An end to the invasion and war in Ukraine can only be guaranteed if Russia’s security is itself guaranteed. Security is largely indivisible. Security for one state requires security for others, says the Los Alamos Study Group.
One of the most respected and best informed anti-nuclear war groups in the world is the Los Alamos Study Group. Founded at the end of the Cold War in Los Alamos, New Mexico, where the first nuclear bombs were designed and built, the LASG’s aim of taking nuclear weapons out of foreign policy. It has won landmark environmental, civil rights and freedom of information lawsuits in the U.S., provided hundreds of top-level briefings, and played a crucial role in preventing the production of the core elements of plutonium warheads. As nuclear war threatens over Ukraine, the LASG has released this remarkable and urgent analysis of the risks and the solutions. — John Pilger.
By Greg Mello
Los Alamos Study Group
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine began, what was a regional conflict has become a global hybrid war with ever-greater stakes, not least the risk of nuclear war.
Perhaps the greatest danger lies in the difference of motives between parties, which is also the fundamental cause of this war: Russia seeks security, while the U.S. and its NATO allies have been using Ukraine to deny that security — to “break Russia,” in Henry Kissinger’s 2015 phrase. The U.S. does not want peace, unless it be the peace of a conquered Russia. That is why there is no obvious end to the escalations and counter-escalations. The U.S. and NATO see opportunity in the war they have been trying so hard to provoke.
The tragedy is that few people seem to understand that at the root of the Ukraine crisis is a specific strategy known as the Wolfowitz Doctrine, named after Paul Wolfowitz who, as under secretary of defense in the administration of George H. W. Bush, was one of the authors of a 1992 document that laid out a neo-conservative manifesto aimed at ensuring American dominance of world affairs following the collapse of the Soviet Union.
“Our first objective,” stated the document, “is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival [to the United States], either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere. … This is a dominant consideration underlying [a] regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.”
The Wolfowitz Doctrine triggered the post-Cold War use of NATO as an instrument of bloody aggression against Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. It declared, in effect, that diplomacy was dead and that American power ruled by violence if necessary. A resurgent Russia led by Vladimir Putin was next, and on the horizon, a risen China.
The 2014 Washington-engineered coup in Ukraine that removed an elected leader who sought to reinforce his country’s relationship with neighboring Russia, was a product of the 1992 Doctrine and the extremism it represented. Victoria Nuland, a neo-conservative ideologue and President Barack Obama’s “point person” in Ukraine, has played the same role in President Joe Biden’s State Department.
The 1992 Doctrine is elaborated in an infamous RAND study on how to overextend and, in Kissinger’s words, “break Russia.” This is U.S. foreign policy today: a fact well understood by the Russian leadership who regard their country as effectively under siege by the United States.
The potential of American missiles pointed at Moscow from former Soviet satellite countries, together with NATO troop deployments, is the reality they see. A militarized and virulently anti-Russian Ukraine being used as a tool by the U.S., with an expressed wish for nuclear weapons, on the brink of invading Russian-sympathizing provinces on the Russian border — all that was too much for Russia. What, do you suppose, the U.S. would do if such a situation arose in Mexico or Canada?
Since 2014, the Las Alamos Study Group has made it part of our business to understand the conflict in Ukraine and its significance for the world. In that year we held public meetings and teach-ins discussing it and since then have tried to examine developments as we could. In the Obama Administration, we took our concerns to the offices of the National Security Council — and were appalled by the lack of knowledge and understanding we found there.
Many non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have taken positions on this conflict. In our view, most (not all) of their statements are superficial, and/or omit the causes of the invasion as Russia understands them, or are in lock-step with U.S. and NATO propaganda.
(Fogener Haus/Wikimedia Commons)
The Study Group’s Basic Conclusions
- Understanding why Russia invaded is not condoning the invasion. Russia’s view is that of existential dangers to its very existence. The sincerity of that view is evident in the grave risks Russia is taking in this invasion which, again, we need neither justify nor condemn. Russia’s view has to be respected, whether or not we agree with it. Failure by the U.S. and NATO over the course of decades to respect Russia’s position, and to provide a humane and reasonable provision for Russia’s security needs is the main if not the only material cause of the present conflict.
