(LifeSiteNews) — In his February 25 program, Tucker Carlson made plain the war aims of the United States. His brief video shows the falsehoods and the realities of U.S. policy on Ukraine, which reduces to a potentially catastrophic attempt to destroy Russia in the name of democracy.
In a segment on Carlson’s show, U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham is shown describing the conditions for the end of the war. Speaking in December 2022, he states the war will end “When Russia breaks and they take Putin out.”
Graham’s position is one echoed by many pronouncements on the war, but few are as pointed as his summary of the strategy of the U.S. and its satellite states:
We are in it to win it. And the only way we are going to win it is to break the Russian military and have someone in Russia take Putin out.
Carlson suggests that the Russian president may not take happily to the promotion of his own murder as a U.S. foreign policy objective, and opines that this makes nuclear war more and not less likely. It is a reasonable view, as the war faction makes plain their goal presents an existential threat to Russia, beginning with the existence of its president. This is undertaken in the name of democracy, of course. Carlson shows that there are existential issues with this question, too. The issue is, the democracy in question is nowhere to be seen.
There is no democratic mandate for U.S. involvement in the war. There is no attempt to secure any for the policies it pursues under the Biden administration which amount to provoking a third world war. This is the policy of neoconservatives such as Tom Nichols, whose February 23 article in the neoconservative magazine The Atlantic reveals the aims of this faction:
Now we are faced with the long grind of defeating Moscow’s armies and eventually rebuilding a better world.
Nichols demonstrates the parallel universe mentality of the neoconservative which selects a fantasy and asserts it as reality. In this instance, it is the pretense that the war began in 2022:
Today marks a year since Russian President Vladimir Putin embarked on his mad quest to capture Ukraine.
Nichols also likes to refer to the defense of democracy, and brackets the January 6th “coup” with the battle to destroy Russia using Ukrainian lives. These are two examples of neocon-think, which satisfy the trans-sane condition of belief.
“If I believe it, then it is true.”
The neoconservatives have this trait in common with men who believe they are women.
These are the kind of people who like checking your facts and telling you what is misinformation – but cannot say what is a “woman.”
For the reality-based community there are two points to consider. As Carlson points out, Ukraine is not a democracy. It has no freedom of speech, assembly, religion nor of expression. It is a corrupt one party state which would immediately fail were it not for your money.
Secondly, there was a coup which overturned a democratically elected government, but that was not as a result of a peaceful march in which one woman was murdered by a police officer. It was in 2014, in Ukraine, when the United States backed the violent overthrow of the Ukrainian government in a move which sparked the war in the Donbass.
Reality has never been the concern of the neoconservatives, who identify as better than you. They reserve to themselves the right to judge who shall live, whose lives and votes matter and whose do not. Their gambit was recognized as a prelude to war with Russia at the time, as this piece by John Pilger in 2014 makes clear.
‘The scale of our indoctrination,’ wrote Harold Pinter, is a ‘brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis,’ as if the truth ‘never happened even while it was happening.’
This is the nature of truth in our times. What is true has never happened, especially when it is happening now. What that truth is here is that a small faction is directing the world to destruction in order to avoid losing face.
Pilger concluded in 2014 that “The Pentagon currently runs ‘special operations’ – secret wars – in 124 countries.”
The issue is not merely with Ukraine, and nor is the enemy in Russia. It is at home, and its actions are always in service of “National security.”
How does the provocation of nuclear war square with “national security?” To ask the question is to make obvious the lunacy of our predicament. Our fates are determined by fanatics who have not only lost touch with reality – they consider it an inconvenience. Escalation to destruction is preferable to the admission they have made yet another mistake.
How has the United States been reduced to the instrument of a tiny death cult? Daniel Ellsberg, the whistleblower who leaked the Pentagon Papers detailing classified U.S. activity during the Vietnam War, has long maintained that the United States government has been captured in a silent coup.
At least since the aftermath of September 2001, western governments and intelligence agencies have been hard at work expanding the scope of their own power, while eroding privacy, civil liberties and public control of policy. What used to be viewed as paranoid, Orwellian, tin-foil hat fantasies turned out post-Snowden, to be not even the whole story.
The events of September 11th 2001 opened the door for the neoconservatives and their fanatical belief in the spread of democracy through permanent warfare. It also accelerated the destruction of the very values at home these zealots claimed to be defending abroad. The wars require the abolition of basic liberties, in order to protect our freedom. This too is insane.
What’s really remarkable is that we’ve been warned for years that these things were going on: wholesale surveillance of entire populations, militarization of the internet, the end of privacy. All is done in the name of ‘national security,’ which has more or less become a chant to fence off debate and make sure governments aren’t held to account – that they can’t be held to account – because everything is being done in the dark.
There has been no defense from the institutions nominally assigned with our protection from tyranny. The mainstream media offers many examples in the mold of Tom Nichols, but the cause of sanity has no champions. This is not an accident, but the result of a culture of censorship which has become so widespread as to be invisible.
By and large the media have paid scant attention to this, even as more and more courageous, principled whistleblowers stepped forward. The unprecedented persecution of truth-tellers, initiated by the Bush administration and severely accelerated by the Obama administration, has been mostly ignored, while record numbers of well-meaning people are charged with serious felonies simply for letting their fellow citizens know what’s going on.
In December 2013, as the U.S.-backed protests in Ukraine were gaining momentum, Ellsberg made an appeal for more whistleblowers to come forward: “Courage is contagious.”
He remarked, but sadly cowardice and avarice seem to be safe and effective countermeasures to the danger presented by the intrusion of reality upon the plans of the permanent war faction. Journalists have not covered themselves in glory in the nine years since Ellsberg made his appeal. Those few who do speak out, such as Glenn Greenwald and Seymour Hersh, Matt Taibbi and Lindsey Snell are described as traitors and operate outside the Regime media machine.
To describe Ukraine as a democracy is to degrade the term. To describe the United States as one is to deadname it. No one voted for World War Three. This is not an issue of party politics. It is a very real crisis provoked by a faction whose survival may come at the expense of our own.