The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPat Buchanan Archive
Is Trump the Peace Candidate?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

With Democrats howling that Vladimir Putin hacked into and leaked those 19,000 DNC emails to help Trump, the Donald had a brainstorm: Maybe the Russians can retrieve Hillary Clinton’s lost emails.

Not funny, and close to “treasonous,” came the shocked cry.

Trump then told The New York Times that a Russian incursion into Estonia need not trigger a U.S. military response.

Even more shocking. By suggesting the U.S. might not honor its NATO commitment, under Article 5, to fight Russia for Estonia, our foreign policy elites declaimed, Trump has undermined the security architecture that has kept the peace for 65 years.

More interesting, however, was the reaction of Middle America. Or, to be more exact, the nonreaction. Americans seem neither shocked nor horrified. What does this suggest?

Behind the war guarantees America has issued to scores of nations in Europe, the Mideast and Asia since 1949, the bedrock of public support that existed during the Cold War has crumbled.

We got a hint of this in 2013. Barack Obama, claiming his “red line” against any use of poison gas in Syria had been crossed, found he had no public backing for air and missile strikes on the Assad regime.

The country rose up as one and told him to forget it. He did.

We have been at war since 2001. And as one looks on the ruins of Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen, and adds up the thousands dead and wounded and trillions sunk and lost, can anyone say our War Party has served us well?

On bringing Estonia into NATO, no Cold War president would have dreamed of issuing so insane a war guarantee.

Eisenhower refused to intervene to save the Hungarian rebels. JFK refused to halt the building of the Berlin Wall. LBJ did nothing to impede the Warsaw Pact’s crushing of the Prague Spring. Reagan never considered moving militarily to halt the smashing of Solidarity.

Were all these presidents cringing isolationists?

Rather, they were realists who recognized that, though we prayed the captive nations would one day be free, we were not going to risk a world war, or a nuclear war, to achieve it. Period.

In 1991, President Bush told Ukrainians that any declaration of independence from Moscow would be an act of “suicidal nationalism.”

Today, Beltway hawks want to bring Ukraine into NATO. This would mean that America would go to war with Russia, if necessary, to preserve an independence Bush I regarded as “suicidal.”

Have we lost our minds?

The first NATO supreme commander, General Eisenhower, said that if U.S. troops were still in Europe in 10 years, NATO would be a failure. In 1961, he urged JFK to start pulling U.S. troops out, lest Europeans become military dependencies of the United States.

Was Ike not right? Even Barack Obama today riffs about the “free riders” on America’s defense.

Is it really so outrageous for Trump to ask how long the U.S. is to be responsible for defending rich Europeans who refuse to conscript the soldiers or pay the cost of their own defense, when Eisenhower was asking that same question 55 years ago?

In 1997, geostrategist George Kennan warned that moving NATO into Eastern Europe “would be the most fateful error of American policy in the post-Cold War era.” He predicted a fierce nationalistic Russian response.

Was Kennan not right? NATO and Russia are today building up forces in the eastern Baltic where no vital U.S. interests exist, and where we have never fought before — for that very reason.

There is no evidence Russia intends to march into Estonia, and no reason for her to do so. But if she did, how would NATO expel Russian troops without air and missile strikes that would devastate that tiny country?

And if we killed Russians inside Russia, are we confident Moscow would not resort to tactical atomic weapons to prevail? After all, Russia cannot back up any further. We are right in her face.

On this issue Trump seems to be speaking for the silent majority and certainly raising issues that need to be debated.

How long are we to be committed to go to war to defend the tiny Baltic republics against a Russia that could overrun them in 72 hours?

When, if ever, does our obligation end? If it is eternal, is not a clash with a revanchist and anti-American Russia inevitable?

Are U.S. war guarantees in the Baltic republics even credible?

If the Cold War generations of Americans were unwilling to go to war with a nuclear-armed Soviet Union over Hungary and Czechoslovakia, are the millennials ready to fight a war with Russia over Estonia?

Needed now is diplomacy.

The trade-off: Russia ensures the independence of the Baltic republics that she let go. And NATO gets out of Russia’s face.