- Telling Russia what to do is the problem, not the solution. We in NATO countries and in the West more broadly, and in peace-oriented groups, should confine our imperatives and judgments to what we ourselves can do, in our own countries and in relation to NATO. It is imperative to bring peace to Ukraine as best we can and to not inflame or broaden this conflict further. Our words can kill, or heal.
- An end to the invasion and war in Ukraine can only be guaranteed if Russia’s security is itself guaranteed. Security is largely indivisible. Security for one state requires security for others. This is a core principle of European security which Russia rightly insists upon. The U.S. should honor that. The fundamental cause of the current conflict is the desire of the U.S. to weaken or “break”Russia.
- Human rights, including the right of political self-determination, are pillars of Western values and institutions. The government of Ukraine has denied human rights and political self-determination to the peoples of the Donbass. Some 13,000 people have died during the eight years since the 2014 coup, according to the United Nations. The Ukrainian government has overtly genocidal policies toward Russian minorities. Since the 2014 U.S. sponsored coup, the U.S. and its European allies have used Ukraine to undermine Russian security.
- Nazi and neo-Nazi formations and ideologies in Ukraine present a clear danger to human rights and human life everywhere.
- Peace and nuclear disarmament organizations should be alarmed by NGO support for U.S. efforts to demonize and destabilize Russia.
What the Study Group Wants
1. We want a negotiated peace at the earliest possible time. In our own countries, every effort should be made to achieve this. We do not see those efforts.
2. We want an end to further escalation and broadening of the conflict, which threatens the well-being and security of the whole world. None of our countries should be introducing or transporting arms or conducting military activities or providing training or support of any kind in Ukraine. Peace groups should oppose all such escalation. “Helping Ukraine” with military “aid” is just a way of getting more people killed in the service of long-term U.S. aims to destroy the Russia.
3. Weapons should not be provided to civilian individuals, gangs, criminals, children, and “stay-behind,” guerrilla, or Volkssturmgroups. This only inflicts needless suffering and damages prospects for peace now and in the long run. There is no honor or legitimacy in such tactics in the present circumstances.
4. All economic sanctions – which hurt ordinary citizens more than elites – should be lifted. Economic sanctions are weapons of mass destruction, with global effects.
5. We want measured, just, de jure de-nazification of the Ukrainian government and laws.
6. The independence of the Donbass region within pre-conflict administrative boundaries should be accepted by all peace organizations and states.
7. The democratic decision of Crimea to rejoin Russia should be accepted by all peace organizations and states.
8. Peace groups should support a neutral, demilitarized (i.e. without heavy weapons or force projection capability) Ukraine, which is similar if not identical to the outcome sought by Russia.
9. Civilian areas must not be used as military staging or artillery bases. This is illegal, in fact. There is evidence that the Ukrainian Armed Forces are engaging in this odious practice.
10. Ukraine should not be allowed to join NATO. That was a capital demand of Russia and one that we should all support.
11. NATO should disband. The largest military alliance in the world, NATO consumes more resources than all the world’s militaries combined, and has conducted multiple wars of aggression, in violation of the U.N. Charter and Nuremberg principles. NATO is also a nuclear weapons alliance.
12. The U.S. and the five states that host U.S. nuclear weapons should, jointly or individually, end nuclear hosting arrangements, as well as end the training of non-U.S. pilots in nuclear weapons use and the prospective use of non-U.S. dual-capable aircraft for nuclear missions.
13. Clearly, all of the above is urgent if the killing is to end, and there is to be a lasting peace in Europe.
Greg Mello is the executive director of the Los Alamos Study Group in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
When Samuel Goldwyn, a Polish immigrant, became a U.S. movie mogul, Americans were amused and delighted to learn of his creative use of the English language. Once, when he disagreed with his colleagues, he famously declared “Include me out!”
Over the past thirty years, Russia has reason to believe that it was invited to European security discussions for the sole purpose of demonstrating that its participation was irrelevant. Its security concerns were pointedly ignored, dismissed out of hand, the better to drive home the message that its “colleagues,” all NATO allies, considered it to be an outcast, a pariah that had been “included out” of all discussions, ostensibly for the threat it presented to Europe. It is not without significance that when Michael McFaul, former U.S. ambassador to Russia, appeared on the Stephen Colbert Show on 3/9/22, he referred to Ukraine as “the largest country in Europe,” underscoring that he considers Russia, the largest country in the world, to be “outside” Europe, which is where the United States national security establishment wants to keep it.
