Well, fellas, for those of you who actually care about the current state of US politics (something that is not just of interest to US citizens) here’s an early Christmas gift. Today, the Booby’s going to give you a brief history lesson, the kind that you won’t get in high school or college, and won’t see on network news or in Hollywood movies.
In recent weeks we’ve witnessed Princess Hillary essentially accuse fellow Democrat, Tulsi Gabbard, of either being in cahoots with the evil Russians or at least being their stooge (see here)… oh, and Jill Stein’s a Russian agent, too… oh, and of course everyone in TV land knows Donald Trump is a Russian agent, too. Needless to say, the mindless parrots of the mainstream media are on board with these curious assertions (see here).
Now, if the former first lady actually believes her own claims about the increasingly long list of persons she considers to be collaborating with the Russians (and against her) then we must conclude that Princess Hillary is clinically insane, and we must also wonder about the sanity all those who have swooned over her for years, and still do. Remember this is the same Hillary Clinton who believed her husband’s sexual transgressions were really a “vast right-wing conspiracy”.
What’s even weirder is the relative silence on this matter from the Republicans and their pundit lapdogs. Seems they’re none too pleased with Tulsi Gabbard, either.
So what does all this have to do with you or with your son(s) dying on the steppes of, say, Ukraine? Well, everything, fellas. Let the Booby’s history lesson begin:
The Cold War
If you’re a fella from the USA, Canada, or the ANZAC countries you probably know something about the Cold War. Some of us fellas are old enough to actually remember it. Much like today, there was much harrumphing in Western capitals in those days about the Soviet (i.e. Russian) threat.
Now, the Booby’s not going to suggest that the USSR was not a threat to anyone. It was. It was by any objective measure as murderous and aggressive a regime as Nazi Germany. What should be made clear is that the USSR was most certainly not an existential threat to the United States, to Canada, or to the ANZAC countries.
In the immediate aftermath of World War II, it was the countries of Western Europe who had plausible concerns for their survival and territorial integrity. Fresh off conquering Berlin, the Red Army was literally poised, not merely at Western Europe’s doorstep, but with a big foot in the door by virtue of occupying Eastern Germany. Throw in the fact that the Western powers and the USSR were natural ideological enemies (see here) and the situation explains itself.
Now, the USSR’s practical ability to successfully invade and overrun Western Europe is certainly debatable, but at the very least the threat was real. In fact, so weakened were the forces of the British Commonwealth as well as the laughable “Free French” forces that a Soviet post-Berlin victory would have been assured had no one else been in place to oppose the Red Army.
But there was someone else. Only the presence of the US Army in Western Europe rendered the West strong enough to stop the Red Army from advancing into Western Europe assuming they it even wanted to.
But that’s Europe. What must be made absolutely, abundantly, and positively crystal clear, fellas, is the fact that at no time during the Cold War, or at any time since, has Russia represented an existential threat to the United States, to Canada, or the to ANZAC countries. The logistics alone render the whole discussion moot.
Consider the Allied invasion of Normandy as a comparison. For the US to have successfully invaded Europe in 1944 it had to first cross an entire ocean, and not only that, had to safely carry hundreds of thousand of troops, all their equipment, heavy military hardware, air forces, and supporting populations, provisions, and supplies from North America. This is a logistical nightmare in itself. To do so in an ocean that is a war zone is unthinkable.
What instead made that invasion not unthinkable, but very thinkable, were at least two primary realities: 1) Great Britain served as a pre-invasion base where troops could be stationed, housed, trained, supplied, and otherwise prepared. And 2), just as importantly, the German naval threat to large-scale shipping in the Atlantic had been mostly contained. Absent either of these conditions the US’s participation in any invasion of Continental Europe would have been not just impossible but suicidal.
These factors, it should be noted, don’t even mention the tremendous contributions from the countries of the British Commonwealth (up to that point the world’s dominant military power), and others.
By contrast, the notion of a non-North American power actually invading North America successfully is quite simply impossible for these same reasons. Consider: even when it was the world’s leading superpower Great Britain could not successfully conquer the United States, not in 1776, not in 1812.
The Soviets, if they wanted to threaten the US in any meaningful way, would have had to somehow transport at least a few million troops (which they didn’t actually have), all their equipment, heavy military hardware, air forces, and supporting populations, provisions, and supplies from Eurasia without the benefit of a landing base, and without the benefit of safe naval passage via the oceans. The very notion of Moscow attempting this is worse than ridiculous, it’s insane.
No, Alaska would not have worked, either. The Rocky Mountains make any kind of offensive lightening attack from Alaska on the interior of North America impossible, while any army stationed in this remote, inhospitable state would be under constant areal bombardment and susceptible to counterattack by North American forces in a far better position to operate.
Besides with only a single Trans-Siberian Railroad connecting the USSR’s Eastern ports to its industrial hubs supplying such an invasion force was unthinkable.
But, for fun, let’s just say the Soviets managed to successfully land a few million troops (which, again, they din’t actually have) somewhere on North American soil, along with at least some of their complementary equipment, provisions, and some remnant of the Soviet air force. At that point the invaders would have had to fight both the US and Canada on their home soil. Not only would these countries’ militaries be fully engaged with the advantage of fighting on their own land, but the domestic populations would become fully mobilized to fight or assist by whatever means necessary. In other words, it would be suicide.