Should Russia dishonor its commitment, economic sanctions are the answer, not another European war.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.”

Copyright 2016 Creators.com.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy, Ideology • Tags: 2016 Election, Donald Trump, Russia 
Hide 39 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Whilst Ike was issuing his warnings to the US about Nato, Enoch Powell was telling the British people that there would be rivers of blood in the streets unless mass immigration was stopped and yes, there is a connection.

    • Replies: @anon
  2. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    It’s the way of power. Power always wants to expand.

    Up to WWII, the world was divided into several spheres. Also, America for most of 19th century had been busy taming the continent. Americans were never isolationist. They kept moving westward. They took SW from Mexico. They bought Alaska. They triggered war with Spain to take the Spanish Empire, or remnants of it.

    Even so, US might couldn’t dominate over other great powers: British Empire, French Empire. Russian Empire. Germany hadn’t much of an empire, but it was the big power in Europe. And Japan was growing in the Pacific, and US and UK saw it as useful bulwark against Russia.

    Up to WWII, US had its own sphere of influence and stuck to it.

    But in WWII, Germany falls. British Empire and French Empire are weakened and soon to fall in the coming decade or two. Japan totally loses to the US.
    So, US and USSR are the only ones left in the super-empire game.
    US might was checked by USSR.
    But with the fall of USSR, there are no more obstacles. It’s the nature of power to keep expanding and expanding and expanding. Military men like projecting power. Money men like spreading their power and markets. Media wants to take over the globe. Pop culture is expansive and invasive.

    Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan were just being realistic at the time. They were faced with a truly great rival and power.
    But US no longer respects Russia as a great power. The world is much changed. All this shrill hysteria is to get Americans all scared and supportive of globalism.

    Consider this. Suppose Russia is very weak and hardly has a military. Does anyone think it will be left alone? No, excuses will be found for other nations to carve it up and swallow it… .like China was carved up and swallowed by imperialists in the 19th century. No one makes such move on Russia because it has a big enough military and nukes. But suppose Russia had the power of Libya. What NATO did to Libya would have been done to Russia. Of course, some reason would have been found like… Russia doesn’t allow ‘homo parades’, so it must be ‘liberated’. Suppose Russia was as weak and vulnerable as Syria. Wouldn’t the West have done to Russia what it did to Syria?

    It’s the nature of power.

    But it’s esp worse because of Jews. The problem for Jews is that they have great power but don’t feel secure or at home in any nation except tiny Israel. Jews run the US, but Jews don’t feel close to any gentile group in the US. Jews will use whites to hate on Muslims. Jews will use blacks and browns to hate on whites. Jews will use yellows to work as drones for globalism. Jews will use different gentiles against one another.
    But Jews don’t feel any tribal connection to any gentile Americans. (Jews claim to care for blacks and browns, but Jews really use them against whites.) And Jews don’t want white gentile elites to feel any connection to white masses since that will lead to white racial consciousness and power. Indeed, the most frightening power against Jews was German National Socialism that united German elites with German masses. It also united capitalism with socialism. In a homogeneous Germany where all classes were united under racial-nationalism, Jewish power was up against the wall. National Socialism failed because it triggered wars with other nations. This war was both a curse and blessing for Jews. Curse because it brought on the Holocaust. Blessing because German security and unity would be shattered by the war that would turn other nations against Germany. Thus, the greatest threat to Jewish Power came tumbling down almost overnight. If Hitler had kept it a national socialism than a racial imperialism, his movement would have had more of chance of becoming the 1000 yr Reich… or at least a 100 yr one.

    [MORE]

    Also, Jews fear nationalism and ‘isolationism’ in gentile nations. Suppose a European nation were to go with nationalism than with globalism. It means that Polish elites will lead and unite with Polish masses. It will mean Hungarian elites will lead and unite with Hungarian masses. It will mean Austrian elites will lead and unite with Austrian masses. It will mean Jewish globalist elites will be seen as outsiders by a nation united in elites and masses. So, in order for Jews to break the nationalist-race-ist-cultural bond between gentile elites and gentile masses, Jews push globalism. That way, gentile elites are made to collaborate with Jews and get involved with globo-world affairs than represent, lead, and defend their own people. Also, the native masses are increasingly displaced by foreigners who become the new object of the affection of the national elites. It’s just Justin Trudeau of Canada is more into representing diversity than white Canadians. And since PC took over education and kids are raised on pop culture that are mostly about black rapper thugs and homos, even the white masses are turned onto mindless cuckery. Consider how the majority of young Britons voted to remain in the globo-EU. Look at the British elites, Blair or Cameron. Instead of defending UK for the white British, they been browbeating their own people and sucking up to Jewish globalists and pandering to masses of foreign hordes.

