Will Putin Submit to US-Imposed ‘Weakening’?

Will Putin Submit to US-Imposed 'Weakening'? By Patrick Buchanan

Nothing done in Ukraine in this two-month war has diminished the Russian arsenal of 6,000 nuclear weapons, the world’s largest stockpile. And the more we destroy Russian conventional power, the more we force Moscow to fall back onto its ace in the hole — nuclear weapons.

“Once war is forced upon us, there is no alternative than to apply every available means to bring it to a swift end. War’s very object is victory — not prolonged indecision.”

So said Gen. Douglas MacArthur in his April 1951 address to Congress after being fired by President Harry Truman as commander in chief in the Korean War.

And what is now America’s goal with our massive infusion into the Ukraine war of new and heavier NATO weapons?

Said Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on his return from a Sunday meeting in Kyiv with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy: The United States wants “to see Russia weakened to the point where it can’t do things like invade Ukraine.”

“Russia,” said Austin, has “already lost a lot of military capability and a lot of its troops … and we want to see them not have the capability to very quickly reproduce that capability.”

Thus, the new, or newly revealed, goal of U.S. policy in Ukraine is not just the defeat and retreat of the invading Russian army but the crippling of Russia as a world power.

The sanctions imposed on Russia and the advanced weapons we are shipping into Ukraine are not only to enable the country to preserve its independence and territorial integrity but also to inflict irreversible damage on Mother Russia.

Putin’s Russia is not to recover soon or ever from the beating we intend to administer, using Ukrainians to deliver the beating, over an extended period of time.

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu has seen through to the true objectives of some NATO allies: “There are countries within NATO that want the Ukraine war to continue. They see the continuation of the war as weakening Russia. They don’t care much about the situation in Ukraine.”

But to increase steadily and substantially the losses to Russia’s economy, as well as its military, the war must go on longer.

And a long war translates into ever-greater losses to the Ukrainians who are alone in paying the price in blood of defeating Russia.

Is Austin committed to fighting this war to the last Ukrainian?

How many dead Russian soldiers — currently, the estimate of Russian losses is 15,000 of its invasion force — will it take to satisfy Austin and the Americans?

To achieve, say, a loss of 50,000 dead Russians, how many Ukrainians would have to lose their lives as well? How many Ukrainian cities would have to share the fate of Mariupol?

Clearly, the Joe Biden-Lloyd strategy of indefinitely bleeding Russia contradicts MacArthur’s dictum: “War’s very object is victory — not prolonged indecision.”

Does a war to bleed the other side to death also contradict the moral conditions for a just war?

Then there are the practical considerations.

When we say we will so weaken Russia that it cannot threaten its neighbors again, we are talking about conventional weapons and power.

Nothing done in Ukraine in this two-month war has diminished the Russian arsenal of 6,000 nuclear weapons, the world’s largest stockpile.

And the more we destroy Russian conventional power, the more we force Moscow to fall back onto its ace in the hole — nuclear weapons.

Asked Tuesday about the risk of a nuclear war emanating from the conflict, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov replied.

“The risks now are considerable. I would not want to elevate those risks artificially. Many would like that. The danger is serious, real. And we must not underestimate it.”

Putin put it this way: “If anyone sets out to intervene in the current events from the outside and creates unacceptable threats for us that are strategic in nature, they should know that our response will be lightning-fast … “We have all the tools for this that no one else can boast of having. … We’ll use them if needed. And I want everyone to know that.”

Tactical nuclear warheads aboard hypersonic missiles would seem to fit precisely what Putin was describing.

Which raises the question: Will Putin accept a U.S.-induced permanent reduction in Russia’s standing as a great nation? Or would Russia resort to weapons that could avoid that fate and avoid as well the long and debilitating “forever war” some Americans want to impose on his country?

If we are going to bleed Russia into an irreversible strategic decline, is Putin a ruler of the mindset to go quietly into that good night?

