The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Robert Roth Archive
Are We Being Scammed Into World War III?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The Biden-Putin summit back in July produced some real but fragile promise. The Presidential Joint Statement on Strategic Stability, signed by US President Joseph Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin at the close of the summit, confirmed the Reagan-Gorbachev declaration that a nuclear war could not be won and should never be fought, and called for robust “bilateral” dialogue between the US and Russia and the initiation of negotiations toward new treaties to control current weapons systems.

True, the media ignored that Joint Statement, focusing entirely on President Biden’s repeated mention of vague “consequences” if Russian “behavior” didn’t change. But the way was there, if only the two sides had the will, to build back the structure of international arms control – which Russian president Putin has called for repeatedly. The stage was set.

Since then the US (echoed by NATO) and Ukraine have issued a number of impossibly hawkish statements and the US has supplied Ukraine with a humongous torrent of sophisticated weapons. The chorus has grown so fierce and loud that many commentators have criticized their tone and expressed fear that Ukraine may be encouraged to take offensive action against Russia, leading to war between them and possibly to US involvement which would threaten nuclear holocaust. The import of these criticisms has been to urge the US to tone things down. But perhaps the more appropriate admonition would be to urge the US to start telling the truth.

I pointed out after the July summit that who those want to continue and expand the New Cold War could easily head off improvement in US-Russia relations by continuing to make unfounded accusations that would be reported as facts by the major media, triggering calls for “consequences” and continuing the demonization of Mr. Putin and Russia. I imagined further evidence-free charges of objectionable conduct such as ransomeware attacks.

The charge that Russia is preparing to invade Ukraine carries that dynamic to a whole new level. It’s so far beyond what I had in mind that it took a headline in my local newspaper to make me recognize the similar dynamic. Here’s the headline:

US intelligence: Russia planning Ukraine attack.

The “news” is that US intelligence agencies claim Russia’s troop movements within Russia are the prelude to an invasion. According to the Associated Press, “US intelligence officials” “determined” that Russian planning is underway for a possible military offensive that could begin as soon as early 2022. The “new intelligence finding” estimated the Russians are planning to deploy an estimated 175,000 troops and almost half of them are already deployed near Ukraine’s border, “according to a Biden administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the finding.” The “official” added the plan” calls for the movement of 100 Russian battalion tactical groups along with armor, artillery, and equipment.

These are pretty detailed “findings.” US intelligence supposedly has uncovered a Russian “plan” that is disclosed to the public without any evidence and on condition of anonymity.

There’s the dynamic, in full: the intelligence agencies make the charge, the media act as stenographers conveying it to the public as news. Democrats who belong to the bipartisan War Party threaten whatever they can think of (so far, short of war) should there be such an invasion, and off we go.

Meanwhile, various US spokespeople – led by Mr. Biden himself – encourage Ukraine to believe the US has got its back, no matter what. And Ukraine has refused for years to take the steps it agreed to years ago to defuse and resolve its conflict with residents of eastern Ukraine who object to the installation of an anti-Russian government in a US-backed coup back in 2014.

As Caitlin Johnstone points out, nuclear war is getting increasingly likely. Other analysts have provided detailed background on the situation, including the absence of any Russian motive for attacking Ukraine. On the other hand, two in particular have pointed to the profits of the war industries as the obvious motive of those who are increasing US-Russia tension to seriously frightening levels. Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies, The US-Russia Confrontation Over Ukraine (Consortium News, November 23, 2021),

Personally I find quite appealing Dmitri Orlov’s description of the situation:

The Ukraine aspires to NATO and EU membership, but this prospect appears exceedingly unlikely since it is much more of a liability than an asset: destitute, bankrupt, politically unstable and not in control of its own government or its own territory—a failed state, essentially. Plus, the EU and NATO are themselves perhaps not too long for this world, the EU having recently lost the United Kingdom and NATO having just fabulously failed in Afghanistan, and not really capable of accepting new members. Sensing their own weakness, and projecting onto Russia their own instincts to engulf and devour all that they can, they automatically assume that Russia will exploit this weakness and reconquer the Ukraine and perhaps some other parts of Eastern Europe as well. But this is all it is—a projection, because the contemporary Russian project is something else entirely. Russia does periodically move its troops around its own territory, thereby keeping the West in a constant state of nervous agitation bordering on outright panic, but from the Russian perspective that is just a pleasant side-effect of regularly scheduled training exercises. There was a recent hysterical outburst in Western press over Russian tanks massed on the Belorussian border, for instance. Russia is always “about to invade,” on Tuesdays especially, but somehow never gets around to it. Dmitri Orlov, Who Wants Some Ukraine? (November 24, 2021)

Much as I enjoy Orlov’s humor, however, economist Michael Hudson suggests another explanation – besides profits, and apart from any genuine panic – for the intemperate outbursts emanating from US and NATO officials these days, an observation which warrants much wider exposure and contemplation. Professor Hudson, a former Wall Street economist and now a Distinguished Research Professor at University of Missouri, Kansas City (UMKC), has authored many books on international economics, counsels governments on finance and tax policy, and maintains a website at . In a discussion with Pepe Escobar (In Quest of a Multipolar Economic World Order (March 26, 2021), ), Hudson declared:

“The Americans want war. The people that Biden has appointed have an emotional hatred of Russia. I’ve spoken to government people who are close to the Democratic Party, and they’ve told me that there’s a pathological emotional desire for war with Russia, largely stemming from the fact that the Tzars were anti-Semitic and there’s still the hatred about their ancestors: ‘Look what they did to my great-grandfather.’ And so they’re willing to back the Nazis, back the anti-Semites in Ukraine. They’re willing to back today’s anti-Semites all over the world as long as they’re getting back at this emotional focus on a kind of post 19th-century economy. I’ve met these people. Their emotion is one of hatred and anger. You can look at their face and see what they’ve become. This is really dangerous. They are crazy.”