Interesting, but GW Bush is just a part of the 5 Administrations involved here. The Clinton Administration had to continue it, the GW Bush Administration did continue it, the Obama Administration is the one that attacked Libya and Syria–both under Hillary Clinton in the SecState seat–and the “2014 coup” in Ukraine with Kerry as SecState, and now we have Joe Biden trying to lead the world against Russia. Left out, however, was the 2012 attempt to destabilize Russia by the Obama/Clinton Administration’s meddling in the election, spending Billions to fight against Putin winning.
The only President we had that didn’t appear on-board with this was Trump.
I find the reference to a Nazi-style government in Ukraine interesting, especially since the current government was aided by Obama/Biden/Kerry. Yet I do find the desired government style of the present day Democrats closer to the Nazi regime than Stalinism.
This NeoCon arch-conspiracy with its inner cell of Strauss-ian elite with its Noble Lies has been as immensely successful as criminal. When the history of this period particularly from the Wolfowitz memo to the showdown with Russia and ff. (if anything does), U of Chicago classics prof Leo Strauss and his and his little cabal of student geniuses, … and likely Yale classics prof Donald Kagan, his two sons and infamous daughter-in-law, will be the originalry evil.
Thank you Consortium News for republishing this. Such sound and balanced views , reasonably expressed in civilised language , on the terrible events taking place in Ukraine now . I recently returned from a month in Russia lecturing and moving around Northwestern Russia independently. I am sure the Russian people will continue to trust their government’s policy and actions in this crisis whatever the hardships . Tony Kevin.
It is astonishing to me that neo-Cons such as Nuland and Wolfowitz et. al., continue to resurface, decade after decade, despite their horrific record of leaving a trail of death and destruction wherever they have a hand in making “policy.” They seem like adolescents, full of rage, and will do whatever is necessary to inflict their delusions of the rest of the world. Of course, they themselves remain conveniently isolated from the carnage, and usually are rewarded with promotions. One would think this country could do better.
The NeoCons are a tight blood mafia. Their remarkable cohesion and power stems, of course from the fantastic wealth assured adherents and collaborators, but mainly from such things as 9/11. Those who committed this crime are bound together to stop at nothing in order to maintain their explanatory narrative, “global terrorism”. And each succeeding crime and specious narrative binds a further circle.
FYI I have left a comment for Mearsheimer and Mc Govern On Ukraine, might be beneficial to those not especially familiar with the origin of the neocons.
The book DARK MONEY by Jane Mayer 2016. I have more to say on the subject there.
Robert your description of the NeoCons as being a a tight blood mafia is in my opinion an understatement. I’m thinking world wide super tight blood mafia. These are some very nasty people. See the “Tin Man’s”(one Dick Cheney) statement, “Now it’s time for us to get our share!” or words very close this quote.
I made the comment once that referred to the Deep State and the US Government as being no more than ” mafia with a flag”. I was egregious in my error. I have since adjusted by belief and consider the Deep State a parasitical group / organization that clandestinely infiltrates governments leading to the detrimental perversion of said governments world wide, the USA included.
Consider the current state of world peace and read this book if our have not done so.
By the way, our government seems to be an apparent victim of this cabal.
Thanks CN
Add Elliott Abrams, convicted of lying to Congress and chosen by the Trump gang
to orchestrate the destruction of Venezuela and the suffering of its people
— sanctions, subversion, economic strangulation, military and privatized coups.
He’s now a prized media commentator, I understand.
If this is the way “Democracy” can be hi-jacked and corrupted, perhaps we need a better system of control. Perhaps we should accept that we are not living in a democracy, that our rights to free speech are being curtailed, and we aren’t really that much better off than people living under an authoritarian regime. It’s time to expose our system for what it is, CORRUPT!
As for the MSM, propaganda, and the gullible general public – There are none so blind as those who will not see.
