By Jorge Vilches for the Saker Blog
useful European idiots
" Washington and London have drawn 'useful European idiots' into an economic war against Russia " - said former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev - adding that "the onset of a systemic crisis in the Eurozone is beginning to come true." He added that Anglo-Saxons on both sides of the Atlantic conned EU members "like a couple of shell-game tricksters" by drawing them into an unwarranted economic war against Moscow which is actually an Anglo-Saxon project, not theirs. Paraphrasing James Carville, "it's the Anglo-Saxons, stupid". The US-UK cabal does not want Europe and Russia to trade, do business, relate, or grow together in any way, shape, or form. So they designed, built and forced upon Europe the current John Bolton-Ukraine war which had plan A (now failed) with Russia as target and plan B as substitute with Europe itself as the intended victim coming next. What Dmitry Medvedev may not know though is that such "useful European idiots" can be broken down into 3 fairly distinct categories starting with the EU "well-trained career idiots" basically focused on continuously earning salaries and perks way above their capabilities. So they know that (a) the EU system rewards them generously despite their obvious mediocrity and limitations and (b) thus do not dare to question, doubt, let alone defy the EU system or dictats. They all know and feel every day of their lives that the EU 'system' has a very strict pecking order and what top-cock (or top-hen) says to do or say or think is to be summarily executed without questioning the mandate, even if against European best interests as is the case.
This simplifies the problem from the Washington-London perspective as by controlling a handful of EU leaders (more on that later) the rest just follow the Pied Piper of Hamelin. Furthermore, these EU-captured intellectual simpleton retards are not dumb enough to the extreme of questioning their unequivocal role (they are aware of it) and accordingly constantly strengthen their vested-interests relationship. In sum, they work hard at it.
Then there is a second category of "useful European idiots" grouping the visible top EU leaders - many unelected - who can either be (a) plain corrupt as traditionally allowed for in Europe or (b) perceive themselves as God-chosen to lead Europe to a glorious yet undefined destiny no matter if actively hijacking any representational capacity and values they may have received. For lack of a better term, this "affection" - which pretty much comes with the territory - in medical circles is sometimes also known as "bronzemia" a rare hematological disease that makes the patient believe his destiny is to end up in a bronze sculpture and adored - literally - just like a Greek God of sorts. For example, it is very well known that EU Commission President Ursula von den Leyen abhors British leadership, let alone after the yet un-resolved Brexit due to unconfessable trickery from Perfidious Albion. But she still accepts and follows Anglo-Saxon mandates because of what she perceives to be her role in achieving the still unknown greater European "good". Go figure... Finally, the third group of "useful European idiots" are regular everyday Europeans that - so as not to abandon their zone of political and economic / financial comfort - knowingly allow their leaders to betray their best interests without getting their feet wet in any way.
Pepe Escobar says in his latest article referenced below: " The combo in power in Washington actually "supports" the unification of Britain, Poland, Ukraine and The Three Baltic Midgets as a separate alliance from NATO/EU - aiming at "strengthening the defense potential." That's the official position of US Ambassador to NATO Julian Smith.
So the real imperial aim is to split the already shattering EU into mini-union pieces, all of them quite fragile and evidently more "manageable", as Brussels Eurocrats, blinded by boundless mediocrity, obviously can't see it coming. More on the UK + Australia roles later.
Meanwhile the Austrian Chancellor himself thoughtfully posits that "Alcohol could be our last resort " and the EU gaslights environmentalists by grossly redefining what 'green' energy is. This resembles quite closely former US President Bill Clinton's dilemma in his grand jury testimony regarding his acknowledged and intense sexual relationship with young White House intern Monica Lewinsky "it depends on what the meaning of the word is is" (sic). No typos in that quote, so say no more...
