Zelensky is a Dangerous Psychopath
Ukrainian president calls on NATO to launch pre-emptive nuclear strikes against Russia
Volodymyr Zelensky has just called on NATO to launch “pre-emptive strikes” against Russia to “eliminate the possibility” of a Russian nuclear strike.
Volodymyr Zelensky is a dangerous psychopath.
He is also a puppet of the war hawks in London and Washington, but we’ll get onto that in a minute. First we need to linger on the abject lunacy unfolding before our eyes. Indeed, one could be forgiven for wondering if the current year was 1962 rather than 2022.
Most of the corporate media is silent on the Ukrainian president’s mind-blowing utterance (just Google: ‘Zelensky calls on NATO to launch pre-emptive strikes against Russia’ and you’ll see what I mean) with only the Washington Examiner visible on the front page of the search results, hastily walking back a previous report by correcting its use of the word ‘strike’ to ‘action’ in line with Zelensky’s own interpreter’s self-correction. It appears that the establishment is defaulting to the position that Zelensky was misinterpreted, despite manifest evidence to contrary, as I will now explain.
It's times like this I wish I fluent in Ukrainian so I could fact check Zelensky’s words myself, and I have in fact reached out to a friend who has some knowledge of the language in the hopes of clarifying whether the actual word Zelensky used was ‘strike’ or the somewhat more innocuous ‘action’ and more importantly, whether there is any meaningful difference between the two in the Ukrainian dialect.
For this really is the nub of the issue: Regardless of the actual noun Zelensky used, ‘strike’ or ‘action’, (if indeed there are two such differentiated nouns in the Ukrainian dialect) it is what he said before and after this that reveals his true meaning. Let us examine the full transcript of the segment:
What should NATO do? Eliminate the possibility of Russia using nuclear weapons. But what is important, I once again appeal to the international community as I did before February 24: We need pre-emptive [strikes/actions], so that they’ll know what will happen to them if they use nukes, and not the other way around. Don’t wait for Russia’s nuclear strikes, and then say: “Oh, since you did this, take that from us!” Reconsider the way you apply pressure. This is what NATO should do: reconsider the order in which it applies pressure.
Assuming the rest of the segment has been correctly translated, one must start with the very obvious red flag: There is only one potential way to ‘eliminate the possibility of Russia using nuclear weapons’ – and that is indeed a pre-emptive nuclear strike. There is no other measure on earth even remotely capable of preventing Russian missiles from firing if indeed Putin is moved to that course of action. So right off the bat, the question of whether Zelensky meant ‘strike’ or ‘action’ is a moot point.
Secondly, when Zelensky says ‘…so that they’ll know what will happen to them if they use nukes, and not the other way around’ what could he possibly be referring to other than the use of nuclear weapons?
The Kyiv Independent reports that “Serhii Nykyforov, Zelensky's spokesperson, explained that Zelensky was referring to preventive sanctions to be applied before Russia's full-scale invasion and assured that Ukraine would never call for the use of nuclear weapons.”
Sanctions? That’s a joke right?
What sanction could NATO possibly employ against Russia that it has not already? And more to the point, this makes no sense in the context of Zelensky’s words. He said ‘so that they’ll know what will happen to them if they use nukes, and not the other way around’.
Is Serhii Nykyforov attempting to convince us that Zelensky’s meaning here is that if Russia uses nuclear weapons, then the appropriate response of NATO would be sanctions? And that instead of waiting for Putin to fire his nukes NATO should instead employ sanctions now, so that Russia will know what will happen to them if they use nukes?
This is simply ludicrous, and only a credulous fool would be taken in by it. It is in fact yet another example of the bizarre new phenomenon that has emerged in politics since the election of Joe Biden – of the statements of presidents being hastily walked back mere hours later by their press agents. This was a regular occurrence in the Biden Whitehouse under Press Secretary Jen Psaki, and it has continued under Karine Jean-Pierre, suggesting at the very least that Biden’s obvious mental deterioration is causing him to go off script, or more concerningly, that he is not really the guy in charge. And with Zelensky, a young and ostensibly lucid man, now also being corrected by his publicist, it seems even more probable that there is a tug of war going on behind the scenes between the hawks in the Liberal World Order and those who might favour a more cautious approach.