The bold black lines amounting to two sentences just before John Pilger’s statement at the top of this article says all that really needs to be communicated. Except maybe the Pilger comment about the LASG working to take nuclear weapons out of foreign policy, which makes more sense than most of what has been written about this Ukrainian incident so far.
Disclaimer: To be fair others have been close with their thoughts
I wonder if anyone from the LASG has sent this to the White House via certified U.S. Mail?
Thanks CN
Time for this one to fess up in humble contriteness. This is no time for foolishness.
I seem to be an expert at blurting out certain assessments prematurely. Distraction is a terrible affliction I’ve had always.
I’m hoping for forgiveness from Mr. Mello and his friends at LASG. And all the rest here.
I read his offering again this AM. I was blown away at what I have missed. My apologies to Mr. Mello and the LASG. I blew it yesterday.
I’m thinking we will not see a clearer indictment of the Neo-con philosophy than has been offered here.
In this instance the neocons have again proven they are willing endanger the entire planet. No surprise they are consistent in that vein.
What is it that fuels this drive to be the ultimate decision makers for the planet and mankind? A sickness they should have recognized and avoided, that drive for the ultimate threat of power over the lives of everyone in their quest for wealth?
The likes of Paul Wolfowitz and G H W Bush are devilish men from the dark side of humanity and they are not alone.
Be warned these psychopaths inhabit all halls of government and reside in both bogus American political parties.
Now let my lashing begin.
REW
Excellent analysis of the problem, yet the proposal for a solution is entirely theoretical. There is no way that it can be implemented in the real world.
My preferred scenario has always been a neutral and federal Ukraine, in which both the Eastern regions and the Western regions have the degree of autonomy that fulfils the aspirations of their respective people. The central government would have a power-sharing arrangement preventing either side from dominating the other. Ukraine’s prosperity would naturally result from close trading relations with both the EU and Russia without the need for any IMF, EU or Russian subsidies. As bridge between East and West, Ukraine could not fail to prosper.
While legal sovereignty over Crimea could remain pending, both Russians and Ukrainians should have free access to Crimea. Free movement of goods and people (ie. open borders) between Ukraine and Crimea on the one hand and Russia and Crimea on the other hand would place Crimea back at the crossroads of the ancient Silk Road, where it once was.
It’s painful that such a promising scenario is gone forever because of the greed and ignorance of our political leaders. In 2014, Ukrainian nationalists have gambled away Crimea. Now they are gambling away the rest of the Ukraine.
Military actions create facts on the ground. Unless the West manages to destroy the Russian Federation in the coming weeks, Ukraine as an independent neutral country will be gambled away by Ukrainian nationalists. If the West keeps on fuelling the resistance, Russia will have no choice but to occupy the whole of the country. Any resistance to the Russian forces will then have to come directly from a Nato country and constitute an act of war towards Russia. The US will not go down a road where it has to declare war on Russia. The Ukrainians have always known that.
My thoughts about Ukraine exactly.
Thank you for posting them.
The ongoing Russophobia has reached such dimensions that, unfortunately, too many people will not heed what this article recommends. It is as if intoxication is taking over – drunk on power and reckless.
These are all commendable ideas any sane peace loving person would agree with,however they are not new. Every one of these proposals have been presented by Russia repeatedly for 30years. Russia is very diplomatic and outwardly still hopeful. The reality is that they look west and see every country that officially and unofficially collaborated with Nazi Germany and they see A Great Patriotic War 2 starting! Not just Ukraine but the fascist west. Russia literally considers the events of especially last 6 months as an existential threat ….again! They know better than we do that negotiating with fascists is just appeasement and leads to the usual eventuality! Woulda, coulda, shoulda is part and parcel HOPE..Hope is the the mother of fools! I sincerely hope I’m wrong.
I agree with the author’s sentiment, but to me his piece falls short. Ukraine is not Russia’s enemy, NATO is. The missile bases in Romania and Poland that can nuke Moscow in minutes have to go. We in the West who want peace need to focus on the security guarantees treaty Russia proposed in December that the US and NATO spurned. Their upshot is a withdrawal of NATO militaries to the positions they held in 1997 and the removal of all nuclear weapons to their owners home countries. Since no one in Europe felt insecure in 1997, why should we hesitate to return to those positions now? Why should the US and it alone be permitted to spread its nuclear arsenal not only into European countries but Asia and elsewhere across the globe? So long as these measures, plus the removal of sanctions, is all Russia is asking, peace movements across the West have no excuse not to embrace Russia’s proposals and to call on our governments to negotiate a new, peace-promoting security structure in Europe.
