Zelensky Willing To Cede Territory To Russia In Exchange For NATO Protection

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is willing to give territory to Russia in exchange for NATO protection in order to stop the “hot stage” of the war.

Zelensky added that after the ceasefire was achieved Ukraine could attempt to “diplomatically” negotiate the return of the territory currently under Russian control, reports The Telegraph.

“If we want to stop the hot stage of the war, we should take under [the] NATO umbrella the territory of Ukraine that we have under our control,” said Zelensky in an interview with Sky News Friday. “That’s what we need to do fast, and then Ukraine can get back the other part of its territory diplomatically.”

Zelensky’s statement is a dramatic shift from previous positions.

More from The Telegraph:

Mr. Zelensky hinted in his interview that the “NATO umbrella” would not be full membership of NATO, something Putin has rejected as part of any peace deal.

Rather, it could mean NATO member states, including Britain, the US, France and Germany, providing individual security guarantees to Ukraine.

This development comes on the heels of reports from Infowars and Alex Jones that President-elect Trump has been working around-the-clock to achieve a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine ahead of his inauguration.

Keep reading

Globalists Go For Broke: Plan To Trigger World War III Moves Forward

There are considerable and insidious forces at play when it comes to the development of the war in Ukraine; a swirling mass of think tanks, globalists and bureaucrats are doing everything in their power to instigate an international conflict between the US, the EU and Russia. They’ve specifically been looking for a way to leverage the Western populace into supporting direct and open warfare.

At the beginning of the event the propaganda was very effective in herding the political left into cheering for NATO involvement, with leftists calling for the “cancellation” of Russia and demanding boots on the ground to “wipe them off the face of the Earth.” One of those rabid activists (Ryan Routh) even tried to assassinate Donald Trump, ostensibly because Trump promised immediate peace negotiations with Russia should he become president again.

The Democratic Party, once considered the “anti-war party”, is now the warhawk party. Add to that a gaggle of frothing Neo-Cons (leftists and globalists posing as conservatives) like Lindsay Graham and Mitt Romney, and it’s difficult to see how we will be able to avoid an escalation. There are people on both sides trying to trigger greater bloodshed and anyone who calls for peace comes under threat of assassination.

Russia and Vladimir Putin have culpability of their own and one could argue that the East vs West paradigm is itself a brand of theater. However, the evidence for now leans heavily towards globalist think-tank instigation, leading to the Maidan coup in Ukraine in 2014, the flood of NATO weapons and “advisers” into the country under the Obama Administration and the deep involvement of Lindsay Graham, John McCain and The Atlantic Council in attempts to secure EU and NATO membership for the country; a red line which Russia consistently warned would lead to confrontation.

Keep reading

Military Chairman of NATO Admiral Rob Bauer: Preemptive Attack on Russia Should Be Considered

NATO Military Committee Chairman Admiral Rob Bauer from The Netherlands discussed the need for preemptive strikes on Russia in the event of armed conflict.

Joe Biden and NATO are hoping for all-out war with Russia, the world’s second largest nuclear power, before President Trump enters office in January.

Tucker Carlson calls these recent developments the most evil thing he has seen in his lifetime.

The EurAsia Daily reported:

NATO is discussing the possibility of preemptive precision strikes on the territory of Russia in the event of an armed conflict with the alliance countries. This was stated at a conference in Brussels by the head of the Military Committee of the bloc, Admiral Rob Bauer.

He called positive the fact that NATO has changed its attitude to the essence of the organization as a defense alliance, as well as the perception that it is necessary to “sit and wait for us to be attacked” and only then react.

Keep reading

Have the US and NATO Decided to Play FAFO With Russia?

FAFO is a social media acronym that means F**k Around Find Out. It appears that the United States and NATO have decided to play that dangerous game with Moscow. I had an offline chat with Alastair Crooke this morning. He flagged an article in the Times of Israel that I had missed, and he discussed it with the Judge. The article is an interview with retired Israeli General, Itai Brun, the former head of the IDF’s Military Intelligence research and analysis division. Here are the salient points:

[Brun] warned Saturday that Israel’s inability to recognize that Hamas was preparing to invade shows a far-reaching systemic failure that cannot be fixed simply by replacing key officers and officials.

Correcting that strategic failure, said Brun in a TV interview, requires a fundamental change in the approach and culture of intelligence gathering, the processing of intelligence by the security establishment, and the interaction with the political leadership. . . .

