Discover more from Information Warfare Analysis
North American Terrorist Organization
The US government’s “No Action, Talk Only” propaganda strong-arm.
Okay, so it might be a bit snarky to title an article with jokes about NATO, but the recent blather from NATO seems to justify it. Regardless, NATO is not what it is perceived to be. NATO is the puppet military branch of the US government that, since March 4, 2022, has been ranting about how they are ready for war with Russia. It all reminds me of a quote:
There are but two sorts of government: one where men show their teeth at each other, and one where men show their tongues and lick the feet of the strongest. – George Eliot
First, we have Rob Bauer, chairman of NATO’s Military Committee, saying NATO is ready for a direct conflict with Russia. Then NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg said NATO has information that Russia plans to “deprive Ukraine of statehood.” And Ukraine knows Russia will launch a new offensive on February 24, 2023. And let us not forget that Russia plans to call up another 500,000 conscripts in January. Or 200,000 troops will mobilize if you listen to NATO.
Beyond Russia, Pentagon spokesperson Brigadier General Patrick Ryder says that no US troops participated in strikes in Iran this past weekend and alleges it was Israel behind the strikes. Yet Ukraine suggests they struck Iran over supplying drones to Russia.
Of course, NATO is ready to “preserve peace” in Kosovo, where they were sent by the UN under UNSC Resolution 1244 for “12 months, to continue thereafter unless the Security Council decides otherwise.” So should we continue with Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, or Iraq?
Who is telling the truth?
People ask me regularly how to tell the truth from fiction in the news. It is not difficult. The most important rule is not to be quick to decide. Instead, follow the stories and compare them to what happens over time. Then decide.
For example, in October, NATO said that Russia was running out of high-precision weaponry and could not produce more due to Western sanctions. And yet Russia still strikes with precision-guided missiles regularly.
The second rule is to watch what people say over time.
“Oh! What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.” - Sir Walter Scott, 1808.
Western media reports that Ukraine shot down forty-seven out of fifty-five missiles Russia launched on January 26, 2023. Yet, in the same article, they say that air defenses shot down twenty out of forty-seven rockets near Kyiv. To paraphrase Scott Ritter, the Marine math does not add up. In the past, the Western media reported sixty of seventy missiles downed. Recently, the Pentagon said there is a 100% success rate. With such good air defense and all the power outages, we can only assume that someone is not telling the truth, the electric grid is exceptionally fragile, or Russia can hit multiple targets with a single missile.
Things to think about
Now back to the claims I mentioned at the start of this article. I am unsure how NATO can be ready for a direct conflict with Russia, considering they say twenty of their thirty members have depleted their weapon stockpiles. Regarding depriving Ukraine of statehood, Russia’s plans haven’t changed since February 24 of last year – end the war waged on Eastern Ukraine back in 2014. As to the exact date of the new offensive? Analysts keep changing the date. All I can say is always expect the unexpected from Russia.
I am writing this article on February 1, 2023, and Russia still hasn’t called up any conscripts or mobilized more troops. For the record, Russia does not need to conscript anyone. On the contrary, they have 1.5-2 million reservists. But, of course, that does not include those who volunteer to fight, foreign volunteers, and civilian volunteers.
As for Israeli drone strikes, I do believe that no US troops were involved. But I do think US intelligence and the CIA were involved. But that is my opinion based on prior analyses of how the US and Israel work together. I do not believe Ukraine had anything to do with it other than trying to use it as an ego-boosting ploy. But both points are my subjective opinions.
Serbia and Kosovo
There are many aspects to consider with Kosovo and Serbia. First, keep in mind that the UNSC deployed NATO peacekeeping troops to Yugoslavia to allow displaced people to return to their homes and to ensure “substantial autonomy and self-administration” for all inhabitants of Kosovo. Second, USSC Resolution 1244 did not give independent status to Kosovo. Instead, it allowed the “self-government” of Kosovo while maintaining the “sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia” (Now Serbia).
Serbs living in Kosovo are again subject to being called, in general, criminal groups, by the “Kosovo Foreign Minister.” But, of course, the UNSC Resolution bans such actions, much as it bans Kosovo from having its own military. Serbia asked NATO if they could deploy their police to Kosovo in December of 2022, but NATO denied Serbia this right, despite the UNSC Resolution guaranteeing this right.
And we must also consider that Kosovo declared independence from Serbia in 2008, and “the end of Serbia in Kosovo.” The circumstances are almost 100% the same as in the Crimean declaration of independence, aside from the Crimeans voting overwhelmingly to join Russia. The US and its allies recognize declarations by Kosovo, Israel, and other western-leaning “countries” while denying recognition to eastern-leaning countries.
Finally, we should consider the US stance on Taiwan. First, we must ask if China plans peaceful reunification with Taiwan or an invasion. Biden cannot make up his mind, having said that the US will defend Taiwan and that he doesn’t believe China will attack. So why even tell the former if the latter is true?
And does the US believe in the UN’s one-China policy as they claim, or are they provoking China by providing Taiwan weapons and increasing the US military presence near China? Again, I know where I stand on the issue.
Nothing is simple in world politics, and today’s situation is no exception. But as you can see, you can find the truth by weighing the total evidence over time and applying the idioms “What’s good for the goose is good for the gander” and “Shi Shi Qiu Shi” (seeking truth from facts).
And I will close with a quote from Teddy Roosevelt:
To sit home, read one’s favorite paper, and scoff at the misdeeds of the men who do things is easy, but it is markedly ineffective. It is what evil men count upon the good men’s doing.
Information Warfare Analysis is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber
Donate via BitCoin (BTC) Wallet: 1NDv1i3Lj1LS34bUG9JG9T2JDafQ2AUjAH