Which way will Turkey go? has to be another
The bit I don’t quite grasp is why the donors of arms can’t work out one simple thing:
Cause: what’s left of Ukraine possesses/uses weapons with a range of 80km
Effect: the forces of RF/DPR/LPR push the Ukr artillery 81km past the line where they would have drawn a line otherwise.
Good question, but why would RF need to adopt a punitive stance when they are so determined to destroy themselves, under US pressure? It seems to me self evident that the EU is doomed and that this is a feature not a bug of the US strategy. Not one that Russia necessarily supports, but dealing with France, Germany, Hungary, etc, on their own terms seems perfectly feasible. Exactly as Sergei Lavrov, bless him, is doing in Africa and many other places.
Meantime USA issues threats, because it’s the only thing they can do. Not agreement-capable I think I saw it described as.
Personally I wouldn’t write off theories of the Illuminati quite so readily, though the notion that there’s an Uber class that are all-powerful helps the Uber class to project that impression, and should be ridiculed for a variety of reasons.
You’ve outlined a few @RhisiartGwilym, another is quite simply that they really don’t like it. Remember when Dorothy and the crew pull aside that curtain?
Control of the levers of power is really all that’s needed, no particular strategy, master plan, manifest destiny, call it whatever. It’s spectacle, see Guy Debord.
I agree @Everyman, the article is all over the place. It took me some concerted effort to read past the oafish clunker early on that conflated Existentialism, as a strand of post-war philosophy (examples chucked in were Sartre and Camus), with the phrase “existential threat” used in the geopolitical sense.