Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

The Anti-Israel Push May Have Changed Trump’s Mind on Ukraine

By

Those claiming they were stopping us from being dragged into a war in Iran may have dragged us into a war in Ukraine.

Anyone remember World War III? Before President Trump took out Iran’s nuclear program, various “experts” and “influencers” frenziedly warned us that a world war was coming and millions of Americans would die if we attacked Iran.

Some, like Tucker Carlson (who seems to spend half his time in the Gulf and seems to have offered flattering interviews to every Muslim tyrant in the region), were obvious agents of foreign influence, others may have been sincere in their hysteria, but the combined effect made the movement look like clowns, especially once they were proven wrong. Most refused to admit they were wrong, but have gone on claiming that if it wasn’t for their bedwetting, we’d all be dead.

Whoever won the debate on social media is hard to say, but we all know who won the debate in real life. Trump acted and shrugged off the antics. But interestingly, there are signs he’s pivoting on Ukraine. While that may be in part hardball negotiating politics due to Putin’s refusal to make a deal, but it seems to have ramped up after the same people who had vocally argued against U.S. support for Ukraine burned up all their credibility trying to stop a U.S. strike on Iran’s nukes.

I’ve been a longtime critic of the U.S. backing for Ukraine under Biden, and it’s unfortunate that a legitimate position was discredited by dubious figures and even more dubious experts who spent a week telling us that a third of of Tel Aviv had been destroyed and Russia and China would bomb us if we hit Iran. Many of them showed they were ignorant, idiots or agents of foreign influence.

President Trump was paying attention. This is why it’s important to keep a movement, a faction or a trend “clean.” The same people who claimed they were stopping us from being dragged into a war in Iran may have ironically dragged us into a war in Ukraine.

Comments

  1. I only know that I will always support Ukraine’s legitimate right to defend itself from the Russian cowardly invasion and the also legitimate claims to its territory, I can’t how can anyone who support Israel may dare to see it otherwise unless they fully lack the coherence to realize both Israel and Ukraine are bulwarks to the free world and victims to usurpers trying to steal their identity and territory. It’s as simple as that. No compromise possible, no tertiversation should be ever tolerated in respect to both these countries’ legitimate rights and supporting just one is either lack of coherence or a much stronger word I wouldn’t use towards Mr. Greenfield. I hope you realize this the soonest,sir.
    I’m a Brazilian citizen fortunately living in my homeland but I’m no fan to either Biden or Trump, nevertheless, the latter’s support to Ukraine, even if fainthearted in practice, was the best thing he has ever done, whereas Mr. Trump support to Israel is actually doubtful under a deeper scrutiny of his international policies, as the expert Francisco Gil-White has opened my eyes about.

    • Ukraine is not a bulwork of the Free world in the way that Israel is, for the simple reason that Russia is not a threat to the rest the way the Soviet Union was. Yeah, the intellectually lackadaisical West which did nothing after the Cold War to revamp its ideological positioning but simply substituted the Soviet Union w/ Russia pretended that it was, expanded NATO eastwards while denying Moscow the right of entry, w/ the result that the Kremlin got paranoid and ultimately perked up when a democratically elected Ukrainian president was toppled in 2014

      Here is the main difference b/w the 2. Russia was fine leaving Ukraine alone if it had the confidence that Kyiv was not gonna try & join NATO, which had outlived its mission by more than a decade. Iran, otoh, has a problem w/ Israel’s very existence as a Jewish state. If Russia had, say, a Lukashenko-like leader in Kyiv, they’d probably be happy to restore them the Donbass and the Azov coast. There is nothing that Israel could do or have in order to get Iran to recognize it

      • There were some sound reasons for denying Russia the right of entry to NATO due to its massive corruption and general dysfunctionality but I agree that a Russia in NATO not long after the fall of the Evil Empire may have proven optimal for Western security. Besides, if Russia would ever learn (quite unlikely) it would realize that it is in its own best interests to be aligned with the West.