Ref #3 rt.com Ref #4 en.wikipedia.org
Ref #5 thesaker.is
plan A
"Rape Russia" was plan A, by first provoking Russia 24x7x365 into an existential armed conflict, then let's defeat Russia militarily (ha!) and change the regime, then balkanize the Russian Federation and fragment it into manageable pieces, and then plunder all of Russia yet again just like we did in Yeltsin's time. Easy does it. Problem is plan A failed miserably on all fronts no matter how much and how well hundreds of Anglo-Saxon experts - the real puppeteers moving the EU-Ukraine strings - planned for it, some of whom still insist it's only a matter of pressing yet longer and harder. Others say let's not lose this war, let's just go nuclear (more on that later). Yet others - probably cool-headed baldy boomers with Cuban missile crisis personal experience - warn that let's better not try nuclear warfare as Russia, at least today with fully proven hypersonic vector delivery... would also win. Besides, European capitals nearby would be very soft and quick targets, would they not? Furthermore, Russia's Sarmat ICBM would immediately step into the act able to 'demolish half a continent as the most powerful missile of its class in terms of range and warheads invincible to all existing air defenses'(sic) And also possible unstoppable latest generation UAV drone fleets already under Russian deployment and/or drone-bot or regular submarines could also nuclear-trigger unheard-of massive tsunamis at every targeted coastline in Western seaboards that 'almost' land-locked Russia does not have... plus EMP mid-air detonations grinding the crowded Western cities to a halt. All politically impossible and Russian very highly-improbable... but let's just hope and pray that it doesn't happen by accident either...
At any rate, plan A took several disciplines and many years of design and training probably more than 10 as proudly explained by NATO's top dog, Jens Stoltenberg. Also, as per the latest public statements made by former White House National Security Adviser John Bolton, it took a lot of hard work, many US and UK agencies and hundreds of experts, think tanks, rivers of ink, and Zettabytes of documents (no pun intended) plans, maps, satellite imagery, logistical research, telecommunications development, and testing, interviewing and questioning of many thousands of Ukraine soldiers and foreign mercenaries, political influencing, and many billions of dollars - skeptics please refer to Victoria Nuland - sending tons of lethal, modern, sophisticated weaponry to Russian enemies... and still plan A failed, and badly at that for reasons explained hereafter. Only Field Marshall Nazi General von Paulus and Napoleon Bonaparte would possibly share the disgusting feeling of such terribly frustrating defeat.
With plan A, even Germany broke its long-standing policy of banning all exports of lethal weapons to a conflict zone the instant it agreed to deliver 1,000 rocket launchers and 500 Stinger surface-to-air missiles to Ukraine. France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and many other states have joined the effort and, led by Germany, have added greater support with whatever including anti-tank, anti-aircraft weapons, howitzers, armored vehicles, body armors, night vision devices, grenade launchers, etc., many/most of which completely uncontrolled and without any oversight actually ended up in the hands of numerous resellers on the "black Internet", not the Ukraine military. The six EU sanctions "packages" - No. 7 is in the works - did not help plan A at all either and, as a matter of fact, all were badly counter-productive. Neither did the addition of "creative transfers" of truly lethal weaponry from Canada per detailed proposal from The Brookings Institution, probably the most prominent "peace-minded" think tank the US will ever have. So imagine what Hoover or The Heritage Foundation, the Council of Foreign Relations, Cato, CSIS, PIIE, American Enterprise or Rand Corporation might say for that matter. The list goes on and on...
Like many other Western strategic projects, plan A most probably originated and/or picked up critical speed in the keenly Russophobic and always protagonistic UK. Still, the level of US involvement was extraordinary and ever-increasing as plan A kept failing, including sanctions preparation, intelligence sharing, weapons deliveries, and tons of money, bribery included. Add to that the ever-heightening political rhetoric: "The United States is in this to win it... not for a stalemate" as one US Congressman proudly tweeted from Kyiv. Or even claiming that "Supplying Arms to Ukraine is Not an Act of War"... The US has sent many F35 jets to Estonia, yet more to Spain and elsewhere...has increased its military presence with US permanent headquarters and troops in Poland... plus a 10-fold enlarged rapid-response force up to 300,000 with yet additional troops in Romania and the Baltic states... plus yet more destroyers in Europe's waters and skies. And always of course with the always-instrumental UK helping along as per Foreign Secretary Liz Truss - now confirmed candidate for the Prime Minister position - urging to send more "heavy weapons, tanks, and also airplanes" to Ukraine ASAP "digging deep into our inventories and ramping up production".