But Putin has blown it. Not just by invading but by the way he has done it. Widespread destruction of civilian areas and an unknown number of casualties. A million refugees. In Russia most news services censored or closed. People are arrested for holding up signs and we hear of prison sentences years long.
The EU has been galvanised into a rare unity. Not just the member states but the ordinary population. In Germany and Poland people have turned up at railway stations to offer rooms in their homes. In my part of England there have been collections of goods for them and trucks are on their way to eastern Europe. This hasn’t been organised by the state but by voluntary groups. The EU was founded as the European Economic Community was basically about trade but its origin was also about preventing any more wars in Europe. People now cross borders at will and often work with people of other European countries. Pro-NATO sentiment has risen in neutral Sweden and Finland.
I have a number of American friends on facebook and on some their sites, I often see a willingness to go to war or regard Russia and China as similar to the Germany of 1938. Obviously, there is a range of views but the near worship of the armed forces one sees in the US, is much less on this side of the Atlantic.
This is not to say that the machinations of people like Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz are not true. Their nature is quite widely recognised. France and Germany did not join the invasion of Iraq. In the UK it is now widely held to be wrong. Yes, we have our hawks too but they have to shout louder to be heard.
Putin’s invasion has caused an anger across the continent that will last a generation. The arguments we read here are being eclipsed.
The number of civilians known dead so far is less than 500, according to figures released by the UN today. It is impossible to verify stories of how civilian targets are being struck. Russia says Ukrainian militia are operating out of populated areas and the result is from return fire. Western media and Ukrainian officials say Russia is purposely killing civilians just for the hell of it. It is not clear what Russia would have to gain from that. We have not read Russia’s side of the story anywhere in Western media.
I am usually in sympathy with most of what Consortium news says.
The reports come from many sources. People phoning relatives in the west. We have video evidence from diverse sources. Yes there may be propaganda but there is too much information. Uncomfortable though it may be for some, Russian artillery is pounding cities from a distance. I don’t see how else cities could be defended except from within the city. The Ukrainians don’t have much in the way long range missiles.
Truth will emerge but if Putin thought he would have a quick victory and divide and humiliate the west, it has backfired.
You can go outside the city to fight them there and not fire from residential areas risking civilians with return fire.
While the article from Los Alamos Study Group makes eminent good sense, humanity remains challenged with the main current problem: Fascist war criminals who wish to maintain and continue their historic routine of mass murdering innocent others with impunity, unfortunately, don’t “do” good sense.
Peace.
This is a powerful document and I commend CN for helping to distribute it. One footnote: I read the interview with Kissinger linked near the top of the article and was pleasantly surprised to find that Kissinger opposed ‘breaking Russia’ and instead saw the long-term goal as integrating Russia. Another demonstration that no one is beyond redemption.
i don’t think there’s much difference between ‘breaking’ and ‘integrating’ for the russians. they had a taste of the ‘integration’ in the 90’s. in both scenario’s russia is supposed to passively undergo western dominance.
I read Professor Brenner’s piece before this one. The truths of Objectives #2 & #3 (above) I tried to elucidate in a comment there.
Strikingly accurate, level-headed, and beautifully written. Now if only someone could beat our belligerent government into accepting it!
It’s sad to see how even the average, well educated American citizen rifuses to openly condemn the imperialistic, foreign US politics responsible of so much harm, death and destruction all over the world in the last century. And to identify in the political warmongers and military-industrial tycoons the malicious spirits who systematicaly betray their compatriots.
Thank you for publishing this perfectly sane path to peace. The dogs of war in Washington need to be brought to heel.
