“The only thing we learn from history, I am afraid, is that we do not learn from history.” Ron Paul
The US funding of the proxy war in Ukraine is another example of an historically proven failed policy; it’s also a principal contributor to the national debt, now greater than our GDP. The irrational nature of such policies inevitably leads to abdication of support, or direct involvement as the proxy war fails. The result of abdication is very Viet Nam and Afghanistan like as the US loses even more credibility, whereas the options of direct involvement are either as combatant or enforcer of a peace agreement; these two options are more of a distinction than a difference.
The current administration insists that only Ukraine can decide to negotiate with Russia; this does not make sense when the US and EU are practically Ukraine’s sole means of support, a position that gives them the ability to effect an armistice and peace talks, and one that has bipartisan support in Congress. The US and EU are funding a proxy war against Russia without a legitimate treaty as Ukraine is not a NATO member; European nations had rejected Ukraine’s applications to join the EU until 2022 when they granted it candidate status. This is actually a war between NATO and Russia similar to the past, except this is not a Cold War; this time it’s very much a hot war in a recycled old feud.
The Russo-Ukrainian War has been dragging on since 2014 and so far resulted in Russia annexing Crimea and most of Donbas. For whatever reason, many in mass media refer to the February 2022 Russian invasion as the beginning of this war, even though Ukraine lost a large amount of its territory to Russia early on in what is now a decade’s long conflict. Most military experts assess Ukraine’s ability to win this war as little to none, even with an astronomical amount of US and EU aid; the main reason for this pessimism is the corruption endemic to the Ukrainian regime as made apparent with the various times the security and military leaders in Zelensky’s government have had to be replaced. The US and EU are aware of the NAZI backgrounds of the oligarchs that engineered Zelensky’s election; since then, they have declared that only their party is legitimate, which now controls all mass media and press.
Despite the fact that both the US and EU know the sordid reality about the Ukrainian administration, they both backed Zelensky to be considered a candidate for the 2023 Nobel Peace Prize; while bookies and the media predicted he would win, fortunately for what’s left of the organization’s reputation the winner was an Iranian human-rights activist, Narges Mohammadi. While the US and EU have presented Zelensky as a democratic leader, the Nobel Peace Prize Committee found a legitimate and far more worthy candidate.
A reasonable question is why would the US and EU continue with the same failed policy time after time, but expect a different result; is it just an example of Einstein’s definition of insanity, or is there something else in play? What is it about this perpetually corrupt former province of Russia that motivates so much support from US and EU leaders? Why are the political and media narratives about Ukrainian democracy and not tyrannical oligarchs? Why does the Biden administration persevere in this policy when the July 2022 CNN poll clearly showed that most Americans were against further funding? Politics is a transactional affair, and Ukraine is a very resource rich area; the answers to these questions can be found in those realities.
“What if the American people woke up and understood that the official reasons for going to war are almost always based on lies and promoted by war propaganda in order to serve special interests?” Ron Paul
Libera Voce 