Biden up and down.
It is causing a sensation that Biden has called Putin the murderer, only to be answered "mirror reflection", or something similar. And it's funny to see everyone striving to give the most varied interpretations, carefully avoiding the one that makes sense.
First thing: Biden doesn't give a damn about human rights. Their main ally in the Middle East is called "Saudi Arabia", takes journalists, kills them, cuts them to pieces with a saw and then incinerates them in the oven. And it's not even clear if he was dead when they sawed him to pieces. Ah, yes: they do it inside the embassies.
So to say that we are angry with Putin because he tried to poison Navalny is so stupid that only a journalist can believe it.
Why did he do it then? At this point there are several options.
- Biden is not a rational player. In this case he did it simply because it was unpredictable that he would do it, he wanted to displace Putin, and now he ignores him. In short, he's playing crazy.
- Biden is rational, he knows that he cannot win with China, he knows that China is expanding its area of influence (essentially, we notice this because the Asian democracies are disappearing one by one, see under Thailand), and he knows that if it can still say its by sea, land powers such as Russia are out of its range of influence. So to offer the voters a victory, he tries to hit an opponent he feels is within his reach.
But there is another factor that we are not considering.
The USA is the leading country of the so-called "anglosphere". This means that they share the agenda. What is the historical agenda of the Anglosphere?
The number one priority of the anglosphere is to prevent an alliance (of interests or politics) between Germany, France and Russia at any cost. As the EU tries to be a separate entity and unites the interests of Germany and France, the agenda now says to prevent any alliance of interests between the EU and Russia at all costs.
To do this, a casus belli is needed. It is not for nothing that every time that the Italian newspapers (which are the gatekeepers of the Anglosphere in Italy) see a friction, they headline "North Stream II is in danger". In reality, the works have resumed, since none of the builders let themselves be intimidated by the threats of sanctions: if the project fails, they too will fail. The threats of sanctions are irrelevant: it was the financial companies that let themselves be intimidated, but now the work no longer requires too much financial support.
Is it possible that the German government will back down on North Stream? Maybe, but that's not the only common interest with Russia. For example, there is this:
This is an image of a few years ago, in reality now the commercial railway reaches Spain and Italy is also connected to it. Of course Russia could stop it in retaliation, but it won't. Every hundred KM of railways produce GDP for an entire city, and there are many hundreds of KMs.
Indeed, the volume is increasing as fleets of trains join. And another road is opening up,
For which Italy has already signed, during the "silk road" agreement. Even if the US could, being a maritime power, block the sea side, the railway side would remain, which is out of their possibility of intervention.
Biden MUST, at all costs, put the European allies against the Russians. And if Europeans are recalcitrant (and they are), then it must make the Russians hostile to European countries.
This means that, in essence, we will see an escalation of American provocations against Russia, Turkey and China, aimed at breaking the land routes being built on the Eurasian continent.
Why does this priority come BEFORE the fight for the Pacific?
Because all the countries of the anglosphere are thalassocracies. It means that militarily speaking they are maritime powers, from which the supremacy of the air follows (through aircraft carriers and bases exposed to the sea). If we take for example the red line of the last map, or even the railways of the first map and calculate how it can break, we get that the US should gain air supremacy in places far from the sea, where they HAVE NO HOPE to gain. the supremacy of the heavens.
The progressive shift of Europe-Asia relations on land routes weakens the thalassocracies. Preventing the anthropization of land transport on the Eurasian continent is an EVEN more vital priority than simply defending the Pacific. Anglophone countries have two continent nations in the Pacific (USA and Australia) and one nation (New Zealand). They can regain control of it in the future.
What they don't have is someone who can help them take over the air and the earth, if we talk about Eurasia. They must therefore prevent land transport between Europe and Asia from being anthropogenic.
And it is for this reason that their doctrine has always been to prevent economic or political cooperation between France, Germany and Russia: once this is done, the door to Asia is open and all European politics would turn east.
Making sure that Europe and Asia are opposites and adversaries is the TOP priority of the English-speaking countries. It comes before supremacy in the Pacific. The US is not afraid of the Chinese fleet: they can make a bigger one. The US is afraid of all land routes between China and Europe.
Any possible war in between, between Europe and Asia, will be fomented. Any possible tension between the EU and Russia is fomented. Because 70% of humanity lives on the Eurasian continent: if this humanity frees itself from the sea routes and uses land routes, the thalassocracies lose their strategic supremacy.
This you will NEVER read on "Limes".