Either way it does not bode well for the regular person, be he NATO or Russian-aligned, or indeed any inhabitant of our all-too-small world. For let us not kid ourselves for one moment the way many pundits and gung-ho news anchors appear to be – a nuclear exchange between NATO and Russia will likely lead to a full-scale thermonuclear war that will destroy life on earth as we know it.
The usually prescient and intelligent Tim Pool, of whom I am a great admirer, has repeatedly asserted that in the scenario where orders are issued for a general nuclear exchange, the soldiers and airmen with their fingers on the respective launch keys, would simply refuse to obey.
This is facile. Such positions are not staffed by idealistic pacifists, but hardened, indoctrinated warriors who have been trained from day-one to obey without thinking. To put one’s faith in the inherent goodness of humans as you make inane jokes in your cushy studio in the Appalachian foothills Tim, forgive me for saying, is pathetically naïve.
For one, Tim seems to miss the point that it’s not just one guy on each side sitting in front of a red button. The system is set up precisely so that even if a few key functionaries do disobey the order to fire, most of the birds will ultimately fly. But he also fundamentally underestimates the effect of panic and adrenalin – which is strange for someone who has spent so much time in war zones. In the event that a controller is given the order to fire, one of the first thoughts through his mind will likely be – ‘This could be a case of us or them’, in other words, the hasty cost-benefit analysis his selfish human brain will likely perform in the split-second after he receives his order will lead him to conclude that he has a greater chance of surviving if he fires, thus potentially reducing the enemy’s ability to respond.
But the game theory of nuclear deterrence and first strike doctrine can and has been discussed at length by far more capable folk than me. The point is, we are quite literally playing with fire here. Zelensky was clearly calling for NATO to strike Russian forces and facilities with nuclear weapons, either within Ukraine or inside the homeland. Such a move would very likely lead to nuclear war and the death of billions of people. And for this reason alone, Volodymyr Zelensky is a dangerous psychopath who should be immediately deposed and imprisoned.
But beyond this, NATO’s continued funding and supplying of the Ukrainian war effort (which by proxy is a hot war between the world’s two strongest nuclear factions) could well lead to nuclear war even if Zelensky’s outrageous request is completely ignored. Putin himself may yet decide to use low-yield tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine to shore up his faltering invasion. I don’t believe Putin is essentially that stupid but if pushed into a corner he may well take such a course.
In the end it doesn’t matter who fires first, and in the event that one country does, the truth will likely never be known by the survivors. There are far too many unstable variables in such a scenario to be risking the kind of unhinged rhetoric of Volodymir Zelensky. To quote a barbershop conversation from the brilliant and terrifying film The Day After, which I have repeatedly encouraged my readers to watch:
Customer A: “I really don’t think either side wants to be the first to use a nuclear device”.
Customer B: “It’s not a question of who but where. Over whose real estate. Say we explode a nuclear bomb over their troops on our side… The fallout had better not drift over to their side.”
Customer A: “They’re crazy. How do they expect it’s going to stop with just one bomb?”
Barber: “You know what crazy is? Crazy’s not staying out of other people’s business. We shouldn’t be over there in the first place.”
Thus speaks the common man in the street (or the barbershop) the world over today. Why are we spending billions of our tax dollars to prolong this conflict? Why are we suddenly back in 1962? What the hell is going on!?
The barber’s words in The Day After are as true today as they were when the film was made in 1983. We shouldn’t be over there in the first place. And we are over there. We haven’t sent conventional armies because we can’t – that would certainly mean nuclear war. But we are sending money, equipment, and mercenaries. The West is currently at war with Russia – make no mistake.
If NATO existed for the benefit of its member states' populations, it would get the hell out of Ukraine and let Putin have at it.
However, NATO does not exist for the benefit of its member states' populations but as the enforcement arm of the international banking cartel and their subsidiaries in the armaments industry.
It’s the same old story: the war pigs profit while the rest of us get shat on; the rulers indulge their masturbatory nuclear fantasies from the safety of their bunkers while the common people stare down the barrel of the same old Cold War nightmare that we naively believed we'd left back in the 80s.
We need a John F. Kennedy right now, not the bloodthirsty, demented, corpse currently shuffling around the Oval Office.
To flip the machine's own craven anti-Trump propaganda back upon itself: It's time the adults were back in charge.