Ref #6 zerohedge.coma Ref #7 rt.com
Ref #8 justsecurity.org
Ref #9 brookings.edu Ref #10 rt.com
Ref #11 euronews.com
Ref #12 b92.net
Ref #13 estonianworld.com
Ref #14 rt.com
Ref #15 rt.com
Ref #16 rt.com
short war
Semantics matter. Sure enough, a formal stake-holder agreement or peace settlement or "peace treaty" of sorts may take very long or even never happen such as still in Korea. And yes, the conflict will go far beyond Ukraine only as a starting point of a new revolution already outlined by Russia's President Vladimir Putin splitting the world in two very distinct 21st century halves in a "before and after" moment. Still, I insist in that the current shooting "hot war" in Ukraine will be short, with Russia simply winning by European default come 2023 - or even before - as explained already in depth. So such "cease-fire" does not need any official "Peace Treaty" or settlement, just shooting and bombing stopped altogether. Ukraine will simply depose its aggression for lack of European support or else be run down by Russian forces wherever Russia decides. Europe would have had enough, so they just want OUT.
In sum, backfiring EU sanctions on Russia will be the reason for Europe and Ukraine - not Russia - to abandon the shooting battlefield thus 'ending the shooting war' soon even if the US would still want to go for it... which actually would not as their plan B (more on that later) would kick in immediately against Europe (!!) as soon as the battlefield war stops in Ukraine. So, thanks to their own EU sanctions, by not having enough Russian oil, fuels, nat-gas, food produce, etc., etc., with social unrest and millions freezing and starving to death, regular public-opinion Europeans would demand the EU to stop battlefield support for the provoked Ukraine war and have their leadership revert sanctions on Russia embracing it as the reliable trading partner as it has always been and thus returning to "normal" ASAP. In that sense, it'd be a short war. Formally, diplomatically, it may never actually end. Just saying...
Ref #17 thesaker.is Ref #18 rt.com
Ref #19 politico.eu Ref #20 thesaker.is
the UK role
After Brexit failed, Old Blighty UK more than ever had to overact positing, for example, that the collective West now needs "a global NATO" to pursue geopolitics anew. Or also " Europe must immediately cut itself completely off from Russian energy supplies oil, gas and coal ". Actually, the current UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss went yet further by tapping her well-known Rule Britannia Anglo-Saxon exceptionalistic mind-set which now would badly demand a much larger "lebensraum". By the way, the Rule Britannia lyrics let the world know that "...at heaven's command...Britons never, never, never shall be slaves". No way, slaves will exist, but Britons shall make sure they are the owners of such and not any other way around. So now, with strategically located Australia - among the world's largest LNG and food produce exporters - the AUKUS core concept is "all Anglo-Saxons for one, and one Anglo-Saxon for all". And do not kid yourself as this is national UK policy from Tories, Lib Dems and also Labour. And per Liz Truss it'd be a flashing new "Network of Liberty" yet global in nature. The time and place of this new "Global NATO" setting Ms Truss says is (1) right now and (2) throughout the whole world. And the "lebensraum" Ukraine would only be the starting point says Foreign Secretary Truss very proud of British colonial history. Actually it'd have to be even far larger than what Adolf Hitler originally foresaw with his Nazi foreign policy dictum left on record in "Mein Kampf". Unbelievably, and per the Führer's own description, such "lebensraum" was to be found - oh coincidence - "in the Ukraine and intermediate lands of eastern Europe"... Liz Truss is on record adding that China would face the same treatment as Russia if it doesn't "play by the rules". The war in Ukraine is "our war" because Ukraine's victory is a "strategic imperative for all of us" while denouncing the "false choice between Euro-Atlantic security and Indo-Pacific security. We need to pre-empt threats in the Indo-Pacific, working with allies like Japan and Australia to ensure that the Pacific is protected. In the modern world we need both. We need a global NATO," she said. Also, there is this new US strategy seeking to arm Japan against China, also consistent with such policies. Ref #21 rt.com
no-one left behind
In addition, the sitting UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss - now official Tory candidate for Prime Minister of the UK - has emphasized that the West "must ensure that, alongside Ukraine, the Western Balkans and countries like Moldova and Georgia have the resilience and the capabilities to maintain their sovereignty and freedom". So Ukraine is not enough for her. And according to the top UK diplomat, NATO should integrate Finland and Sweden "as soon as possible" if the two Nordic nations choose to join the military alliance something which they are both definitely pressured to do.
