Still Ukraina?

Many have wondered why I talked so much about war in Europe and Ukraine BEFORE the invasion started, but not now. And the answer is obvious: it is now history. None of us can do anything about it. The war will escalate in intensity, because the US wants it to climb and will force Putin to use nuclear power.

They will initially be small nuclear weapons, perhaps the media will not even say it, or they will call them "special artillery", but in the end nuclear conflict is what the US wants. As Trump said, they have a new set of "mini" nuclear weapons. But they don't know where to test them.

And it's already starting to talk about it, so you get used to the idea:

Why am I writing less now than before? Because something could have been done before. When I went, along with many others, to join Trump's campaign to make Clinton lose, that was exactly what I wanted to avoid: a war in Europe.

Because since then, (and since then I repeat it and write it on this blog) Clinton wanted what is happening today to happen.

A war that will inevitably leave us (as Europeans) poorer, politically disjointed and perhaps even radioactive. And it is useless to accuse the EU of this: it is the shopkeepers, to be accused. Those who "sanctions yes, but only if they don't hit my shoe shop". Ultimately, people. It is useless to think that a government elected by cowards is courageous, or that a people who think first of the belly can follow high principles.

But the point remains: now it's history. Decisions made, and planned by the Democrats as early as 2016, if not earlier. What are we talking about today? What is Gabanelli chattering about, what do the various Limes fortune tellers talk about? It was already Clinton who wanted this, and she also said it during her election campaign: https://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/15/opinions/putin-clinton-hate-affair-ghitis/index. html :

Propaganda was already in action at the time. What's the surprise today?

But all this, I repeat, is in the distant past. The decision to start a war the US Democrats had already made in 2016. It would have been made years ago, if Clinton had won.

What is there to foresee in something that was already foreseeable in 2016? Anything. It is useless now to write articles upon articles: of what? What the US expects from this war is clear, and I have already written it here .

So what am I supposed to write now? Make a prediction? Reassure you? No. If newspapers start mentioning "tactical nuclear weapons" today it is because tomorrow there will be tactical nuclear weapons and because tactical nuclear weapons will start popping here and there.

So what is there to write? What is the utility? It's too late now.

Can we talk about how the press is handling this? That is fine. They're doing the same shit they've been doing since the first Desert Storm, which is to prevent US unwelcome news from getting on the pages by simply filling the press with unnecessary details.

Interview with the Ukrainian hairdresser. Tank photo. The reporter runs away because the rockets are heard falling. Satellite photos that could be Ukraina such as Casalecchio di Reno. A river of disconnected data, devoid of context and therefore devoid of any cognitive utility. And all the paraphernalia of useless news. Gabanelli who summarizes things we already know by passing him off as a journalistic investigation, Limes babbling nineteenth-century bullshit, and NOBODY who will answer the questions you really have in mind:

will we go to war? Will we be involved? What damage will we have? Will the war spread?

These are the questions you all have, and have, in mind. But these are the questions the American boss doesn't want to answer. And so instead they will fill you with irrelevant news, like that Russian tanks met in Sarcazzitzpop, a town nobody knew anything about, news that says nothing without an accurate map of UKraina.

So get ready for a flood of useless words, which will make you believe you are informed, even without answering the main questions. In short, I care about the glorious village of Sarcazzizpop up to a certain point, while I would like to understand if I should expect a nuclear power plant on Düsseldorf. But let's not delude ourselves: they will continue to talk to us about Sarcazzitzpop.

The last question I hear is "but why do you think there will be escalation?"

The answer is simple: Kiev politics is divided between pro-Russian parties and pro-Ukrainian parties. But if Putin now detaches the two regions that have more Russian-speaking citizens, in the next elections (assuming they are held in wartime) there will be no chance that a pro-Russian party will come to power. The next government will inevitably be nationalist and the pro-Russian parties will count for little (assuming they are still legal, given that it is an enemy / invader).

So Putin, if he wants a pro-Russian government, must come to Kiev and take control to organize fake elections. Which demands a quick win. So he must also attack from Belarus . And therefore the Baltic republics and Poland will go into alarm. And then there will be the Kaliningrad problem. And so on. Everything is done for an escalation. It looks like a script already written.

Having said that, now this is the present, that is, the past.

The problem, at best, is the future, which is already written: the US wants a disaster to get rid of the European industry, which is too competitive with the US. Ditto for the Chinese.

The rest you can understand for yourself.