Are Putin & Co. bluffing with this implied nuclear threat?

When Georgia invaded South Ossetia in 2008, Putin’s Russian army reacted instantly, ran the Georgians out and stormed into Georgia itself.

When the U.S. helped to overthrow the pro-Russian government in Kyiv in 2014, Russia plunged in and took Crimea, the Sevastopol naval base, and Luhansk and Donetsk.

When Ukraine flirted with joining NATO and Biden refused to rule out the possibility, Putin invaded in February.

When he warns of military action, Putin has some credibility.

And in this talk of using tactical atomic weapons to prevent the defeat, humiliation and diminution of Russia itself, is Vladimir Putin bluffing?

7 replies
  1. Gerry
    Gerry says:

    Perhaps a better title and essay would be Will World Submit to Bible Imposed Strengthening!!! Or Better Yet how about The Real Revolution in Military Affairs?!!!

    Wow, I can’t begin to imagine what the world and its leaders would do if they knew what the Bible teaches on climate change? Far more significantly, though is we find written these astonishing words:

    “Have you entered the storehouses of the snow or seen the storehouses of the hail, which I reserve for times of trouble, for days of war and battle?” (Job 38:22–23)

    What God is Himself a military commander with his own weapons? Can we apply this scripture to what occurred with Bravo Company?

    “According to a radio newscast I heard while in my car during the Iraq war, a lone Moslem in the city of Baghdad had been screaming, “Hey, look what God is doing to the U.S. Forces.” Upon hearing this, I scoured the newspapers for any news about what this gentleman was talking about and came across a report about Bravo Company when they were some twenty-five miles from Baghdad. They were stopped dead by a series of storms that sprung up out of nowhere. The day had begun calmly enough, clear and sunny, but as they neared the city, they encountered a windstorm so fierce that it obscured the sun, turning the desert black. The wind was strong enough to batter and shake their tanks and personal carriers. After several hours, the sandstorm turned into a hailstorm with accompanying thunder and lightning. It turned the sand into mud, bogging down their vehicles and stalling their advance. They had to deal with the forming of a lake which almost swamped their vehicles.

    Wow, look at this? The conditions of the Old Testament are literally coming back in the Middle East. Sadly, it took one lone citizen of the city of Baghdad—a Moslem, no less—to recognize it for what it was: an act of Almighty God. He, of all people, could see what others could not. No doubt this was due more to his acclimatization to that environment than his education in matters of the Bible or the Koran (assuming there’s anything in that book regarding the weather). In the desert, no one ever lives to see a hailstorm, in so abrupt a manner and over an army.”

    Or if that scripture doesn’t suffice maybe this one is more to your liking?

    “The Lord will cause people to hear his majestic voice and will make them see his arm coming down with raging anger and consuming fire, with cloudburst, thunderstorm and hail.” (Isaiah 30:30}

    Wow, imagine contrary to what we’ve been told for hundreds of years that God can’t be observed to exist lol, behold the lies of it all? Nice eh? And hey do you think such scriptures then explain what occurred at Fort Carson?


    Raises some serious questions does it not?

    Wow, if only military schools and colleges taught this maybe the “FEAR OF GOD as taught in Proverbs would go a long way to solving all of the sin and killing throughout the world? Patton? https://the-american-catholic.com/2019/12/16/pattons-weather-prayer-2/

    Perhaps then we would learn or experience the truth of the words:

    “It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” (Hebrews 10:31)

    and if any want more solid and concrete proof as to the validity of this read the book Climate Change the Work of God. Who knows one might actually like to hear and know the truth for once in their lives. But maybe one likes being lied to? Industrial pollution – bulldung.

    • Lucius Vanini
      Lucius Vanini says:

      Yes, I’m sure of what if the “world and its leaders would do” if they knew what the Wholly Babble teaches about climate change. They’d cease talking about climate change in an instant and open up all Alaska for oil-drilling. Sure—it’s only ignorance of what God wants that’s made people push the climate-change narrative!

