Which Way will the Cat Jump?

The website Defense One sent a flash notification yesterday that a Russian projectile had landed in Poland. Defense One is a deplorable propaganda outlet for the U.S. military-industrial-security complex. Defense One promotes conflicts and see “threats” all over the planet for Uncle Sam to confront. 

Why? It’s good for business. That motivation seeps through everywhere, especially in the ads. One weapon system after another. So let’s go! Article 5 of the NATO treaty is in play! A NATO member has been attacked! Washington to the rescue!

Well, no, wait just a moment. Defense One sounds a note of caution, all of a sudden, now that an actual member of NATO could be directly, not indirectly, mixed up in the contrived Ukraine conflict. For Washington, the implications are mind boggling.

Actually, under a strict interpretation of the rules of war, Russia would be justified in attacking Poland, not to mention the U.S., for supplying enormous quantities of arms and ammunition to the regime in Ukraine. This is the same corrupt regime, or iteration of it, that the 2014 Washington-instigated coup installed in Kiev.

This successful regime-change project was orchestrated by the Obama functionary and Dick Cheney protégé named Victoria “Fuck the EU” Nuland. Since then, NATO-supplied Kiev has relentlessly attacked Russian-speaking regions of Ukraine, that is, the Donbas, and to a lesser extent, Russian Crimea.

Finally, that bogeyman President Vladimir Putin decided he had had enough, and launched his “special military operation” in February 2022 to rescue the Russian population. Washington was quietly delighted. The White House and “the West”, as it is still graciously called, branded the operation “unprovoked and unjustified” among other things.

Putin naïvely hoped that “the West” would regard his limited intervention in Ukraine as an example of the UN “responsibility to protect” concept, famously touted by Obama adviser, NSC member, UN Ambassador and Harvard Professor, Samantha Power.

That hope was in vain. What is good for the goose is not good for the gander. From Putin’s perspective, RtoP the Russian population is precisely what he was doing, all doors to diplomacy (Minsk I and II) having been slammed shut by Washington. Biden and his inner circle know this and are responsible for it.

In any event, Defense One is back-peddling fast on Article 5. Perfectly understandable. Things are going swimmingly for the Neocons and Neoliberals in Washington. This war, this quagmire, on Russia’s border is a godsend for them.

Washington and its NATO chums get to supply Kiev with limitless amounts of arms and ordinance in their quest to destabilize Russia via open-ended war and economic sanctions, while concurrently they remain untouchable from retaliation. Article 5 might wreck that scenario.

Defense One quotes Ben Hodges, a retired U.S. Army general, who commanded U.S. Army Europe, as tweeting: “There is no such thing as ‘triggering’ Article 5. It’s not automatic. There is no laser beam that opens a door like at a hotel or store if you walk thru it. Art 5 is a political decision.” Get the drift? Of course you do. Relax.

When you come down to it, everything is a political decision. Every step in Washington’s inglorious road to war in Ukraine, in promoting a civil war there, was a cynical political decision. Washington had a choice. It could meddle, instigate, conspire, manipulate and lie…

Or not get involved in that way. Not pose a threat to Russia. Act honestly and even-handedly. Well, Washington did choose to get involved decades ago, starting with NATO’s eastward march to Moscow. So here we are, faced with Article 5. Who needs this? No one knows which way the cat may jump.

Article 5 deals with an attack upon a NATO member, requiring all members to respond. What about a direct military attack upon Russia or assets of Russia? What is Russia supposed to do then? What about an attack upon a NATO member by a fellow NATO member? The bombing of Nord Stream pipelines 1 and 2 comes to mind, offhand.

The Nord Streams were attacked within NATO territory and are European infrastructure. They can also be considered as extra-territorial assets of Russia, since Russia paid for their construction to provide Europe with natural gas. Russia was a partner with Germany in the enterprise, much to the consternation of Washington.

Did the Russian military attack these pipelines? That is what officials in Washington and its stooges in the MSM actually expect you to believe. They said so. Am I laughing. It is preposterous.

Since then, the matter has been dropped. Disappeared from the headlines and radar screen. Radio silence. The empty suits in Berlin are not investigating for fear of what they might find. Perhaps they have investigated, know who did it, yet still remain silent. Why?

Has not Germany, indeed, all of Europe been attacked, taken for a ride, and lied to? Why are they pretending otherwise? Step by step. Who knows which way the cat may jump?