    Jews feel the same way about America. Trump is saying American leaders should represent, lead, and defend American people. Jews fear this. Jews fear that it will mean white elites will come to represent and unite with white masses for American interests. Jews love the ‘coming apart’ of White America as documented by Charles Murray. They fear the Coming Together of white elites and white masses. They see it as ‘new Nazism’ even if it isn’t antisemitic. Even if nationalism isn’t anti-Jewish, Jews see it as an obstacle to their globalist agenda since a National Policy generally tend to reject foreign interventionism. But Jewish power is all about foreign interventionism since Jewish network of power stretches all over the world among the Jewish diaspora and their comprador-cucks.

    According to Nationalist dynamics, Jewish globalist elites will be seen as the outsider. So, Jews have hysterically rev up foreign policy into New Cold Wars. That way, people like Hillary and McCain are so busy bitching about Russia and China and Iran and etc to ever care about America and Americans. Instead of using their energy to defend what is American, they are too busy globe-hopping and working with Jews to expand Zio-networks of power in US, Canada, EU, Middle East, Latin America, and Asia.
    Of course, white gentile leaders of small European nations may even enjoy joining in the globalist game. After all, if they were mere national leaders, they would represent only the people of that nation. And most European nations are small and ‘insignificant’. But if they get to play global roles, they feel important as ‘giants’. It is esp intoxicating to French and British elites since they used to be world powers until second half of 20th century. Globalism makes them feel as world players than mere provincial leaders of single nations.

    If Jews could feel at home in one nation, they wouldn’t be so restless(like George Soros) in acting so much like Paul’s grandfather in A HARD DAY’S NIGHT who is a ‘king mixer’ who makes others fight others. The old would be a nobody if he didn’t set the Beatles and others against one another. He finds his mediating role within the space of interpersonal conflicts that he himself sets off.

    Paradoxically for Jews, a world at peace is at war with Jews. If every nation was at peace with others, it would focus on its own national borders, identity, security, and needs. And such national consciousness will suspect the Jewish elites as the alien body possibly at odds with National Interest.

    But a world at war(hot or cold) means that nations are too much at each other’s throats to calm down and notice that it is the Jews who are the outsider elites in their domain. Jews like to play like the character in YOJIMBO. Play every side and make everyone fight everyone while they rip off all sides.

    • Replies: @anon
  3. Parsifal says:

    Mr. Buchanan, Russia wouldn’t take those three Baltic states if you offered her all of Fort Knox! What possible use could she have for them? Far more likely scenario is for them to engineer a latter-day Gleiwitz incident along the Russian border so they could scream “agression” and drag america into WWIII.

    • Agree: Kiza
    • Replies: @HdC
    , @Priss Factor
    , @Boris N
    , @Wally
  4. Realist says:

    “Is Trump the Peace Candidate?”

    Not as much as it sometimes appears. He has his bouts of American hegemony and warmongerism or bellicism.

    • Replies: @boogerbently
  5. tbraton says:

    The NATO Treaty is not as automatic as most think. Here is Article 5 of the NATO Treaty:

    ” Article 5
    The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

    Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security .” (Emphasis added.)

    I would add that the population of Latvia is 2 million, the population of Lithuania is 3 million and the population of Lithuania is a mere 1.3 million. Since those countries have mutually pledged to come to the defense of U.S., does anyone sleep more soundly at night thinking that, in the event the U.S. is attacked, those three countries will rush to our defense?

  6. HdC says:
    @Parsifal

    As far as Poland is concerned, nothing needed to be “engineered” by the Germans.

