bloc like Poland like those tanks they inherited from the Soviet Union’s T-62.
They are now egging on Germany to supply Ukraine with the most advanced class of battle tanks known as Leopard 2.
It has even imposed restrictions on the transfer of said tanks without authorization from Germany.
France has also sent their Leclerc AMX 30 tanks while the US is still thinking of sending 30 of its Abrams to Ukraine.
Russia did not stop NATO from sending any of their sophisticated tanks to Ukraine except to say that all of them will be burned and destroyed in the battlefield.
Russia refuses to elaborate for it could not really do anything to stop NATO’s quench for adventurism.
Knowing the psychological thinking of the West, it seems the West are eager to send their weapons to Ukraine as if to taunt Putin to engage in stiffer conflict.
The destruction of the costly Abram tanks could result in a great loss to the much-ballyhooed tanks and could cost their financiers from the military industrial complex.
Medvedev already spelled out the grim consequence of that lackluster adventurism by the collective West.
Such could result in nuclear war where there would be no winner.
What Medvedev said is quite prophetic when he said no superpower was ever defeated in a war.
This means the pride and ego that go to one that has attained a status of a superpower is just too great to allow it to fall that easily.
Those states that fall in the category states or that of a hegemony have their political points on how difficult it is to reconcile their own history.
Even on the verge of defeat, a super power like Russia would simply not allow it to be defeated or much more its cities ruined by nuclear holocaust or put an end to the greatness of its empire.
It is inconceivable for the Russian federation to be defeated unless that country is equally ready to plunge the nation into the fires of hell.
Even the US which has the equal capacity to destroy Russia is hesitant to embark on this journey that would plunge its nation to no return.
A nuclear war should never be tested for nobody can determine the consequential price of its outcome. (02/27/23)
