19 Comments

Nice article. One minor doubt: “I would hope that giving Trump “the win” is preferable to nuclear war”

Not to the deep state. Not by a long shot.

If it did work, the deep state would be apoplectic because it would virtually guarantee Trump 2024. I honestly think the deep state would prefer to take their chances with nukes.

Expand full comment

They would prefer to take OUR chances with nukes. They have no sons or daughters in the fight and they haven’t quite killed enough of us with Covid.

Expand full comment

the deep state, aka swamp (trump is right), is wholly owned by wef world fascists of davos. fascism is the common denominator in the 'leadership' nuland/obama installed in kiev in 2014.

the swamp has been out to destroy russia since clinton reneged on holding nato in the west and bombed belgrade for 90 nights in 1999 to pull kosovo out of yugoslavia.

yes putin drew the red line,

how many nukes will putin need to show he won't let russia be dismantled?

Expand full comment

Sadly you may be right. Gummi Bear's statement to "never underestimate the Egos of important people" would apply to the deep state as well.

Expand full comment

I doubt the globalist warmongers think that would be better than a nuclear war. Particularly if it requires Trump, whom they hate with the heat of a thousand suns. He's a nationalist all the way, completely anathema to them and their goal of "spreading liberal democracy" and "nation building" in the countries they've destroyed around the world.

Def. "liberal democracy" - a globalist kleptocracy that allows them to suck up all the wealth and resources through economic collapse and pen up the peasants and peons in labor camps after reducing the world population by about 75%.

Expand full comment

soros said kiev is a democracy.... see their version of t. jefferson?

Expand full comment

Dear lord, no! The last thing we need is the guy who inflicted Operation Overventilation and then WARP speed on us getting into a dick measuring contest with Putin that includes a possible nuclear response on the end of it.

Don't get me wrong, nobody Dementia Joe sends is likely to be useful at all. But you don't send a lit match to a powder keg.

Trump actually had his chance to prevent this by pulling out of NATO when he rightly identified it as an alliance whose purpose had become for European countries to milk US resources for their national defense rather than paying for it and providing it for themselves. And how they were also becoming more dependent on Russian resources that ultimately undermined NATO's original purpose. But in the Trump way, he talked a good game and delivered no actual game or, as with the case of COVID, a nightmare of a Fauci game.

Expand full comment

Typo

"There is a **per-existing** relationship and mutual respect between the two - there is a strange kinship between the two"

Expand full comment

An excellent idea. And a bonus: the libs won't back the war anymore.

Expand full comment

Not just libs backing the war. GOP is all over this thing. They love the warfare state as much as the libs do. Libs didn't used to, but now it's politically expedient.

Expand full comment

Because both Parties are controlled by the same forces.

Expand full comment

I mean, I think there are reasons this is happening now instead of four years ago.

But Trump is absolutely more objectionable than nuclear war to deep state players. Even if he had the ability to talk everybody down, he’d never be given the chance.

Expand full comment

I like your thinking. But I think we all know that there is no way Biden or his cabal would give Trump the chance to negotiate with Putin. Sad but true.

Expand full comment

10 minutes before the sotu; putin should call brandon on the "hotline"!

see how brandon's depends hold up!

Expand full comment

"We made the best deal, the greatest deal ever! Nobody could have made a deal as good as this one.” - Yup, I can just hear him say this. I like your idea. Sharyl Atkisson floated this idea on Twitter a couple of days ago.

Expand full comment

Not sure what you mean by "no quick win for Putin". It took the US more than 3 weeks from the Iraq invasion start to get to Baghdad (and Ukraine has a larger are than Iraq). Would you say the Iraq invasion (not the occupation afterwards) was not a quick win?

As to occupation of all of Ukraine - I doubt that was ever Putin's plan. He would probably keep the areas that were initially pro Russian (Donetsk, Lugansk), but the rest is full of hostile population. Why would he need it?

Expand full comment

do not expect russia to shock and awe in to a stalemate ala the us' military industry complex business model!

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Mar 1, 2022
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Isn't that what Kerry did with Iran?

Expand full comment

Yes. But the Logan Act will suddenly be the most important thing ever when Trump does it.

Expand full comment