    The chauvinistic junta of the colonels managed that all by themselves.

    Read Witness to History by Michael Walsh to throw some light onto those times. HdC

  7. Trump wants to undo free trade and open borders because they are a bad deal for America. Is war a good deal for America? Especially a war with Russia and China? Of course Trump is the peace candidate. Instead of two war candidates we finally have an election featuring a peace candidate vs. a war candidate. The working class wants work and wages not war and welfare. How do you think they will vote?

  8. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website
    @Parsifal

    “Mr. Buchanan, Russia wouldn’t take those three Baltic states if you offered her all of Fort Knox!”

    LOL. Yeah.

    Maybe US wants Russia to take them. Then it can fear-monger all it wants.

    Btw, the US guarantee not to expand NATO was useless. The guarantee was made on premise of USSR as a great power.
    Once USSR collapsed and Russia could hardly feed itself, the temptation to expand NATO was just too great and easy.

    Promises mean nothing when the picking is good.

    And it makes no sense to trust politicians.

  9. Outwest says:

    War in Europe is theoretical and thus less threatening. First we have a fine mess in the Middle East where our forces are deposing linchpin dictators and sowing malevolent anarchy. It would be much better for the people there to fight out their way of living. Ours won’t work for them. If we can just bring our forces home and suppress our tendency towards aggression and control, Russia will feel less threatened if not less aggressive.

    But, yes, WW2 is over. The cold war is over. There’s no reason for American forces to be in Europe, or elsewhere outside of the United States.

    • Agree: woodNfish
  10. Marcus says:

    Maybe it would be a good thing if Clinton wins and starts a war over gay rights and Estonia’s borders: our major cities (which are beyond saving) are annihilated in a nuclear exchange and the rest of us can start from scratch.

  11. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Groovy Battle for Blair Mountian"] says:

    If Donald Trump were the peace candidate he would:

    1) call for a nuclear weapons free Middle East

    2)call for the indictment of Hillary Clinton for War Crimes in the Balkans,Libya,Syria, and The Ukraine.

    3)Call for the indictment of Barack Obama for War Crimes in the Ukraine, Libya, and Syria.

    4)call for an immediate withdrawal of the all US Troops out of Iraq,Afghanistan, and Syria.

    5) reinstate the draft for the fat bastard chicken-hawk-war-hawk White Males who listen to the WFAN sports talk radio, sit in the Garden watching Ranger and Knick Games….and sit in the Met Life NFL Negro Football Stadium and yell “WHAT A STUD!!!!”…

    If 5) is done only….there will be no more INVADE THE WORLD-INVITE THE WORLD nonesense anymore….and then we can all listen to Rachmanoff’s theme on a variation of Paganini-23 variation over and over again-and everyone will be happy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!…

    Oh I forgot…Donald Trump must also call for the indictment of the filthy Irish Skank Legal Immigrant Samantha Powers for War Crimes in the Eastern Ukraine.

    • Replies: @Marcus
    , @SteveRogers42
  12. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    Why Bernie Sanders voters will not support Trump.

    Trump appeals to the working class and lower middle class.

    Sanders supporters are not really in it for economic issues. Indeed, few belong to the working class or want to be a laborer. Their socialism is purely rhetorical and virtue-signaling, like with rich whites in Vermont who made Sanders their senator. Sanders Folks are upper middle class.

    Sanders voters are privileged and well-educated whites. They want cool creative jobs, government jobs, professions in media and academia. They create businesses that cater to the rich globo-class in big cities. Like fancy restaurants and artisanal chocolate and beer.
    They don’t care for manufacturing jobs for ‘dummies’.

    They want more globalism and more wealth-sharing from the top globalists.
    They don’t care about return of manufacturing jobs that are sooooooo boring and ‘dumb’. They want lower college tuition than factory jobs back from Mexico or China.

    Because they have no real tie or connection to labor, their primary ideological instinct is social than economic. They are worshipers of Diversity and homomania. The greatest sin in their eyes is ‘racism’.

    So, if Trump is associated with the ‘right’, that is No Go for the Sanders voters even if trump is good for American Workers.

