Towards a nuclear war in Europe.
When I wrote that I had played, as a digital mercenary, in the Trump 2016 campaign because I thought that the Democrats would bring Europe into a (inevitably nuclear) conflict in Europe, I saw only skeptical comments. Democrats couldn't be that "bad".
Oh, you'll see they won't be. They will write beautiful things on Facebook after European cities have been razed to the ground. But they must have caused it.
To the skeptics who said "come on, we are not even close to a conflict on a continental scale", to those who told me "but Russia will not make war because it wants to sell us gas", I ask for an account of 175,000 men amassed on the Ukrainian border , and to an unknown quantity found in Belarus.
Since the Democrats returned to power, NATO's diplomatic activity in both Ukraine and Georgia has grown in intensity. The aim is to bring the two former Soviet republics into NATO.
Thus the Russians are preparing to devastate Ukraine, and since it is a country that occupies the position it occupies, they will probably also annex Serbia and the direct confrontation with NATO troops will probably take place in Moldova. It would be stupid for the Russians to seek a confrontation further north, where they would risk a salient with the Polish forces, and it would be stupid for NATO to let the confrontation take place in NATO territory, as in Romania, because they would have to protect access to the sea. Black.
Consequently, it will go to confrontation. There are already two war fleets in the Black Sea, and so on.
That the war will use light nuclear weapons (but then light is a hypocrisy of those who use them is obvious) is equally inevitable: Putin cannot afford a single step back. The Russian economy is stagnant, the average life span is 62 years (so let's imagine the standard of living of the population), the crime it had repressed is returning because it has merged with the institutions. The Russians are unhappy, and for now they are settling for the story that "yes, eat weed, but we are a power again".
The only thing holding Putin back is the fear of losing, or of finding it difficult, questioning the superpower status he has promised or told the Russians. He can't lose her, he can't reveal the bluff. Given the Russian finances, those 175,000 soldiers are probably the maximum of operations allowed, and cannot even keep them in action for very long.
Consequently, he will use nuclear tactics. He can't not do it. And he will also use the new hypersonic missiles: he showed them to the population, he presented them as the fulcrum of their new power. He can't help it.
So it's better to resign yourself: if this war starts it will be a nuclear war, and in Europe. We will lose some cities.
And this was absolutely predictable, by ceasing to believe that the American Democrats are "the good ones", that they would never do it, that they are on the side of human rights, when it is since the time of Obama that we have only heard words of contempt towards the Europe and towards the EU.
When Clinton said "fuck the EU", she was already giving the address to American politics, or at least she was expressing a known address. Now the Democrats are back. And now the nightmare returns.
How did the Democrats do it? Oh, simple: they continued to send military and diplomatic advisers to get Ukraine into NATO. Now, as Ukraine and Belarus are so-called "buffer states", it is obvious that they should not be militarized.
But the USA, like all Anglo-Saxon countries, live in real islands. They have NEVER understood the concept of "Bearing State", and they will never understand it. And they will not understand that the need for such states is to guarantee a "media" between two countries, or between two blocs, with conflicting geopolitical interests.
The result is that Putin is now forced to devastate part of the Ukrainian territory, or at least break Ukraine in two, so that the new state (Eastern Ukraine?) Is the new buffer state.
And this has been wanted by the US democrats, who have also wanted it for years, already since the Clinton times, also because a war in Europe would weaken the EU, if it would not destroy it, and would make all European countries return to role of "NATO puppets".
I repeat: Trump's second term would have been better. It would have been a disaster for the US, but it would have spared a nuclear war on Europe. Oh sure, Lena Durham couldn't have had an abortion. But don't worry, because after a couple of nuclear bombs in Europe, your problem will not be having an abortion: it will be having children again.