But while Israel’s military intelligence community recognized that it had refused to even consider that Hamas could and would burst through the border fence, and “they realized that they needed to rethink” as regards Gaza, some fundamentally false conceptions continued to be held even after the invasion and slaughter.

Israeli intelligence still failed to recognize and internalize that the Iran-led axis believed it could destroy Israel, Brun specified. “They didn’t understand this change.”

He said Israeli intelligence had so much data, all indicating that Hamas was deterred and was not seeking a war, that there was a refusal to so much as countenance the possibility that this conception was erroneous — not even when the IDF obtained documentation such as the Jericho Wall material showing Hamas’s attack plans.

This intelligence failure is the result of at least two kinds of bias — reporting bias and confirmation bias.

Reporting bias is when managers and analysts selectively report or omit information based on the outcome of the research or personal beliefs.

Confirmation bias is the tendency to favour, seek out, interpret, and remember information in a way that confirms one’s pre-existing beliefs or hypotheses, whilst giving disproportionately less consideration to alternative possibilities.

This is different than lying. And this phenomenon is not unique to Israel. In fact, I believe it is a major reason the US intelligence community has been so wrong, so often in its analysis of Russia and the war in Ukraine. We are seeing a manifestation of that now with Biden giving the Ukrainians the green light to use ATACMs inside Russian territory. Biden and his inept advisors have convinced themselves that they can unleash Ukraine and Russia will not respond. If Ukraine goes forward and launches the missiles — with the help of US intelligence data to program the missiles — then Russia will respond in a forceful way. Initially, I believe they will limit their response to Ukrainian territory, but Putin will authorize targeting NATO sites that have gone unscathed until now.

Keep reading

European Lackeys in Panic Mode as Trump Signals Detente With Russia

It’s early days yet. However, there are signs that President-elect Trump is moving toward a detente with Russia over Ukraine.

One good sign is that Trump will not invite Mike Pompeo or Nikki Haley to join his cabinet when he is inaugurated as the 47th U.S. president on January 20. Both of these figures were rabid anti-Russia hawks during Trump’s previous administration. There were suggestions that Pompeo and Haley might return with senior posts in his second administration. But Trump has announced the pair will not be offered new positions.Murray N. Rothbar

Another positive sign is from people close to Trump’s inner circle who are letting the Kiev regime know – rudely – that the U.S. military aid spigot is being turned off.

Donald Trump has yet to hold a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to the Kremlin. But both leaders have already expressed a willingness to negotiate a peaceful settlement over the Ukraine conflict.

Another promising sign of potential detente between the United States and Russia is the sheer panic among European leaders. The news of Trump’s election last week has caused most European elites to scramble like scared children on hearing “boo!”.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and French President Emmanuel Macron are consoling themselves by urging Europe to “come together” in the wake of Trump’s stunning election victory. The collapse of Germany’s coalition government of Chancellor Olaf Scholz is an early casualty of the Trump impact.

European leaders fear that if Trump pulls the plug on military aid to the Kiev regime they will be left holding the can to fund the proxy war against Russia, which the weak European economies have no chance of sustaining.

It’s no secret that the main European states were betting on Democrat candidate Kamala Harris winning the race to the White House. Harris would have ensured the continuation of NATO’s backing for the Kiev regime. With Trump becoming president, all bets are off.

Keep reading

The UN, Green Fund, and NATO – Unqualified Audits = Fraud

According to the World Meteorology Organization, the world began in 1885 when temperatures first were recorded.   And based on those recordings, which have been radically altered since that time, this is representative of a disaster caused by mankind.  The global mean temperature rose by 1.5’ Celsius.  The goal is for global temperatures to only rise by 1.5’ Celsius… 

In addition, UN climate experts have claimed that global greenhouse gas emissions have ‘smashed all records’.  Records began in 1958.  Starting in the 1950s, scientists began drilling deep into the ice sheets of Antarctica and Greenland to extract tubes of ice called ice cores.  The data is compared to the last ice age wherein there were few to zero – trees, plant life, etc… This is their methodology which has all the scientific analysis of comparing cow farts to climate.   Elevated levels of CO2 from climate change may enable plants to benefit from the carbon fertilization effect and use less water to grow.

With a President Trump we are hopefully back to reality in regards to Climate Change, NATO and the UN.  Fire up the coal and eliminate the wildlife weapon – windmills.  Melt down the steel components and make appliances.