    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
  13. KenH says:

    Trump has said some promising and commonsensical things about foreign policy, but I don’t see how one can be so totally in the tank for Israel as Trump is yet be an honest broker for peace in the Middle East and the other hot spots like the Ukraine. And he’ll have no shortage of Jewish advisors surrounding him, not to mention his Jewish convert daughter and her racially Jewish hubby.

    I’m trying not to be too cynical, but on paper this just doesn’t look as promising as some think and I have my doubts on whether Trump will deliver on his “America First” pronouncements especially if he’s surrounded by people with passionate attachments to Israel.

    • Replies: @WorkingClass
  14. anon • Disclaimer says:

    NATO should have been dissolved a long time ago. The membership of the USA and Canada in particular in this alliance is absurd.

    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
  15. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    Britain would be a far happier country today had Enoch Powell been listened too.

  16. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor

    Very difficult to have an America first foreign policy when America has an incredibly powerful Jewish lobby that wants America very active in the world, to safeguard Israel.

  17. Rurik says:

    The trade-off: Russia ensures the independence of the Baltic republics that she let go. And NATO gets out of Russia’s face.

    the US doesn’t now and never did give a rip about the Baltic republics

    the ONLY reason we’re (ZIO-NATO) in Putin’s face right now is because Putin’s Russia has become an obstacle to the destruction of Syria- so that Israel can steal the oil-rich Golan Heights – once Assad has been given the Gadhafi treatment.

    that’s what this is all about

    and if Putin would simply say ‘OK, you guys can lynch Assad and take whatever you want’, with some token territory given to Russia, then this whole charade would disappear overnight, until the next scheme these fiends come up with to bully the planet and steal other people’s stuff

    Ike and JFK and some of the others still had a shred of integrity. GWB and Obama have none. Zero. Our state Dept. is being run by the Kagans and co. And they’d start a war with Russia in a New York second, and would watch Estonia bombed into a glass parking lot with elation in their hearts. The more stupid goyim (anti-Semites) that got slaughtered.. Russian, Baltic, Ukrainian, etc.. the better.

    And Pat (and many others here) knows this, but he can’t say it.

    • Replies: @Boris N
  18. @KenH

    Will you be voting for Hillary? Third party? Staying home?

    • Replies: @KenH
  19. by considering those americans who can’t vote, and those who can vote but didn’t, clinton/trump were elected to face-off for the presidency by 9 percent of the population.
    nearly 70% of americans think hillary clinton is a serial liar and don’t trust her. i can’t quote the exact number, but millions of americans think donald trump is a billionaire bombastic narcissist who is clearly off his head.
    those numbers should give us all pause.
    but, does it really matter which pathetic primate occupies the white house for the next 4 years?
    someone once wrote that the presidency is the entertainment division of the military/industrial complex. we must update the observation with the addition of wall street, healthcare insurers, big pharma, and big agra into the mix.
    we have a congress and judiciary, neither of which acts as a check against the executive, but support their chosen party head like cheerleaders for the quarterback of a football team.
    i hope the world didn’t tune-in to the conventions, because both republicans & democrats provided indisputable proof that america has finally jumped the shark. good grief, what an embarrassment.
    emma goldman: if voting changed anything it would be banned.
    no wonder americans stay home on election day. we have one more choice than the old soviet union. to quote simon & garfunkel: when you’ve got to choose; anyway you look at it you lose.
    vote if you want to. but with the idiotic electoral system, in only a handful of states does your vote matter.
    to the rest of america, stay home, order out, pour a glass of cabernet and watch seinfeld reruns.
    at least, you won’t hate yourself in the morning.

  20. @Realist

    Compared to Hillary…..

    • Replies: @Realist
  21. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    2016 election is an All-Trump Show.

    It is Trump vs Anti-Trump. It is not pro-Hillary. Hillary just runs as Anti-Trump.

    Because Dems got the ‘creative’ community on its side, it can create all sorts of smoke-and-mirrors hype about unity and ‘progress’, but the illusion dissipates once reality kicks in.

    Trump matters in 2016 because he laid out certain inconvenient truths about Power in America and the World. Hillary is same-as-usual. Trump is game-change.