The prospect of a nuclear first-strike as a tactic against the US is equally absurd. Any Soviet bomber force would have had to fly over vast distances, somehow undetected, then, once over North America, fight its way through superior American air defences without taking significant casualties, then accurately drop all its bombs and successfully hit each of its intended targets all before the US could launch any kind of nuclear counter-attack. Laughable.
The use of ICMBs would not improve Moscow’s odds, either. US missile technology was superior, and radar would detect any attack in time for the US to launch a counter-strike.
And, of course, the Booby hasn’t even mentioned the notable presence of the US’s European Allies, whom the Soviets would also have had to successfully destroy in totality to prevent them from launching counter-attacks of their own; not to mention all the US missiles positioned on Eurasia, just a few hundred miles in some cases, from the Soviet mainland.
The point of this history lesson, fellas, was not to bore you to tears. The point is that the Soviet Union was never at any time during the Cold War a threat to the existence or territorial integrity of the United States.
Hell, even if the USSR had managed to conquer swaths of Western Europe, and even managed to take the Middle East’s oil supply, the US still would still not be directly vulnerable. North America is quite capable of feeding its people, manufacturing its goods, maintaining a dominant military, and supplying itself with its own abundant oil.
So who benefited most from the USSR’s containment? It’s not rocket science, fellas. It was Western Europe, and to some extent Japan. Had the Cold War turned hot, it was the following people, pictured below, whom your fathers or grandfathers would have died protecting.
The Modern Geopolitical World
So that was the Cold War. Today things are much, much different. Today there is no Soviet Union. Russia is a world power, at least to some extent, but it is no longer a superpower like the US (assuming it ever really was).
Whereas during the Cold War Moscow imposed its influence is faraway places, like Vietnam, Libya, or Cuba, today it is focused on what it can realistically affect, namely its own immediate sphere of influence, places like Ukraine, Syria, Kazakstan, or Armenia.
Today Moscow is not interested in projecting its power in places like Nicaragua or Ethiopia. That’s not because Moscow is suddenly populated by good, peaceful folk. It’s not. Russia is playing the global geopolitical game like everyone else. What’s changed is that it’s no longer capable of projecting its power farther than its own backyard. It’s too weak.
So why then does the West’s political establishment, including Princess Hillary, want war with Russia so desperately today? Well, some things don’t change. Western Europe and Japan still desperately need Middle Eastern oil to keep their industrial economies functioning. Having Syria, Iraq, and Ukraine under the thumb of the US military would go a long ways towards keeping Western Europeans fat and content.
But the world is also changing, fellas. The post-WWII order is changing with it. The West is in decline; serious decline.
Since 1945 it has been the US alone that has secured the flow of cheap, mostly Arab, oil to Western Europe and East Asia. The first Gulf War convinced the world that the post-Cold War US was unbeatable, and its role as global hegemon was unchallengeable. Afghanistan and Iraq showed the world that America struggles mightily when it has to fight wars that don’t involve technical gadgets, laser beams, and glitzy, made-for-CNN picture shows.
The war in Afghanistan will soon run into its third decade. Prince W’s Iraq regime-change just barely succeeded, and only time will tell if that remains true. Of course, that “success” came at the cost of America nearly self-destructing with internal acrimony.
With direct invasion now out of the question the US can only project its influence via proxies and mercenaries, like al Qaida or ISIS: The Libyan regime change succeeded at deposing the government, but it created an ongoing, bloody civil-war and a failed state. The Syrian regime change was an unequivocal disaster. It led to an even more gruesome civil war, the rise of ISIS, it flooded Europe with refugees, and after all that the Syrian government remains in power. Meanwhile, all the world understands that the US fears committing ground troops to another Iraq-type situation.
The political elites in Washington, London, Tokyo, and Brussels, meanwhile, still need the steady flow of cheap, mostly Arab, oil to keep their economies – wracked by debt, demographic suicide, and corruption – afloat. Thus, the “smart people” sit around and talk of “grand chessboards” and “seizing the moment”. What all this talk means, fellas, is that you’re supposed to die fighting to preserve the fragments of a Western Empire, as opposed to protecting your homes, your families, or your countries, none of which or whom are even remotely at risk.
That’s not even the half of it, fellas. We now live in the post-1960s era of New Left morality. You’re now supposed to die at the behest of a political class that openly hates you. Princess Hillary regards you as “deplorable”, President Obama mocks you for “clinging to your guns and religion”, and if you think a President Ted Cruz or Jeb Bush would regard you with any less contempt you’re kidding yourselves.
Your political elite, like every political elite, needs the financial spoils of empire so that they may do things like teach your children the state religion. In the post-60s era that means teaching your children about “toxic masculinity” and the 79 different genders.
Without population growth a fractional reserve banking system tends to revert to a rickety ponzi scheme. Thus, your financial elites need to preserve the zombified economy and its zombie banks by pushing for ever more immigration, and that suits the “de-whitening” demographic agenda of the political elites just fine.