        • Corruption would have been a fine reason for denying Moscow entry into the EU (something the Kremlin never asked). But it’s a ridiculous pretext for denying them entry into a military alliance, especially given what we have today w/ Ukraine, a country reputed to be way more corrupt than Russia, but which NATO leaders have entertained admitting

          The biggest pitfall as a result of that decision was Moscow & Beijing coming together after 2014. During the Cold War, I was one of those not happy w/ President Nixon recognizing Beijing instead of Taipei as the true China. Nonetheless, it was done for a reason that lasted the Cold War: it pre-empted any Moscow-Beijing alliance, and forced the Soviets to fight the Cold War w/o their #1 ideological ally

          It’s questionable whether we could have won the Cold War had Brezhnev had the support of Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping: the Soviets would have had Chinese support in underwriting their international clients like Cuba, North Korea, Nicaragua, South Yemen, Ethiopia & so on. Similarly, Afghanistan wouldn’t have been such a disaster. In the meantime, the West would have been spending a much bigger percentage of its budget on defense, and still wouldn’t have seen off the Soviet Union in the 20th century itself

          The shortsightedness of both Clinton and both the Bushes saw to it that Russia remained alienated from the West, after that disastrous advice they got from Jeffrey Sachs to overnight transition from a command economy to a free market economy. In business, whenever we transition products, we allow for a ramp-down of an outgoing product and a ramp up of a product being introduced. But in Russia’s case in 1992, that transition was expected to take place overnight, and sunk the political careers of some promising Russian politicians, like Yegor Gaidar. Over time, Russia recovered, no thanks to the West, and compounded w/ our leaders treating them as an adversary (by admitting countries from the Baltic states to Bulgaria but not leaving the door open for them), we did what none of our Cold War era leaders from Nixon to Reagan did – drove them into the arms of Beijing. Who we stupidly offshored our manufacturing to, making them the most powerful economy in the world, aside from us

          Now we’d have to wait to see what happens in Russia after Putin, and whether their new leaders would be more amenable than Putin has been recently, Noting that in his first few years, we didn’t have any issues w/ him as the leader of Russia

        • Yes, a Russia in NATO (and optimally Turkey out of NATO) would have arguably been the best way to go. I can’t completely agree with you that a massively dysfunctional and corrupt Russia should have been of no concern for entry into NATO. It has been for other countries.

          As for Ukraine, I have to laugh when people refer to it as a democracy. It is, as you mentioned, quite corrupt, perhaps even more so than Russia. Off the board for NATO membership if Russia was not in NATO should have been both Ukraine and Belarus. Sure a mess now and will be as long as Putin lasts and perhaps even beyond him.

          Finally, I have to wonder how long the enmity towards Russia by Ukrainians will last. What Putin has done to Ukraine and Ukrainians has been barbaric irrespective of any previous actions by Ukraine towards Russia. Of course, essential to know is that historically there has been a huge divide between western Ukraine and eastern Ukraine, the former vehemently anti-Russian and the latter much more inclined to be conciliatory towards Russia (in part for demographic reasons). This is yet another dynamic that has been, is and I think will be a factor in the years to come.

        • Thank you for your response. One more thing I’d add: after the Cold War, some of the anti-Russian stances we took were uncalled for, such as Yeltsin’s war on Chechnya. We didn’t know squat about either Chechnya nor islam, nor I daresay Russia’s own history w/ islamic entities – be it the Ottomans, the Crimean Tatars, the Siberian Tatars and so on. It would be a good idea for our foreign policy establishment to just shut up when they don’t know the history or the internal fissures within other countries, and just pick a side based on the virtue-signalling. (That’s incidentally also how we have so many millions of ignoramuses demonstrating for Hamas in this country)

