Europe can choose to prevent nuclear Armageddon, but European governments do not realize their potential to save the world from Washington’s aggression because the western Europeans are accustomed to being Washington’s vassal states.
It is up to Europe whether or not the Earth dies in nuclear Armageddon.
European governments do not realize their potential to save the world from Washington’s aggression, because the western Europeans are accustomed to being Washington’s vassal states since the end of World War 2, and the eastern and central Europeans have accepted Washington’s vassalage since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Vassalage pays well if all the costs are not counted.
By joining NATO, the eastern and central Europeans permitted Washington to move US military presence to Russia’s borders. This military presence on Russia’s borders gave Washington undue confidence that Russia also could be coerced into a vassal state existence. Despite the dire fate of the two finest armies ever assembled—Napoleon’s Grand Army and that of Germany’s Wehrmacht—Washington hasn’t learned that the two rules of warfare are: (1) Don’t march on Russia. (2) Don’t march on Russia.
Because of Europe’s subservience to Washington, Washington is unlikely to learn this lesson before Washington marches on Russia.
Washington in its hubristic idiocy has already begun this march piecemeal with the coup in Ukraine and with its attacks on Syrian military positions. As I wrote earlier, Washington is escalating the crisis in Syria.
What can stop this before it explodes into war is eastern and central Europe’s decision to disengage as enablers of Washington’s aggression.
There are no benefits to Europe of being in NATO. Europeans are not threatened by Russian aggression, but they are threatened by Washington’s aggression against Russia. If the American neoconservatives and their Israeli allies succeed in provoking a war, all of Europe would be destroyed. Forever.
What is wrong with European politicians that they take this risk with the peoples that they govern?
Europe is still a place of beauty constructed by humans over the ages—architecturally, artistically, and intellectually—and the museum should not be destroyed. Once free of Washington’s vassalage, Europe could even be brought back to creative life.
Europe is already suffering economically from Washington’s illegal sanctions against Russia forced upon Europeans by Washington and from the millions of non-European refugees flooding the European countries fleeing from Washington’s illegal wars against Muslim peoples, wars that Americans are forced to fight for the benefit of Israel.
What do Europeans get for the extreme penalties imposed on them as Washington’s vassals? They get nothing but the threat of Armageddon. A small handful of European “leaders” get enormous subsidies from Washington for enabling Washington’s illegal agendas. Just take a look at Tony Blair’s enormous fortune, which is not the normal reward for a British prime minister.
Europeans, including the “leaders,” have much more to gain from being connected to the Russia/China Silk Road project. It is the East that is rising, not the West. The Silk Road would connect Europe to the rising East. Russia has undeveloped territory full of resources—Siberia—that is larger than the United States. On a purchasing power parity basis, China is already the world’s largest economy. Militarily the Russian/Chinese alliance is much more than a match for Washington.
If Europe had any sense, any leadership, it would tell Washington good-bye.
What is the value to Europe of Washington’s hegemony over the world? How do Europeans, as opposed to a handful of politicians receiving bags full of money from Washington, benefit from their vassalage to Washington? Not one benefit can be identified. Washington’s apologists say that Europe is afraid of being dominated by Russia. So why aren’t Europeans afraid of their 73 years of domination by Washington, especially a domination that is leading them into military conflict with Russia?
Unlike Europeans and Russians, Americans have scant experience with wartime casualties. Just one World War 1 battle, the Battle of Verdun, produced more casualties than the battle deaths that US has experienced in all the wars of its existence beginning with the Revolutionary War for independence from Britain.
The World War 1 Battle of Verdun, which took place prior to the US entry into the war, was the longest and most costly battle in human history. An estimate in 2000 found a total of 714,231 casualties, 377,231 French and 337,000 German, for an average of 70,000 casualties a month; other recent estimates increase the number of casualties to 976,000 during the battle, with 1,250,000 suffered at Verdun during the war.
In contrast, US casualties for World War 1 after US entry were 53,402 battle deaths and 200,000 non-mortal woundings.
Here is the list of US battle deaths from the War of Revolution through the “global war on terror” as of August 2017:
American Revolution: 4,435
War of 1812: 2,260
Wars against native Americans (1817-1898): 1,000
Mexican War: 1,733
War of Northern Aggression: North: 104,414; South: 74,524
Spanish-American War: 385
World War 2: 291,557
Korean War: 33,739
Vietnam War: 47,434
Gulf War: 148
This comes to 561,629 battle deaths.
If we add the battle deaths of the global war on terror as of Aug. 2017—6,930—we have 568,559 US battle deaths in all US wars.
That compares to 714,231 casualties, from which I am unable at this time to separate battle deaths from non-mortal wounds and maiming from a single World War 1 battle that did not involve US soldiers.
In other words, except for the Confederate States and native Americans, who endured enormous Union war crimes, the US has no experience of war. So Washington enters war with ease. The next time, however, will be Armageddon, and Washington will no longer exist. And neither will the rest of us.
US deaths in World War 1 were low because the US did not enter the war until the last year. Similarly in World War 2. Japan was defeated by the loss of her navy and air force and by the firebombing of Tokyo and other Japanese cities, which required few US battle deaths. The nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaka were gratuitous and took place when Japan was asking to surrender. Approximately 200,000 Japanese civilians died in the nuclear attacks and no Americans except prisoners of war held in those cities. In Europe, as in World War 1, the US did not enter the war against Germany until the last year when the Wehrmacht had already been broken and defeated by the Soviet Red Army. The Normandy invasion faced scant opposition as all German forces were on the Russian front.
If there is a World War 3, the US and all of the Western world would be immediately destroyed as nothing stands between the West and the extraordinary nuclear capability of Russia except the likelihood of complete and total destruction. If China enters on Russia’s side, as is expected, the destruction of the entirety of the Western World will be for all time.
Why does Europe enable this scenario? Is there no humanity, no intelligence left anywhere in Europe? Is Europe nothing but a collection of cattle awaiting slaughter from the machinations of the crazed American neocons? Are there no European political leaders with one ounce of common sense, one once of integrity?
If not, doom is upon us as there is no humanity or intelligence in Washington.
Europe must take the lead, especially the central Europeans. These are peoples who were liberated from the Nazis by the Russians and who have in the 21st century experienced far more aggression from Washington’s pursuit of its hegemony than they have experienced from Moscow.
If Europe breaks away from Washington’s control, there is hope for life. If not, we are as good as dead.
This article was originally published at PaulCraigRoberts.org on April 30, 2018.