Your political elite needs the empire so that the US can have the global reserve currency, and borrow money to fight ever more wars, so that Britain, France, Germany, and Japan no longer have to fight amongst themselves for the aforementioned steady supply of cheap, mostly Arab, oil.
It’s the 60s all over again, fellas, except that the counterculture intelligentsia of yesterday has become the political establishment of today. During the Cold War the smart people all considered America evil and bad, and the Russians benign and misunderstood. But today suddenly America is good again, and it is the post-Communist Russians who are now the evildoers.
Oh, and you’re also expected to obediently die… perhaps on the slopes of a Caucasian mountainside, so that Princess Hillary and the rest of her political class can continue to preach contempt for you, the working class male (preferably contempt for the working class white male, but any male will do), and drink organic wine.
All that’s really changed since the 60s is that the anti-war, anti-US intelligentsia, then so in love with Marxism, Mao, and Ché, actually wants war today, for today they are the heirs of the empire.
It’s All About Empire… It Always Was
Now recall all the reasons why the Booby argued that a Cold War invasion of the United States by Moscow was not only inconceivable, but actually insane to even take seriously. This is still true today, only more so. Russia is no more a threat to mom, dad, and apple pie than is the country of Chad.
The reason Russia has incurred the rage of your political elites lies in that country’s insistence on resisting the US’s efforts to impose its power (now only via proxies) upon places like Syria, but especially upon places like Ukraine, which sit on Russia’s boarder. Worst of all, it has resisted the US most successfully.
America’s foray into Iraq, though somewhat successful in terms of achieving war aims, was a disaster in that it revealed to the world the US’s unwillingness to fight a serious, prolonged ground war where it might actually take casualties and not merely inflict them. The American public doesn’t seem to have a great desire for empire. Even the US intelligentsia seems to have little desire for war… at least not when the Republicans are in the White House.
Post-Iraq, the US military has had to settle for regime change by proxy, so as to ensure no American casualties are accrued, and no prolonged engagements occur. Judging by the results in Libya, Syria, and Ukraine these have been utter disasters. It is believed in the highest circles among our highest elites that, to use the parlance of the highest theories of military stratagem… “it’s all Russia’s fault”.
Well, sure, it’s true Russia played a direct role in ensuring that the Syrian and Ukrainian regime changes blew up in Washington’s face, but the fact is Moscow played no role in ensuring the Libyan regime change blew up in Washington’s face. Heck, Prince W’s Iraq conflict blew up in Washington’s face all by itself, without any help from Russia. It just might be that the US really is the “paper tiger” Osama bin Laden once called it so many decades ago.
Of course, our elites cannot accept this. It’s believed that the US military and the American people will rush headlong into the next fight if only it’s sold better. The thinking seems to go that, if the next war is peddled by an Oprah-approved progressive Democrat, then the country’s enthusiasm will gush over and ensure a quick and easy victory. Or so our betters surmise.
Oh, and a great many of you deplorables will need to die, or come home maimed, or psychologically ruined. But no one in Washington, London, or Tokyo cares about that. Neither does the mainstream media.
You see, the whole weapons of mass destruction thing is now blamed for America tearing itself to pieces during the Iraq War. This time, by cracky, they’re going emphasize what a nasty little fellow Bashir al Assad is (as if Saddam Hussein was not 1000 time worse). They’re going to portray Putin as Hitler. They’re going to lament that Ukraine is not in NATO. They’re going to convince us, goddamnit, that the Russians are coming!
Oh, and a great many of you deplorables will need to die, or come home maimed, or psychologically ruined. But no one in Washington, London, or Tokyo cares about that. Neither does the mainstream media… did the Booby mention that?
While the mainstream media has clearly bought into this narrative, it’s not so clear that main street USA has bought in. Has Tulsi Gabbard connected these dots?
So ask yourselves, fellas: Do you want to die for your political elites? Do you want your sons to die for our political elites? Or merely to secure the flow of oil to Tokyo, Brussels, or Berlin?
Take a look at your neighbourhoods, your wives, your children, your parents. Are any of these threatened by what the Russians are doing in Ukraine, or Syria?
It doesn’t appear, at least on the surface, that Donald Trump wants anyone to die on the Eastern Front, though it’s hard to tell sometimes with this clown (see here). Of course, if true, this fact alone would make him an obvious Russian sleeper agent. Sure it would. And Iraq had vast storehouses of WMDs, too.
It also doesn’t appear that Tulsi Gabbard wants you or your sons to die on the steppes of a place 90% of Americans couldn’t locate on a map. Of course, she must be a Russian agent, too… or so says Princess Hillary.
Insane? It’s only insane if our political class, including its various royal figureheads, actually believes the narrative. But if Princess Hillary doesn’t truly believe what she’s saying then we can all breath easy, as that would mean she’s not really insane, but merely a homicidal sociopath… not that either possibility would matter to any of her vapid fans watching The View or CNN
Besides, none of Princess Hillary’s fans will be called upon to fight, that’s you’re burden, fellas.
The Booby senses a counter-counterculture brewing. Care to join?