When, out of the goodness of its heart, the United Nations (UN) defied thousands of years of human wisdom warning about the cockamamie religion calling itself Judaism and gave its adherents a piece of Palestine, the UN started a chain of events whose murderous aftereffects continue to be felt today much to the chagrin of the entire human race.
Yasser Arafat was among the first of Palestinians to feel
the effect of the UN blunder. He formed a resistance group that worked on both
the diplomatic and military levels to alleviate the suffering of his people. To
let the UN know how much its action has changed him from the trained physician
that he was to the leader of a resistance group that he became, he addressed
the UN General Assembly wearing a military attire and brandished a gun.
Decades later, Ukraine suffered a fate similar to that of
Palestine, but neither the UN nor America had anything to do with that event.
Still, its President Volodymir Zelenskyy—wishing to visually dramatize what was
happening to his people—took a page from the Yasser Arafat book, wore his
military attire and addressed the United States Congress as if he were in full
combat mode.
Clifford D. May wrote about the Zelenskyy performance
without mentioning his role model – for a good reason. It is that Clifford May
considered Arafat to be the enemy of Israel while considering Zelensky to be
the friend of the West. Thus, May prepared a different package of strokes for
each of the folks. He discussed all that in an article he wrote under the
title, “Strategy 101: When enemy Russia attacks friend Ukraine, back the
friend,” and the subtitle: “Ukraine isn't asking for US troops, just arms to defeat a common enemy.”
The article was published on December 27, 2022 in The Washington Times.
Surprised by the number and status of the people on the
Right of the political spectrum who found the Zelenskyy performance inappropriate,
Clifford May used the bulk of the available space to attack these individuals
in lieu of writing an upfront article on the subject. Thus, he called churlish
the comments that were made by Tucker Carlson and by Benny Johnson.
In fact, Clifford May suggested that (1) Carlson’s
comment to the effect that, “the president of Ukraine arrived at the White House like the
manager of a strip club and started to demand money,” and that (2) Johnson’s
comment to the effect that, “it is a disgrace to wave any flag other than
America’s inside our own Capitol,” were meant to entertain television viewers
and generate clicks.
But May forgives Carlson and Johnson because he feels it
must have been difficult for them to overcome the cultural effect of what he
calls “reflexive contrarianism.” That is, because those on the Right feel they must
continually demonstrate unshakable loyalty to their side of the political
spectrum by opposing everything that those on the left—such as Joe Biden and
Nancy Pelosi, do—they were compelled to oppose what the latter have been doing
to help Ukraine in its struggle against Russia.
But what about those on the Left. Do they not feel like
double-faced when preaching peace and resolution of conflict by negotiation,
then turning around and giving all these weapons to Ukraine? Clifford May
dismisses this bunch because he believes they simply don’t get it. He gives the
example of Batya Ungar-Sargon who wrote:
“It is possible to admire President Zelensky and the Ukrainian people’s
bravery, resilience, and fortitude in the face of a malevolent, godless foe
while also recognizing that his interests are not our interests, his fight is
not our fight, and his requests should not be granted”.
And so, Clifford May took pain to explain why this kind
of thinking is not only wrong, but downright dangerous for the continued
survival of the human race. To make his argument clear, he first asked the
audience to imagine that Ukraine had fallen to Russia’s military at the start of the
invasion, the way that things were expected to happen. This done, May implored
the audience to think what would be the long term outcome of such a development.
And so, Clifford May proceeded to give his own assessment of what the
outcome may be. But he made sure to begin his rant by blaming the expected
nefarious consequences on Joe Bidden whose “surrender” to the Taliban would
have told Russia’s Putin it’s okay for him to go after Lithuania, Latvia and
Estonia. Following that, May believes that Putin would have Poland, Finland and
Kazakhstan in his crosshairs, intending to use them to destroy NATO.
And because Putin has other foreign autocrats to keep him company, the
destruction of the world will not stop here, says Clifford May. He mentions
three other boogeymen of the autocratic world, and says we must take them into
account when protecting ourselves.
May explains that China’s Xi Jinping will invade Taiwan. Iran’s Mullahs
will do as they wish in their region knowing that Americans will not stand in
their way, especially after they arm themselves with nuclear weapons. And Kim
Jong Un of North Korea, will think seriously about attacking South Korea.
If America allows this to happen, says Clifford May … in
the long run, “America will be seen — with justification — as a nation in terminal
decline. Even the past will look different if it turns out that World War II
and the Cold War only postponed — but did not prevent — the rise of
totalitarianism”.
To prevent this from happening, says Clifford May, rev up the military
industrial complex, and have it employ American workers to produce weapons in
American factories. These would be weapons that the Ukrainians will use to frustrate
the ambitions of America’s despotic enemies.