Ever since the war in Iraq I've been very hesitant to trust the USA when it comes to it's military maneuvering. Hopefully by now we all understand that the USA lied to justify that war. There were no Weapons of Mass Destruction. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. It was a great big lie from start to finish. When the US are involved in war, it pays to be a little cynical.
So when things kicked off in Ukraine, and the western media started trying to whip everyone into a war hungry mob again, as they did over Iraq, I was cynical. The bias in the western media has been shocking, but these are the days of the internet and other sources of information are available. Of course we have to be careful about who we trust for that information..
Here are a few bits of information that come from reliable sources, which will hopefully at least make people think.
"The RAND Corporation is an American nonprofit global policy think tank created in 1948 by Douglas Aircraft Company to offer research and analysis to the United States Armed Forces. It is financed by the U.S. government.... " - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAND_Corporation
It has funding other than from the US government, but the fact that it does have US government funding is a big deal.
In 2019 Rand put out a document called 'Extending Russia - Competing From Advantageous Ground'. It was sponsored by the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, or put simply, the US Army paid Rand, to tell them how they could "stress Russia’s military or economy or the regime’s political standing at home and abroad. "
"these steps are conceived of as measures that would lead Russia to compete in domains or regions where the United States has a competitive advantage, causing Russia to overextend itself militarily or economically or causing the regime to lose domestic and/or international prestige and influence."
If that's not already a bit of smoking gun, page 96 of the report is quite revealing :
"Measure 1: Provide Lethal Aid to Ukraine"
Accepting the fact that this is recommending the US supply lethal aid to Ukraine not to help Ukraine, but solely as a means to extend Russia militarily, which is bad enough, the document goes on to say "The United States could also become more vocal in its support for NATO membership for Ukraine. "....." While NATO’s requirement for unanimity makes it unlikely that Ukraine could gain membership in the foreseeable future, Washington’s pushing this possibility could boost Ukrainian resolve while leading Russia to redouble its efforts to forestall such a development. "
So we might ask what they mean by "leading Russia to redouble its efforts to forestall such a development." Well, it turns out we don't have to think to hard to work that out, because as far back as 2008, the US were setting out their stall on this front.
Date: 2008 February 1
"Following a muted first reaction to Ukraine's intent to seek a NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) at the Bucharest summit (ref A), Foreign Minister Lavrov and other senior officials have reiterated strong opposition, stressing that Russia would view further eastward expansion as a potential military threat. NATO enlargement, particularly to Ukraine, remains "an emotional and neuralgic" issue for Russia, but strategic policy considerations also underlie strong opposition to NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia. In Ukraine, these include fears that the issue could potentially split the country in two, leading to violence or even, some claim, civil war, which would force Russia to decide whether to intervene. Additionally, the GOR and experts continue to claim that Ukrainian NATO membership would have a major impact on Russia's defense industry, Russian-Ukrainian family connections, and bilateral relations generally. "
So let's put that into plain English. The US knew that pushing NATO membership for Ukraine, could "split the country in two".... which it did, " leading to violence or even, some claim, civil war", which it did, "which would force Russia to decide whether to intervene", which they did.
So what we have is that in 2008, the US explained with 20/20 vision what would happen if they pushed for Ukraine to get NATO membership...
How much more of a smoking gun, do we need?
The Rand information comes from Rand's own web site. It's about as valid as you can get.
The wikileaks information has never been disputed by the US. They admitted that the information was taken from them, and have sought to prosecute those who did so. At no point have they ever denied the information was accurate.
Hopefully, that provides a little bit of perspective.
This says nothing about whether Putin is or isn't a nice guy. It doesn't in any way deny the horror that the people of Ukraine are currently having to live through.
I wrote this, because while the Russian people protest war in their country it is down to those of us in the west, specifically in NATO countries, to ensure that our governments are not purposely instigating these wars, as the US very clearly are here.