Robert Roth prosecuted false advertising and consumer fraud as an assistant attorney general for New York (1981-1991) and Oregon (1993-2007), and wrote a mini-primer on the war on Syria, posted at .

• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, NATO, Russia, Ukraine 
Hide 13 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. anonymous[139] • Disclaimer says:

    “The Americans want war.

    Yes, but not to get into it but set up others to get killed so the US can point to that and heighten war hysteria. The US engineered a coup in Ukraine and installed some compliant puppets who are unrepresentative of the mass of Ukrainians, extreme types from western parts of the country. They’re running a dictatorship and have been getting arms from US-NATO whilst organizing a military. The dupes think the US will come in and support them once hostilities begin. The US will fight to the last Ukrainian. Although regarded as being somewhat financially insolvent US vultures might be able to pick their bones, so who knows, they have a lot of land and people that could be squeezed for exploitation in some way. Ukraine is a country that was expanded by communists, Crimea in ’54, some western areas in ’39 by Stalin.
    When did the US become the owner of Ukraine? They border Russia, not the US. If Russia did invade what of it? US has invaded numerous countries thousands of miles away with its typical effrontery, defying anyone to do anything about it.

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  2. Sean says:

    Nuclear weapons have no military purpose, wars cannot be fought with them, so there is not going to be any nuclear hostilities. A war between Ukraine and Russia would not involve America because Russian troops fighting the Americans would be present far too much danger of a conventional global war fought against the world’s most powerful economy, and that is a war Russia could not hope to win, and America generals don’t want to fight. But neither side can ever be sure the other is not getting funny ideas tha<i.might present a risk of the unthinkable; hence all these bloodcurdling threats and postures.

    • Agree: Johnny Rico
    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  3. Just another reiteration of make-goy-fight-goy.

    Russians don’t want it. Chinese and Iranians don’t want it.

    But Anglos are dogs of Zion.

  4. There is again that real issue –what is the result of Crossing a Jew with a Ukrainian? Answer: A janitor who owns his own building. Presto—–Ukes build millions of new buildings and everyone will indeed live a rich and happy life and perhaps John Hagee and Donnie Trump along with Amtrak Joe and Hillary will come —-for a party with Hunter !!!

  5. U.S. word is not worth the paper it is written on (remember the JCPOA), never mind words only pronounced. Whether it is Ukraine or Taiwan, the U.S. won’t get involved because it would far too costly, and in any case it could not win so it would be another humiliating defeat in its already impressive collection. Heck, it cannot even get involved in a war with Iran because ZioNazistan would cease to exist.

    The only way the U.S. would get involved is with yet more weapons sales, which will nicely add to its coffers, thank you very much.

  6. conatus says:

    Jack Matlock, Ambassador to USSR, during USSR fall, has steadfastly maintained we orally promised(not written)(boy we fooled the Russians, right?) not to expand NATO if the Russians allowed the reunification of Germany.They kept their end of the bargain but then the USA lied its way out of any oaths since we use any excuse to dishonor our Word.(We said,”A new Administration you know, we don’t honor any promises the other administration made”(change from Bush One to Clinton))
    So Nato expands  adding ten more countries.

    Matlock speaks

    • Agree: GomezAdddams
  7. @anonymous

    At the time of the CIA-instigated coup in Kiev, occurring conveniently while Mr. Putin was pre-occupied with keeping the Sochi Olympics safe from terrorism, I wondered why he didn’t roll his tanks into Western Ukraine, and crush the illegal coup in its infancy. Paul Craig Roberts has written several columns arguing the same thing. Putin’s prudence has not been rewarded. Washington doesn’t do diplomacy anymore, and only understands force.

    Now, invading Ukraine, with all its high-tech weaponry (courtesy of Uncle Sam) would be a much more formidable task. My fear is that Washington’s fomented crisis could escalate into yet a third major Brothers War. Millions of the best of their generations were tragically slaughtered in the first two. Would white Europeans be so stupid to allow it to happen yet again?

    With its negative birthrate in virtually every predominantly white country, depressed even further by Covid, what will be left of the White Man when all is said and done? It could only greatly accelerate our coming extinction.

    • Replies: @El Dato
  8. Franz says:

    Got to unpack it so it makes sense:

    “The Americans want war. “ — Implies ALL Americans.

    “The people that Biden has appointed” — Well. no, just President Dementia’s hamster cage.

    “have an emotional hatred of Russia […] largely stemming from the fact that the Tzars were anti-Semitic “ — NOW we get you: 2% of Americans, tops, and the least representative ones at that.

  9. JimDandy says:

    Hey, Ron. You should make this the lead article.

  10. @Sean

    ‘…the world’s most powerful economy’??!! The USA??!! You are insane as well as pestiferous. I do love a Yankee blowhard, however.

  11. El Dato says:

    On the good side, the Pale of Settlement would become non-inhabitable, so no return to the ancient homelands for these “Americans”.

    • Agree: Verymuchalive
  12. Sidney says:

    In the 1930’s, Hitler also called for arms control. He even expressed a desire for peaceful coexistence with Britain. Look what happened to him. History repeating itself.

  13. Florin N. says:

    the (((Americans))) always want to profit from wars others die in.

Current Commenter

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 have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Robert Roth Comments via RSS
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Becker update V1.3.2
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
How America was neoconned into World War IV