The left is weeping, threatening that a US agreement to give Russia a win would mean Comrade Rutte will expel the US out of NATO!  NATO spends $1.3 trillion on defense of which the US picks up $860 billion or 66%.  Their last audit was in 2021 and included 33 recommendations, including:  “Five NATO Reporting Entities (ACO, IS, NAHEMO, NAPMA and NCPS) were required to resubmit their financial statements to correct material errors in order to obtain unqualified audit opinion on financial statements.  Sum had to restate their financials multiple times.”

The bottom line audit of NATO declared the Financial Statements and Compliance were ‘unqualified’.  This is considered an Adverse Opinion. Out of 44 reporting entities, 2 were given a ‘qualified’ audit score which is consistent with the last 3 years. Total Assets amounted to roughly $3.2 billion.  Liabilities were predominantly “Deferred Revenue’ of $2.4 billion. Deferred revenue, also known as unearned revenue or deferred income, is money a company receives in advance for products or services that have not yet been delivered.  The accounting entry would debit Cash & Receivables and credit the liability – yet the financial statements reveal only $1.686 billion.  This is what auditors refer to as unqualified, ie fraud.

For the past three years, their spending was exactly equal to revenue.   In the accounting world that is RED FLAG!   Not possible.   Their ‘Other Expenses’ is thus likely a plug to falsely create this bizarre budget.

There have been no financial statements for 2022, 2023 or quarterlies for 2024.   Houston!  This is worse than the US government.  We need to get out of DODGE!  NATO is Ukraine in drag.

Keep reading

Russian Nuclear Weapons Are Keeping NATO Troops Out Of Ukraine: Top Admiral

A top NATO military official said that NATO forces would have deployed to Ukraine to drive Russian soldiers from the country if Russia did not have nuclear weapons

Chair of the NATO Military Committee, Dutch Admiral Rob Bauer, explained to the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ Prague Defense Summit in the Czech Republic that Russia’s nuclear weapons are deterring a NATO deployment to Ukraine.

“I am absolutely sure if the Russians did not have nuclear weapons, we would have been in Ukraine, kicking them out,” he stated. 

Bauer said the challenge for the West is finding where Russia’s redlines on nuclear use are, noting that Washington mistakenly miscalculated that sending tanks and F-16s to Ukraine were the Kremlin’s redlines. 

Admiral Bauer was discussing the difference between the Ukraine conflict and other NATO wars such as the Afghanistan occupation. He stated the main difference between Moscow and Kabul is Russia’s nuclear stockpile.

In Afghanistan, American and NATO forces quickly forced the Taliban from Kabul in 2001. Then, the Western alliance engaged in a two-decade nation-building project while the Taliban fought using insurgent tactics. 

The top NATO official went on to say the Afghan War was not of strategic importance. “Afghanistan was never of strategic importance. If we’re really honest Afghanistan was not of strategic importance.”

He continued, “We spent 20 years there and we did a lot of things and people lost their lives but if you ask the question, ‘was it of strategic importance?’ In Afghanistan, the answer is no.”

Keep reading

NATO & Vaccines: The Twin Sacred Cows

On February 9, 1990, U.S. Secretary of State James Baker assured Mikhail Gorbachev that if the Soviet leader would cooperate with German unification, NATO would not expand “one inch eastward.” This was just one of many assurances of Soviet security made by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991.

On December 12, 2017, the National Security Archive at George Washington University declassified U.S., Soviet, German, British and French documents about these assurances. As the National Security Archive reported at this time:

The documents show that multiple national leaders were considering and rejecting Central and Eastern European membership in NATO as of early 1990 and through 1991, that discussions of NATO in the context of German unification negotiations in 1990 were not at all narrowly limited to the status of East German territory, and that subsequent Soviet and Russian complaints about being misled about NATO expansion were founded in written contemporaneous memcons and telcons at the highest levels. 

The documents reinforce former CIA Director Robert Gates’s criticism of “pressing ahead with expansion of NATO eastward [in the 1990s], when Gorbachev and others were led to believe that wouldn’t happen.” The key phrase, buttressed by the documents, is “led to believe.”

As we now know, the U.S. broke these assurances—a decision characterized by George Kennan, America’s chief architect of Soviet containment policy during he Cold War—as “A Fateful Error” in his Feb. 5, 1997 New York Times editorial.

