Photo: pixabay, jessebridgewater

They Want The U.S. Military To Go Into Ukraine, But We Have No Way To Protect Our Population From Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles

Francesco Abbruzzino, The Uncensored Report, LLC

 

Where in the world did the anti-war movement go?  After the U.S. invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, an extremely vigorous anti-war movement relentlessly protested those wars, and that movement was often greatly aided by voices in the corporate media.  In particular, MSNBC was a persistent thorn in the side of the Bush administration, because day after day it would feature voices that were passionately against the wars.  But now everything has changed.  These days, MSNBC is beating the war drums more loudly than anyone else.  I realize that this doesn’t seem to make any sense, but it is true.

For instance, just consider what MSNBC host Ali Velshi has been saying.  On Sunday, he openly called for NATO to send troops into Ukraine in order to stop Vladimir Putin’s “crimes against humanity”

 

Sunday, Ali Velshi, host of MSNBC’s “Velshi,” called on NATO to get involved in stopping Russian President Vladimir Putin from engaging in “crimes against humanity” in Ukraine.

 

Velshi declared it was time to do more than sanction and issue “strongly-worded condemnations” against Russia. He wondered, “what is the point” of alliances like the United Nations and NATO “if not to stop this.”

 

And in case there was any confusion about where he stood, on his Twitter account Velshi specifically stated that he is in favor of “direct military involvement” in Ukraine.

 

Needless to say, if NATO forces rolled into Ukraine that would immediately take us into the worst parts of World War III.

 

And if the conflict goes nuclear, billions of people could die.

 

But this is apparently what Velshi wants.

 

Of course we are witnessing a great deal of pro-war hysteria on other networks as well.  For example, Sean Hannity has suggested that we must be ready to take military action against Russia even if it means “mutually assured destruction”

 

Fox News host Sean Hannity says the US must be willing to nuke Russia “off the face of the earth” if they use WMDs in Ukraine and mustn’t “cower in fear” over the prospect of a global nuclear holocaust triggered by “mutually assured destruction.”

 

Has Sean Hannity completely lost it?

 

I think that it would do him some good to sit down and watch Tucker Carlson for a few hours.

 

Carlson understands that nuclear war would mean the end of civilization as we know it today, and so he desperately wants to avoid that type of scenario.

But apparently Hannity is in favor of letting the missiles fly and seeing what happens.

Warmonger Hillary Clinton continues to spew venom about Russia as well.  In fact, she insists that now is the time “to double down on the pressure”

 

“So I think now is the time to double down on the pressure. Let’s not fantasize about what comes next in Russia. Let’s focus on what we’re doing right now to help protect and defend the Ukrainian people’s right to be a free, democratic nation and protect their sovereignty,” Clinton concluded.

 

If she was in the White House, I have a feeling that a shooting war with Russia would have already started.

 

Thankfully, most ordinary Americans do not actually want to have a war with Russia

 

However, most Americans (62%) say they would oppose the U.S. “taking military action even if it risks a nuclear conflict with Russia.” About a third (35%) of Americans say they would favor military action in this scenario. Comparable shares in both parties (36% of Republicans, 35% of Democrats) say they would favor military action even if it risks nuclear conflict with Russia.

 

But it definitely is alarming that more than a third of the country is on the side of the warmongers.

 

read more

 

Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.