This is one of the most intelligent contribution to the debate so far in the face of endless noises intended to boosts varying publics into full frenzy for war. Any idiot or fool can start a crisis, but it takes far more energy and everything else to put out the conflagration that follows from the same. May the voices of reason continue to be heard in these times. This good guy / bad guy simplification of issues has always been a precusrsor to wars as the ultimate outcome. It’s more than way past time that diplomacy be given sway yet again. To villify Russia and ignore the role of NATO and Victoria Nuland and the U.S. is more than gross hypocrisy and beng janus-faced in the course of reasoning.
Again, may wiser reasoning help to bring closure to the conflict.
The question for me is: Does the human species have enough intelligence to avoid extinction? LASG has been offering solutions for a long time and I, for one, have been listening.
These are the people who truly understand how precious life is. Our inability to see our self destructive folly would eventually have disastrous consequences for, not only all of humanity, but all for creatures residing on earth’s surface. Don’t we have any concern for them, even if some of us might have unconscious death wishes?
All very valid points.
Within the US, the military and weapons industries have become a subsidized rightwing warmonger machine.
For stability, 80% of this must be re-purposed to build infrastructure in nations developing or devastated by the US.
Define right wing.
It has been the likes of Obama, Biden and Nuland, neocon democrats, carrying out the policy of war pigs Wolfowitz, Cheney, Rumsfeld etc.
Yes, in recent history the Dems are as much rightwing warmongers as the Reps, both controlled by economic power.
The rightwing are tribalists led by tyrants, who invent enemies to pose as defenders and accuse opponents of disloyalty.
La Russie n’envahit pas l’Ukraine, PLUTÔT la Russie LIBÈRE l’Ukraine du joug Nazi militaire de la BÊTE IMPÉRIALISTE OCCIDENTALE WASHINGTONIENNE ET DE SES VASSAUX DE L’OTAN.
POURQUOI ME PARLEZ-VOUS D’ENVAHISSEMENT!
Because it IS an invasion, of course! (Just as the Normandy landings on D-Day, and others, were invasions…)
Du calme, Consortium News est un des rares sites à ne pas jouer dans le camp de la narrative US-Otan.
If only the whole world could get to read and understand this document from the best of America.
As it was at their behest, ‘Western’ governments (both NATO and previously neutral) must first get the attack dogs in the media to stop the whipping up of the people into a frenzy of hate towards Russia. They know how it’s done: It’s all in the photo and headline.
After a lifetime wasted listening to and watching the BBC as my primary news source, I realise I had no way of understanding the Maidan at the time. Living through the Cold War, I remember Mrs Thatcher’s survival experts telling us how to build a nuclear shelter in the back garden – perhaps just a ruse for the Russians to show she was serious. I also remember the ‘Eve of Destruction’ and, as with climate change (not including the nuclear component), we are getter ever closer to midnight.
A superb piece of writing, I wonder if this will also be labelled a ‘conspiracy theory’ by the blind & ignorant when I attempt to post it?
I would conjecture “paid agents”, Mello cites public documents and actions, nothing else.
Most probably, this message will be “blanked out”, no mentions at all in “responsible media” or “responsible organizations”.
Unfortunately, 90% of this country’s citizens and 100% of the nation’s power structure are suffering from a delirious case of war fever. They see this as their best chance to do what the Study Group describes: destroy Russia (and “altruistically” administer its political break up and take-over of its natural resources “for those who need them”). These rabid enforcers of the “Wolfowitz Doctrine” are much more likely to employ first use of nuclear weapons than Russia, as they’ve got a cadre of real genuine Nazis who trace their roots back to the Third Reich to egg them on. Anything is permitted them because they are the “righteous.”
Somehow, during the course of the last 80 years of history the United States was psychologically captivated by the evil forces it helped defeat in the 1940’s. It stopped valuing peace and cooperation among nations as the foremost goal and supplanted it with the will to absolute power no matter how many corpses that would require–hence all the forever wars against badly outmatched opponents who could only die to express their resistance to American barbarism and hegemony. Washington will destroy Russia unless it is stopped and it will purposefully destroy Ukraine as a means to damage Russia regardless of the lies it may tell.