Keep reading

EU Nations in NATO Prepare for Trump Presidency

European Union nations are concerned about Trump’s victory, as Trump has historically opposed the NATO alliance siphoning funding from the US. Before Trump, only a handful of nations were paying their 2% of GDP obligation. World leaders are now calling for a European army, but a plan is already in place for a unified army that NATO could rapidly deploy.

Now, EU nations host multinational armies of 1,500 troops and have had them in place since 2007, yet they have never been deployed. France famously vetoed plans for a unified European army, but President Macron is now open to creating one. The Baltic nations also oppose a unified EU army as they believe it will decrease NATO’s strength. The UK once vetoed the proposal as well when they were within the bloc.

“If we do not start thinking about ways to organise our common defence, we will not be strong enough when we need to defend ourselves, or our neighbours,” voiced Polish leader Luc Frieden. Poland became the top contributor to NATO in terms of GDP after Russia invaded Ukraine.

“At the beginning, we should go ahead with a coalition of the willing. A few countries that are ready to pool their sovereign rights to be more efficient in defence.” He added, “Of course, each country will want to keep control over important decisions such as when to activate its army, when to send its soldiers to war. But it is also obvious that the current situation does not offer the level of security that we need. So, we need to start thinking about a European army.”

Keep reading

10 Obstacles To Trump’s Reported Plan For Western/NATO Peacekeepers In Ukraine

It was recently assessed that “The Clock Is Ticking For Russia To Achieve Its Maximum Goals In The Ukrainian Conflict” after the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump plans to organize a Western/NATO peacekeeping mission in Ukraine without the US’ participation in order to freeze the conflict. This is obviously a lot easier said than done.

Here’s what can offset this scenario by either delaying it long enough for Russia to end the conflict on its own terms or capsizing Trump’s plan completely:

1. The Europeans Fear A Direct Kinetic Escalation With Russia

France’s tough talk earlier this year about conventionally intervening in the conflict and Poland subsequently refusing to rule out its participation as well mask the Europeans’ fear of a direct kinetic escalation with Russia. Trump will have to masterfully leverage the US’ influence over them and NATO as a whole in order to coerce his country’s European partners into putting their security on the line by going through with this risky plan. It could always backfire, after all, and inadvertently spark World War III.

2. Public Opinion In The Polish Lynchpin Is Strongly Against This

It’s difficult to imagine a Western/NATO peacekeeping mission in Ukraine without Poland’s leading participation, but public opinion is strongly against this after a reputable survey over the summer showed that 69% of Poles are opposed to dispatching troops to that neighboring country in any capacity. As mutual Polish-Ukrainian mistrust worsens as explained herehere, and here, it’ll become a very tough sell, plus Poles fear that they’ll once again be exploited by the West while getting nothing at all in return.

3. Trump’s Prior Rhetoric About Article 5 Doesn’t Inspire Confidence

Another hurdle that’ll have to be overcome is regaining confidence in Trump due to his prior rhetoric about Article 5 after he declared in February that the US won’t protect those NATO members who haven’t spent at least 2% of their GDP on defense. He even threatened that “I would encourage [Russia] to do whatever the hell they want.” Even though most now meet that target, they might still fear that he’ll attach more strings to Article 5, which they’ll rely on for defense if they participate in this mission.

4. It’s Unclear Exactly What Trump Would Do If Russia Hit NATO Troops

Trump will also have to convince NATO members that his response to Russia hitting their troops will balance the line between fulfilling Article 5’s perceived commitments while avoiding an escalation that could spiral into World War III. They also need to be sure that he’ll go through with it and not back down. Moreover, this would have to be clearly communicated to Russia too, who he’ll have to deter. There’s a lot that can go wrong anywhere along this sequence of events so its success can’t be taken for granted.

5. NATO Is Unprepared For A Prolonged Non-Nuclear Hot War With Russia

Even in the extremely unlikely scenario that neither Russia nor the US resorts to nukes in the event of direct kinetic exchanges between them, then NATO would be unprepared for waging a prolonged non-nuclear hot war with Russia. It’s losing the “race of logistics” by far, no progress was made during the last NATO Summit on the “military Schengen” for facilitating such movements eastward, and the bloc only has 5% of the air defenses needed to protect itself. NATO might therefore ultimately lose to Russia.

Keep reading