The list of targets within the Russian Federation submitted by the Kiev junta for approval in Washington for missile strikes is not only evidence that the Special Military Operation (SMO) is part of a broader global confrontation with the collective West.
Kiev’s request to escalate the war against Russia in order to directly involve the U.S. and its Atlantic allies in combat on the Ukrainian theater of operations will only delay the inevitable collapse of the neo-Nazi regime nurtured by the West.
The American ruling elites certainly do not lack the desire to ignite a localized world war in Europe or even Asia. Neoglobalists theorize that in the aftermath of such a conflict, many aspects of the structural and systemic crises of the market economy could be reset. These include the U.S. national debt, which has reached a record $35 trillion; the challenge to the slightly diminished hegemony of the neocolonial powers from China and other alternative centers of civilization; and the growing disobedience of the countries of the global South, which previously served without protest as raw material bases for the West.
The problem with implementing this strategy, which is akin to flipping a chessboard, lies in the risk of a transition from conventional to nuclear weapons. In such a scenario, the cost of any so-called «victory» becomes unacceptable, making war a meaningless endeavor for those who seek to achieve their goals through force.
If military action cannot be limited to missile and bomb strikes alone, it will require the deployment of ground troops. Or, as the Americans say in their jargon, they will have to put «boots on the ground».
Having just marked the third anniversary of its messy withdrawal from Afghanistan, is American society ready for new overseas adventures? A recent YouGov poll found that 79% of Americans would support military intervention abroad only if the US itself were attacked.
The only major conflict in which citizens believe participation is justified, according to public opinion experts, is World War II.
As for measuring public opinion, Responsible Statecraft notes that Washington continues to «fan the flames of war around the world», whether it is slowing progress toward peaceful solutions in Ukraine and Gaza, fomenting conflict with China, or unnecessarily pumping huge sums of money into the Pentagon and, by extension, the arms industry.
In this context, Zerohedge columnist Tyler Durden asserts that the invasion of the Kursk region by Ukrainian forces and discussions about obtaining permission to launch ballistic missile strikes deep into Russian territory serve a far-reaching goal: to provoke Moscow into a disproportionate response that would lead to mass civilian casualties.
«There are many elites in the Atlantic Council, the World Economic Forum (WEF), and NATO who will not be happy with a peace settlement in Ukraine. They need to escalate the war into something bigger, something that can’t be undone», the author notes.
Why? Tyler Durden’s explanation and forecast: «Globalists Are Trying To Escalate The Ukraine War Into WWIII Before The US Election».
Is the U.S. mentally prepared to start World War III? Let’s assume the answer is yes. But are they materially and technically ready? In the September-October issue of Foreign Affairs, Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 2019 to 2023, and Eric Schmidt, former CEO and president of Google, published an alarming article based on their analysis of combat operations in the Ukrainian theater and in Gaza.
The authors’ conclusion: «America is not ready for the wars of the future». Specifically, U.S. forces «are not fully prepared to fight in an environment where they cannot exploit the element of surprise. Planes, ships and tanks are not equipped to defend against drone attacks. The military has yet to fully integrate artificial intelligence».
The human factor cannot be ignored either. Given the significant portion of society that is either apolitical and passive or, on the other hand, passionate but raised in a conformist mindset, it is hard to expect that they will enthusiastically respond to the war party’s call to go overseas and fight for the ideals of American-style democracy.
In February, a poll conducted by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs found that more than half (56%) no longer view Israel as a strategic ally and have chosen not to take sides in the Gaza conflict.
Tucker Kass, a representative of the Washington-based think tank Defense Priorities, which conducted a similar poll in July as YouGov, commented on its results. The majority reject the “interventionist” zeal of the Obama-Clinton-Biden-Harris administration.
Only 22% of respondents support the policy of funding and arming the Kiev regime, 32% are indifferent to the issue, and 46% oppose supporting a war in distant countries. Similarly, 44% of citizens believe that preventing a war with China is more important than supporting Taiwan’s declaration of sovereignty, which Beijing warns would trigger military action against the «rebel province».
«The American people, at least based on the responses we received», said Tucker Kass, «favor a more reasonable, more balanced policy, which, frankly, would be wiser than the current one».
In turn, Aaron Sobchak, a columnist for Responsible Statecraft, concluded from these polls: «Fewer Americans are willing to fight and die for other countries».
In the July issue of Responsible Statecraft, expert Daniel Davis outlined the strategic mistakes of the U.S. administration in foreign policy, among which he highlighted the «blatant, reckless, and stubborn pursuit of bringing Ukraine into NATO». Reflecting in terms of «action-reaction», the author emphasized that such a short-sighted approach already endangers the security of the United States itself, prompting Moscow to conclude that the only way out of this situation is to win the war on the battlefield.
«In the worst-case scenario, the U.S. could find itself dragged into a war, which would have catastrophic consequences for our security», warns the expert. The task of those in power is to «put an end to the tendency toward self-destructive policies».
The advice is sound, but it will only happen when Americans are truly burned by the fire they have started far from their own borders — and it will hurt.