Unfortunately, the only way to stop the monster very probably will end up destroying the world because of nukes. Be sure to thank Obomber for the several-trillion dollar nuclear refit that he commissioned around the same time he deliberately re-kindled the Cold War, now transmogrifying into a hot one. I cringe to recollect the hope with which he was elected and his numerous subsequent cowardly betrayals all paving the way for this by his successors. I sincerely hope the history is accurately written by the survivors, if there are any, because I would hate for humanity to not only be subsumed by annihilation but in the service of such lies as thoroughly permeate our existence in this time. Only Satan, if he is real, wins this supposed chess match, not the jackals in Washington.
American attitudes were inclined to be pro nazi before WW2. Look into ‘daily kos’ 2/21/22 ‘In 1939, Nazis packed Madison Square Garden to celebrate George Washington’s birthday’.
There has been a lot of diversity in political philosophy amongst the American people throughout its history. Not only were many German-Americans descended from immigrants loyal to their roots at the time you describe but so were many uber-capitalists in the American oligarchy biased in favor of Hitler. They even invested in his illegal rearmament before WWII and attempted a coup against FDR which was prevented by Gen. Smedley Butler. George W. Bush’s grandfather Prescott was among the coup plotters, but none of them were ever prosecuted–after all, they were gentlemen of means! Mostly Yankee bankers.
However, the US government was never outwardly aligned with Hitler or his Nazis either before the war or after–they were liberal Democrats, sent there by faithful supporters of FDR for the most part! After the war, both parties were stridently anti-Nazi and anti-communist. I well remember: Every other Hollywood film showed us Yanks single-handedly winning WWII.
The orchestrated redirection of official American hate from fascists to commies wasn’t slow but it was sure steady. The zealotry against fascism probably waned faster than the hate for socialism grew. It was a new age for mass communication with the introduction of television and a constant upgrade of every other modality. Very noticeable swings by both the people and their government away from the left and towards the right were obvious even to a kid who lived in the 40’s, 50’s and 60’s and during the entire 80 years upon which I focused.
Moreover, for the record, no more than a tiny percentage of Americans ever embraced “communism.” It was simply too toxic to even be discussed rationally in this country at any time since the Bolshevik Revolution. In contrast, there has been a disturbingly growing number of Americans willing to rehabilitate Hitler and his fascists, rather blaming small time players like Poland, and, of course, Russia for all the upheaval. The left will always have an extremely heavy lift in America, a country that is not satisfied with simply keeping its own system free of socialist taint, but wiping the “threat” out in any other country that wants to try it out as a standard operating system, e.g., Cuba, Chile, Nicaragua, Venezuela or Bolivia (among others).
Sorry, I don’t give much credence to the Daily Kos, not after their immersion in the lunacy of Russiagate and the entire soft slow-motion coup against Trump, duly elected whether you liked him or not. He doesn’t get my seal of approval, and the Republicans would be wise not to run him again, but the constitution was wracked by Democratic extremists who found it expedient to simply ditch the document and its protections to nail one target and legitimate Hillary’s outrageous behaviors and accusations. Hyper partisanship above all else, run totally amuck. That’s the era we are still in and the demons that Lord Biden still serves.
I suppose it’s too much to hope that the libertarians Paul and Lee make common cause with Sanders once again (as they did regarding Yemen once upon a time) and read this word for word in a press conference. We need people of prominence to hail the sense contained herein.
The only comments I’ve seen from Sanders wrt this crisis were the same fulminating against the “evil Putin” that has swamped US and Western media. Did I miss something?
Yes, and I missed it too until recently.
Sanders speaks to both sides on Ukraine, but to find his anti-NATO-expansion comments generally you need to go to alternative media. (After all I’d seen from Sanders, I myself was surprised to find these anti-NATO-expansion comments. Obviously MSM doesn’t want you to hear them. They only highlight his Evil Putin comments.) Notably he gave a “Double Standards” speech on March 3, 2022, covered on Telesur. Here’s the nutshell quote from the speech:
“Russia, like the U.S., has an interest in the security policies of its neighbors. Recognizing this fact is not a sign of weakness, but of an understanding,” Senator Bernie Sanders pointed out.
He has made a few similar comments going back to 2015, interspersed between his Evil Putin comments. Just search for Sanders and NATO expansion.
Sanders? He was all on board for the entire Russiagate conspiracy. To my dismay and sorrow he’s morphed into a Russophobe. Your hope is lost. I’m sorry to say.