          Both Russia & China have major diplomatic advantages over us when it comes to dealing w/ other countries. Let’s say we have a hypothetical country, call it Stania, which we’d like to have as an ally. Their government is open to engaging diplomatically both w/ us, as well as w/ Beijing & Moscow. However, let’s say Stania has a policy of banning all faiths other than Rastafarianism, and they also ban all Centrist to Leftist parties

          Now, the Russians would have no problems dealing w/ such a regime: they’ll treat it as a black box, and just sign agreements w/ the regime there. If somehow that regime falls, they’ll try and continue that relationship w/ the next regime. They don’t subject that country to any litmus test such as whether it’s a democracy, freedom of religion or any of that

          However, w/ US, it would be a different story. Our State Department would publish papers criticizing them at best, and condemning them at worst. The USCIRF, which is a Bill Clinton created department that intrudes into religious freedom in other countries, would condemn Stania for not allowing freedom of religion. So Stania would see the US has being a meddlesome country, and be wary of doing deals w/ US

          If they had to choose b/w the US and Russia, they’d pick Russia, since the Kremlin doesn’t try to interfere in their internal affairs. Incidentally, in this aspect, Russia is a major improvement on the Soviet Union, which wanted to export world revolution. The Russians, by contrast, just wanna deal w/ whoever’s in power

        • Thanks for your reply, Infidel. Your imaginary nation of Stania and how America, and specifically the collection of overeducated idiots at the State Department, would treat with it versus Russia is spot on.

          I remember when Jimmy Carter, who was simply a terrible President in so many ways, took his insufferable high moral stance to such a degree that it severely hurt America’s interests. The best example is of course Iran under the Shah and Carter undermining his regime, yes far from perfect but so what, led directly to what we still have to deal with, i.e., an ayatollah regime which hates our guts. Another example of Carter’s folly is holding Argentina’s military regime up to opprobrium and refusing to have America buy any more Argentine beef (some of the best in the world). Well, what happened? The Soviets bought Argentine beef and gained far more influence in Argentina.

          I don’t mind at all that America has to stand as a moral beacon to the world. Indeed I salute this. But there comes a point when a Machiavellian assessment is necessary even for the most moral of nations and minus such an assessment it demonstrates that a moral touch without a realistic touch can only lead to negative results if not chaos.

      • Infidel, I’m no expert on this, but it seems clear Russia should have been admitted to NATO with Turkey blocked.

        • Definitely after 1991! In fact, had they been added, the mission of NATO could have remained opposing communism, but w/ the borders now as China’s borders w/ Russia, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan

      • Wellington

        One last point in this thread, & I’m done – talking of Jimmy Carter, you forgot how he did one better on Nixon and completely broke off diplomatic relations w/ Taiwan. What Nixon did was understandable, if morally reprehensible, but it at least served US interests well in creating a wedge b/w Beijing & Moscow. But Carter’s move of one-upping him and breaking relations w/ Taipei created a situation like today, where no US diplomat dare express any support for Taiwan’s sovereignty. This despite the fact that the ruling party in Taiwan – an opposition to the KMT – has dropped any claims of being the “real China” and simply wants Taiwan to be the country of native Taiwanese – a common language, but little more

        I do hope we can get to a point where Beijing can be defanged, just like the Soviets were in 1991

        • Agreed. But, should Mainland China collapse, I would not put it past a DPP-controlled Taiwan to find a way to “protect its interests” in places like Fujian, ad then maybe move farther into the Mainland.

  2. I just finished reading your article and like the influencers you are berating for the oft repeated message that we have made been driven into the arms of Ukraine and yet after hearing you repeat it many times I still don’t know why. Seems your guilty of similar hysteria.

  3. Sometimes life leaves you with only bad options and you’re forced to choose the least bad one. Since Putin is indeed Beyond The Pale, a killer who is also a massive blunderer, until his death, which cannot come too soon (though what and who will come after him could be just as awful or even worse because as I have stated previously here t this site Russia never learns), I go with supplying Ukraine with a fair amount of weaponry.