    Trumpism is a real challenge to the ruling global elites. Hillary serves the GLOB agenda.

    So, Hillary doesn’t matter. If the presidency was abolished, it would still be like a Hillary presidency since the GLOB would rule all the institutions. Hillary just aids and abets the GLOB. Hillary or no Hillary, GLOB already has it all.

    Trump matters. His presidency(if he keeps to his word, which I sort of doubt, btw) would change the course of the American Ship.

    Since Trump matters, 2016 election is really an All-Trump Show. The choices are Trump vs Anti-Trump. Trump matters because he disagrees with the GLOB.
    Hillary doesn’t matter since her views and policies are totally aligned with the GLOB. She is just their maid. In contrast, Trump would be their master, something they fear.
    (But Trump’s rhetoric could all be hogwash. His biography is hardly one that inspires trust and integrity.)

  22. Marcus says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    5) yeah a bunch of those are just itching for a fight over Lithuania or some other country they couldn’t locate on a map, idiots
    http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/06/15/republicans-and-democrats-sharply-divided-on-how-tough-to-be-with-russia/

  23. TG says:

    Is Trump the peace candidate? He says good things (but then so did Obama in 2008: talk is cheap). So maybe yes, maybe no.

    But one thing is completely certain: Hillary Clinton is, undeniably, indisputably, positively, the war candidate. Period.

  24. KenH says:
    @WorkingClass

    Trump all the way, but that doesn’t mean I can raise unpleasant questions or constructively criticize him on occasion. Tel Aviv on the Potomac has a way of changing people for the worse and I hope that doesn’t happen to him.

  25. Boris N says:
    @Parsifal

    The only things valuable the Baltics have are their sea and their ports, particularly Tallinn and Riga (small ports like Klaipeda are of less importance), but even thus these ports are not worth to fight for. It might be worthwhile in the 18th century but not now. Russia is building mega world class ports near St. Petersburg, and its transport infrastructure is not limited to sea as it was many centuries ago. Not to mention Poland and other Eurotrash whose only value is their roads to West Europe. Russia could not get and want nothing from all of them except for a save transit.

  26. Boris N says:

    The trade-off: Russia ensures the independence of the Baltic republics that she let go. And NATO gets out of Russia’s face.

    Should Russia dishonor its commitment, economic sanctions are the answer, not another European war.

    First of all, Americans, even those who do not want a conflict with Russia, must stop imposing any binding terms on Russia and thinking of Russia as an evil first mover with an evil thoughts. Americans must stop thinking that Russia is destined and always wants to do something bad, so America always do nothing but just answers to the threats but not actually creates threats itself. When Americans understand that from the Russian point of view it is America which threatens Russia and it is Russia which has to answer the threats, then the relation between two countries may start to become better.

  27. Boris N says:
    @Rurik

    There is a crazy idea that Russia is nothing than a tool in the hands of London and EU masters during their US vs Europe battle for the world. I hate to think that Russia is not independent but everything says that Russian policy in the Middle East was forced upon it like by some much more power hand. So it not as simple as NATO as good guys vs Russia as a resurrecting evil empire. Some more deep and hidden processes are going on, but we’ll never know.

  28. Realist says:
    @boogerbently

    Trump is better than Hillary, but that doesn’t change my post.

  29. MEH 0910 says:

    Hildabeast is the War Pig!

  30. jtgw says: • Website

    It is really scary how quickly Dems have switched to being the War Party.

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
  31. Art says:

    Is Trump the Peace Candidate?

    This article was written Aug 2 – today Aug 3 – it looks like Trump is dead as any kind of candidate.

  32. @Priss Factor

    Good points. Bern victims are more interested in redistributionism than in the creation of tangible wealth, and of course, they are all-in SJW’s.

    My guess is that about 10% will vote Trump out of lingering hatred for Her, 20% will find their way to the Greens or the Libertarians, 20% will just stay home, and Medusa gets the remainder.

    Am I too optimistic?

  33. @anon

    It’s always jarringly incongruent to see a “North Atlantic” organization which was chartered for purely defensive purposes conducting offensive operations in Central Asia.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?