Adding insult to injury, British Armed Forces Minister James Heappey also stated it is "completely legitimate" for Ukraine to use UK-supplied weapons to strike deep into Russian territory. Ms Truss also has said it was "time for courage, not caution", making it necessary for the West to send warplanes to Kiev to defeat Moscow sounding much like the US State Department's London office. Furthermore, German lawmakers overwhelmingly voted to send 'heavy & complex weapons' to Ukraine, thus making Germany the easiest, shortest and most probable first strike in the event that thermonuclear warfare with Russia is provoked. Germany could not have picked a better way to most unnecessarily place itself in harm's way right next to London... or even before London was struck.
Ref #22 zerohedge.com
The UK lost most of its colonies in the 20th century and economically lost further more with Brexit while the US outsourced most of its manufacturing base in the 21st. So with only their financial and military weapons left, both now are trying to make NATO global. And thus the UK would finally reclaim its universal influence and "take back control" refreshing its natural right to run a financial-military 'Empire on which the sun never sets'. British troops are getting ready for one of their largest deployments in Europe since the cold war, the Defence Ministry (MoD) has said.
Thousands of UK soldiers are going to be sent to countries ranging from North Macedonia to Finland in the coming months to take part in joint drills with their counterparts from NATO, Finland, and Sweden, with British soldiers also training together with US forces in Poland. Also troops from the Queen's Royal Hussars have just been deployed to Finland, which shares a 1,300-km-long border with Russia, to be embedded in an armored brigade. Convened by US Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin, and at the behest of US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley, representatives from 40 countries gathered at Ramstein Air Base, Germany, to set the game plan with the rest of the world as pawns.
In practice, a global NATO is already in the making, and the US-led military bloc's Madrid summit in late June 2022
is the best proof of this. For the first time in NATO's history, the Pacific states - Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and South Korea - were invited; actions were intensified to form 'quasi-alliances' such as the QUAD (the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue between the US, Australia, Japan and India), AUKUS (the trilateral pact between the US, Britain, and Australia), and the Partners in the Blue Pacific (PBP: AUKUS plus Japan and New Zealand). In contrast to the 'classical NATO', which has long been perceived in China as a vestige of the Cold War and intra-Western conflicts, these alliances have an unambiguous anti-Chinese orientation.