      In any case it’s great that I don’t have to go to church, that I can attend sermons at a site dedicated to White identity, White interests, Semitic culture.

  2. Lucius Vanini
    Lucius Vanini says:

    PAT BUCHANAN suggests that the neo-Marxists might consider the welfare of ordinary people, and that they might care about “moral conditions for a just war.” I say they care more about Mandarin-Chinese grammar. For one thing, this unholy war affords welcome distraction from what they’re doing to America, and they want it prolonged at least until November.

    For another thing, WW3 might well seem to them a not unattractive option. It would give them their perfect justification for crushing freedom of expression with their new Orwellian Ministry of Truth. A regrettable wartime necessity, y’know. And if WW3 turned nuclear, and how could it not? Well, they want that Great Reset, don’t they. What could better demolish the West as it is, clearing the way for building back better, than a nuclear war? They’d be forewarned of it, and they and their elite friends might well think they could survive in well-supplied shelters far from Russian nuclear targeting. Mind you, they’re not really sane. They think men get pregnant, among other things.

    In short, things are getting more and more dire. And most people, even the most savvy of the Right, aren’t prepared for what these unbalanced Marxist hijackers of D.C. are capable of doing.

    Hope to Pantheos I’m wrong. May someone here prove me so.

    P.S. That it’s White people now dying in a European war is no doubt a bonus for these bits of scum, which see the europe-descended as the big enemy to defeat.

  3. todd hupp
    todd hupp says:

    Prediction: The Chinese will not allow Putin to be defeated. This is a test case for a planned Taiwan invasion.It is interesting India seems to be folding into the Russia-China axis.There will be two global powers east and west ;as this unfolds.Ukraine may be partitioned as was Germany previously.

    If Biden/Left does not mess it up,the USA has a super opportunity to be a very prosperous global energy power;especially natural gas LNG and natural gas liquids(eg ethane,propane)

  4. Edward Harris
    Edward Harris says:

    The family motto of the late Lord Montague was “Let us be judged by our actions”
    He molested Boy scouts, so he was imprisoned.
    Let us apply the motto to the USA
    When the Europeans invaded North America they virtually wiped out and ill treated the native population
    They supported slavery after the Europeans had banned it. Thank you GB.
    The Yankees used slavery as an excuse to plunder the South although Slavery would have soon died out anyway in North America
    Americans invaded and occupied the Sandwich Islands
    Americans created a war with Spain to steal some of their empire
    Americans stole Half of Mexico
    In WW1 Americans made loans to the Allies to destroy their empires while they supported the Central Powers through Scandanavia, Holland, Belgium and Spain while Italy was neutral
    After WW1 Americans drew a line from Pole to Pole down the middle of the Atlantic and said water West of that line was an American Lake
    WW2, which America helped start, Americans kept it going by Neutrality Patrols escorting merchant ships to the UK
    Americans helped the war monger Churchill
    American stooges helped in the creation of NATO, which caused the Warsaw Pact which was always defensive
    Americans made the UK train Moslems in the UK to kill Christians in Africa
    Americans caused the Irish problem and the Falklands War
    Americans caused the war in Ukraine
    I would be pleased to answer any questions

  5. Fenria
    Fenria says:

    Hmmm, where have we seen this decision to cripple a nation after a war play out before, and the exact opposite intended effect became the outcome….. Keep on pushing, USA. You’ll create another one of him soon enough.

  6. JoaoAlfaiate
    JoaoAlfaiate says:

    From Pitchfork Pat’s article:

    Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu has seen through to the true objectives of some NATO allies: “There are countries within NATO that want the Ukraine war to continue. They see the continuation of the war as weakening Russia. They don’t care much about the situation in Ukraine.”

    It’s been said that being an enemy of the United States is problematical, but being a friend is absolutely fatal.

Comments are closed.