    I am under no illusion that Ukraine is some kind of democracy. It is not. But it is a zero threat to America or for that matter the rest of Europe. Putin is a threat and as long as he is aligned with China he remains dangerous. Besides, were America to cut off all aid to Ukraine, which I would consider the worst of the bad options facing America, reflect for a moment on what China would think about this—or North Korea—or Iran—or—or—or….

  4. It’s a shame that Tucker got to go on TPUSA and then claim that Jeffrey Epstein had ties w/ Israel. Given how hard Israel has to work to get US support on anything these days, it’s impossible to see how they would have prioritized supporting a notorious pedo while jeopardizing the support and goodwill of a majority of Americans if such a thing were to ever come out. I actually tend to believe Rep Tim Burchett of TN who claimed that a client list of Epstein did previously exist, but was destroyed by the Biden administration

    On the Ukraine thing, since the attempts to cajole Putin into stopping the war didn’t work, the only thing left would be to tell Putin that Ukraine is about to be given the go-ahead to bomb Moscow, including his residence, if he doesn’t stop. All that talk about WWIII – given how Russia has struggled only in Ukraine, it’s hard to see them escalate to a larger war, given how they don’t look like winning at all, but would simply increase their attack surface

      • Would it have only existed w/ the FBI & DOJ? Or would there have been a wider variety of sources of this list online? Since the only 2 authentic sources for such a list would have been the Epstein corporation itself, and to a lesser extent, the FBI

        I don’t pretend to know how much of the narrative of this saga is real, and how much is brewed online by conspiracy theorists. But I do think Pam Bondi has handled this whole thing pretty badly, making it a PR nightmare at least for herself, if not her entire department. They need to do a public audit and tell us how much they know, how much seems to have been destroyed, how much probably never existed and anything else they can lay their hands on. Already there are rumors on Fox that Dan Bongino wants to leave due to disagreements w/ her on this issue

        • Infidel,

          Yes, it’s a total clusterf*ck – especially for “Blondie’s” DOJ.

          And I think that the FBI’s Dan Bongino – a decent and honest man – is very torn.

        • Bondi has not done herself any favors with her statements on this matter. I think it will hobble her.

  5. Rep Tim Burchett of TN makes a lot of sense. It’s the most logical scenario I have read or heard.

    • Yeah, his is the explanation I’m currently inclined to believe about the Epstein client list

  6. “Tucker Carlson (who seems to spend half his time in the Gulf and seems to have offered flattering interviews to every Muslim tyrant in the region)”… I have seen only one, but he was so obsequious that I couldn’t stay with it past minute two.

    • He had a good experience in the Emirates, which has indeed reformed, but then extrapolates that to mean every muslim country in the region. Most shocking was his coming up w/ a defense of islam, saying that submission to god is a good thing. Totally ignoring all the other submissions that exist – of women to men, of infidels to muslims & so on

      I’m totally split on him. What he says about Israel and islam is garbage. But I do agree w/ him on other things – Russia, China, our cities, immigration, DEI, student indoctrination, LGBTQIA+ politics & so on. It’s a shame that anyone I agree w/ on the latter turns out to be an antisemite and an islamophile on the former

      • Yes, his statements on islam are very off-putting. I do like his allowing people to talk about formerly off-limits subjects and his insider knowledge about DC players that stretches back decades. I never listened to him before because he seemed to be guarding insider secrets, but he has changed and is now willing to fully expose many DC figures. The islamic world is a subject he should avoid until he develops a better understanding.

  8. Why would any democracy not support a small nation’s struggle to defend itself against being violently subsumed by a totalitarian dictatorship?

    • Many here in the U.S., don’t know their own history….and for many others, they came from other places and it isn’t their history at all. (i elmi, alias omar; mamdani, and on and on and on)

      The U.S. was “small” when it fought the British Empire to become a Republic..

    • Every country needs to operate in its self interests. What exactly are US interests in Ukraine?

Discover more from

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Skip to content