Ref #23 rt.com Ref #24 thesaker.is
Ref #25 rt.com
plan A revised
Since at least 10 years ago, an Anglo-Saxon plan A was proactively deployed for the Ukraine war. It meant having the US + UK fully supporting and pulling the strings from 'behind' while the EU + Ukraine's duly bought-out puppets organized a gang-up on Russia from all sides like hyenas on their injured prey. Such plan A by now is obviously failing miserably as the military war is being lost on all fronts and the "sanctions on Russia" have backfired and actually mean terrible "sanctions on Europe" (and "unfriendly" Asians...) with winter rearing its ugly head. Thusly, with plan A failing, Anglo-Saxon plan B is now required. But before getting into its details, let's first review once more what plan A - or the 'let's pounce on harmed Russia together' plan - was all about and how it failed. For Russia was not crushed at all under the weight of sanctions and, actually benefitted in more than one way by collecting ever-larger revenues - due to higher induced prices - for smaller volumes of exports delivered. Furthermore any minute Russia could counter-attack with sanctions of its own regarding many things the West needs besides oil & gas & food & key minerals.
The basic idea behind plan A - not really that "new" by the way - was to prod Russia as much as needed for it to react and then use such reaction to justify a military run-over of Russia. Plan A would take a precise schedule and timing, buying-out whomever wherever, training of the Ukranian military and providing plenty of funding + weapons + intelligence + political coverage + etc. Also there was the requirement to gain time for executing all of the above by actively faking compliance with the Minsk Agreements (shamefully sponsored and led by both Germany & France) which was nothing more than a sham precisely to gain time as readily admitted by former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. So the Western pirating plan was to pounce on Russia hard, produce regime change - despite the "lots of hard work required" per John Bolton former White House National Security Adviser - possibly assassinate Russia's President Vladimir Putin (I kid you not), ruin Russian business capabilities forever, steal Russia's deposits in Western banks, cut off her trade and finances, "yeltsinize" Russia all over again, fraction down the Russian Federation into weak portions, keep on grabbing Russian resources, just steal all that's left or buy it on the cheap... and basically schadenfreude it all the way to the bank...
There was nothing to lose as the US & UK productive game of yesteryear was already over and done with, 'Made in USA' does not exist anymore, the gold-decoupled Bretton Nothing "petro-dollar" standard is in terminal crisis, Brexit did not work out at all as the UK had originally expected, and 75% of the world does not agree with them either. And if while reading this you feel all this is a very unique and peculiar interpretation of facts, I please urge you to (a) take a look at the sources referenced and (b) take into account that if the White House and the worldwide MSM press are willing and able to cover-up today's US president's obvious and most dangerous senility, then what other stories are they euthanizing for you not to know about ? Today's president of the global superpower is permanently confounded by teleprompter and cheat cards telling him what to do and say. Today, the Commander-in-Chief of the by far most powerful military in the world with 790+ military bases spanning the globe and more than 5,000 nuclear warheads, can barely make it through public appearances. Mind you, President Joe Biden wouldn't pass a driver's test, unable to distinguish between a pedestrian or a stop sign. But his finger is on the nuclear trigger. Did the MSM press tell you ?
Ref #26 theguardian.com
Ref #33 rt.com Ref #34 zerohedge.com
Ref #35 technofog.substack.com Ref #36 theepochtimes.com Ref #37 rt.com Ref #38 zerohedge.com Ref #39 oilprice.com
plan B kicks in
Now Russia is winning on all fronts, be it militarily, geo-politically, strategically, financially, economics or logistics. So in the event that plan A failed - as it is now obviously happening - Anglo-Saxon plan B would soon kick in with Europe and Ukraine the victims, not the victimizers because neither will be able to withstand the tremendous burden that their 'Russian sanctions' bear upon themselves, not Russia. And who would the victimizers be? Answer: the US + UK pupeteers-in-chief. Please re-read the " useful European idiots " paragraph above with very clear statements made by former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev. So the 'Russian sanctions' will continue to (1) harm Europe and the Ukraine and (2) leave the Russian Federation basically unscathed and just collecting ever larger revenues - due to higher induced prices - for smaller volumes of exports delivered. This benefits Russia in two ways (a) getting paid more by producing less while saving the difference for future sales (b) it allows to finance Russia's attrition-war strategy forever. There will be violence and massive migrations in Europe for sure as EU leaders are finally realizing.
gold anyone ?
