<\/p>\n
Paul Craig Roberts<\/p>\n
American soldiers are now in Ukraine. Allegedly, they are there only to monitor what is happening to the arms deliveries from the US and NATO countries.<\/p>\n
As previously reported, not all of the vast amount of heavy weapons sent by the West end up on the battlefield. Instead, some find their way into the weapons market where they are sold to who for who\u2019s profit? The same with the money, much of which ends up in unintended pockets.<\/p>\n
The US State Department\u2019s explanation is that the US troops are in Ukraine, not to fight, but to \u201cassist the government of Ukraine with handling US security assistance.\u201d In other words, to identify and stop the theft of resources meant for war against Russia.<\/p>\n
But why is this the job of uniformed troops? Is this a way to sneak US uniformed soldiers into Ukraine and maneuver them into combat? Only people my age, students at the time, remember how the CIA maneuvered the Kennedy White House into involving the US in war in Vietnam. President Kennedy caught on and intended to withdraw, but the CIA killed him before he could.<\/p>\n
President Johnson, realizing that the South Vietnamese government was losing the war, used the alleged firing on two US destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin to escalate the war. On August 7, 1964, a stupid Congress railroaded by patriotic fervor passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. This authorized President Johnson to take whatever measures he thought were necessary to promote peace and security in southeast Asia. This mindless resolution gave Johnson the legal basis for the US war in Vietnam, the total opposite of \u201cpeace and security.\u201d<\/p>\n
Considering the extraordinary number of Washington implemented false flag attacks, should we expect another one in Ukraine that involves the US in war against Russia? \u00a0 Are the 30,000 US\/Nato soldiers positioned on Ukraine\u2019s border there in anticipation of a false flag? \u00a0\u00a0https:\/\/www.rt.com\/russia\/565792-russian-nato-troops-border\/\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n Putin, being a liberal in his outlook, is incapable of comprehending the evil that he faces. He still thinks it is just a misunderstanding that can be resolved diplomatically. Consequently, he doesn\u2019t use the force at his disposal to end the conflict, as he thinks that a demonstration of Russian force would prevent a diplomatic solution. By refusing to bring the conflict to an end in a military victory, Putin provides Washington the time it needs to further expand the war and bases surrounding Russia. The limited go-slow war has proven to be a strategic blunder for the Kremlin. \u00a0If wider war breaks out, the Kremlin\u2019s limited mobilization will leave Russia with insufficient troops to protect the country\u2019s borders, thus forcing the use of nuclear weapons. \u00a0It seems Russia\u2019s \u201climited military operation\u201d was undertaken without thought of its consequences.<\/p>\n As Washington seems more determined to prevail over Russia (and China) than to avoid nuclear war, the outlook is dismal.<\/p>\n