If you woke up one day during the last two decades or so, to the reality that there was talk of war everywhere you looked, you may have asked yourself: How did we get here?
Well, the talk of war has abated since, but
that’s not because the warmongers have suddenly turned dovish. They are still
around in their old skins, and still plotting to get America tangled in
situations that can lead to what they call Kinetic War, which is a lot more
hellish than a Cold War.
Two articles published recently show how those
warmongers grab America by the nose, and drag it to a world where the reigning
paradigm is nothing but war, war, war.
One article came under the title: “Why
‘Confrontation’ with China Cannot be avoided,’ and the subtitle: “A resolute
policy of confrontation now is the United States’ best hope of eventually
convincing Beijing to change course and put us on a path toward a genuinely
competitive and cooperative future.” The article was coauthored by Matthew
Kroenig and Dan Negrea, and was published on November 26, 2021 in the National
Interest.
The other article came under the title:
“Biden and Xi’s Scripted Summit Was More Talk than Action,” and the subtitle:
“Given the consequences of miscommunication at a time when tensions are high
already in Asia, it might have been better not to press for the virtual
summit.” The article was written by Brent D. Sadler, and published on November
27, 2021 also in the National Interest.
As can be seen from the titles and subtitles of
these two articles, the way that the warmongers drag America by the nose, and push
it into perpetual wars, is to employ a two-pronged method. First, they advance
the absurd theory that America must stop talking to potential foes because
talking to them risks creating miscommunication. This leads to the inferred
conclusion that silence is golden. Second, they advance the equally absurd
theory that the absence of efficacious give-and-take with a potential foe,
leads to the conclusion that war is inevitable. So, might as well love the
bomb, and learn to live with it.
Here, in condensed form, is how Brent Sadler
presented his views:
“Many
weeks of planning went into the summit meeting between Joe Biden and Xi
Jinping. The summit really didn’t
help. It may well have hurt. Preparations
for the summit started with the Chinese berating Antony Blinken. Subsequent
interactions had little impact. These engagements did not ease tensions in the
Taiwan Strait. Even though the bilateral
summit was scripted, there was no discussion of Covid-19’s origin. Beijing responds best to action, not talk.
Given the consequences of miscommunication, it might have been better not to
press for the virtual summit. Beijing appreciates power not words. Follow-up
and clarification could have been avoided if the focus had been on actions
instead”.
There was a time when the warmongers had to
dish out a great deal of verbiage to explain why America must mobilize and send
its boys and girls, along with oodles of money, to perish in a foreign land,
doing war to achieve God-knows-what. In time, that approach became stale, and
ineffective.
But then, one day, a pundit among the
warmongers, who realized they were operating with a useless idea, hit on a new one
that could replace the old. He came up with the idea that Brent Sadler has used
on two occasions in his article. Here is how Sadler used the idea: (1) “Beijing
responds best to action, not talk.” (2) “Beijing appreciates power not words”.
Since that time, every warmonger and his
disciple have tried to motivate America (to mobilize its boys and girls and
send them to war) by telling it that the foe they want to see bombed into the
Stone Age, does not budge by words alone, but responds to power and action. This
meant, stop talking, America and start bombing.
This brings us to the Matthew Kroenig and Dan
Negrea article. Here in condensed form, is what these two writers wrote:
“President
Joe Biden held a high-profile summit with Xi Jinping. The meeting produced
no new breakthroughs for Sino-US cooperation. Indeed, the inefficacious
exchange raises a bigger question about the true nature of the US-China
relationship. Presidents Barack Obama
and Donald Trump both desired arms control talks with Beijing, but the CCP
refused to even come to the table. It is doubtful that Biden will have better
luck. The United States and its allies, therefore, should push back hard on
China to defend themselves and to show China’s leaders that challenging the
United States and its allies is too difficult and costly for Beijing, and
ultimately not in China’s own self-interest. Achieving future cooperation with
China will require confrontation now. Washington should augment its own
deterrent, including with theater nuclear forces in the Indo-Pacific”.
What you see here, is yet another trick that
was invented by the warmongers, and used by them as well as their disciples.
Kroenig and Negrea used it as follows to make their point: “Achieving future
cooperation with China will require confrontation now”.
It sounds like, “buy now, pay later” in
reverse. It was what the warmongers had recommended when they told America to
attack by cruise missiles, helicopters, or the full array of the military, the
nations of Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan.
What America did was pay the price up front
by attacking those nations. But then, America never got delivery of what it
thought it was buying. It is that instead of making friends, America made
enemies.
In addition, America got body bags by the thousands, filled with dead American bodies. It also got chests that were emptied of the wealth squandered by the elected criminals of the Beltway.