EU politicking though has now stopped in its tracks right at the physical limit which "lite" and uncommitted European consumer economies will not allowed to be crossed thus altering their "comfort zone". It is becoming ever clearer for European public opinion that without Russian energy, Russian food, and Russian produce at large quite simply Europe cannot survive. So as Frank Sinatra foresaw, the end is now near and Anglo-Saxon+EU joint plans for Russian piracy - plan A - are just about over. Never in their history have Europeans depended so much strictly from Russian produce that very simply cannot stop coming in. All the way to very distant Japan and South Korea, with these Russian sanctions their much-required 'Just-In-Time' strategy is rapidly becoming 'Just-In-S**t. So now Europeans and Western-compliant Asians would freeze and starve with massive migrations democratically spread out everywhere. That's why plan B "let's rape Europe instead" will necessarily kick in soon.
What Anglo-Saxons may do after raping Europe and making it their own for peanuts is to make an energy & produce & resources supply deal with whomever. They'd just get a hold of installed and already built capacity plus expertise and human resources capabilities in Europe. Additionally, they would get the continental internal market in a key and unequaled geopolitical area of the world. The Anglo-Saxons basically just want to change the tide and win at something-anything, so if Russia cannot be defeated they'll rape continental Europe first and try to make buddies with whomever later, even Latam or Africa... with investments profits on top. And Australia, as an active part of the AUKUS core may also perform a key role regarding "unfriendly" Asians. And beware: if you care to believe the Anglo-Saxons, between Fort Knox and the Bank of England they both pretty much vault everybody else's gold, Europe's included. So be carefully aware of the plenty of food for thought before you. Gold is real money as Lawrence of Arabia learned the hard way, and per Liz Truss - possibly the future Prime Minister of the UK - let's recall that whoever has the gold would make the rules, their rules.
This unexpected self-inflicted slow-motion demolition of sorts was not what Europe had in mind for itself nor understood to be the price they'll have to pay for fighting - let alone winning - this NATO provoked Ukraine war.
So, if Europeans do not react soon enough and revert course 180 degrees, Europe will continue vassalized depending ever more upon the US and thus self-hurting itself with "Russian" sanctions, not Russia, allowing for the US and London to eventually come in and pick up the pieces and keeping it all for peanuts as per their plan B. And this would mean that the hot shooting Ukraine war would stop. By the way, Russia could just watch the scene also unable to cover the whole globe and being fed-up of so much unjustified past aggression from the EU. And besides just sick and tired of so much nonsense and wasted opportunities during decades of accommodation to European needs. So with or without sanctions, Russia could simply sell ever-lower amounts of oil & gas & food and other strategic commodities to Europe and other Asian "unfriendlies" which are not that easy to find elsewhere as badly needed regarding quality, quantity, price, type, delivery, etc.
This would happen most probably not because Russia wanted to starve and freeze anybody, but rather because she would have simply found new and much better export clients elsewhere and with whom to relate and grow together in every sense, most probably ever-growing BRICS+ Accordingly, Russia would prefer to take better care of such new business, trade and political partners - with different currencies involved, not dollars nor euros - and leaving aside all the great opportunities missed after decades of Russia behaving as an excellent EU business partner to no avail. So, for whatever reasons and without firing a single shot, Russian sanctions could just impoverish Europe and other "unfriendlies" to the point which US and UK investors could step in and buy it out like vulture funds for pennies on the dollar. This outcome would be welcomed by the US & the UK, of course, the real puppeteers pulling the strings of it all and ready to prey upon the impoverished. So unless "Russian sanctions" are reverted 180 degrees, the US & UK would achieve their carefully planned plan B negatively affecting Europe and other "unfriendlies" for having dismissed Russia as a reliable business associate. So the (supposed) "international community" (ha!) is in for some surprises while three more countries are set to join BRICS+.
Ref #39 rt.com
Ref #40 rt.com
Ref #41 goldmoney.com
