Select Page

American Isolationism is Not New … But Never Right

American Isolationism is Not New … But Never Right

Isolationism has been part of the American fabric since we declared independence from Great Britain. 

Within the isolationist movement are the pure pacifist – those who do not believe even in St. Augustin’s treatise on a “just war.”  Then there are those who believe in “island America” – that are best interests are met in avoiding all “foreign entanglements” – as President Washington called them in his farewell address.

Most Americans, however, draw distinctions between appropriate – even existential – involvements and the inappropriate.  It is a grey area over which we debate constantly – not just in military terms.  We have dubbed those who were “entangled” in World War II “the greatest generation.”  We look back on the Vietnam War with grave reservations, to say the least.

Once again, we are facing the question of involvement in another major conflict – the War in Ukraine.

President Zelenskyy is pushing against what appears to be a growing opposition to the kind of help he needs.  Both the far left and the far right have found common ground in opposing increasing levels of spending on the Ukraine War – but for different reasons.  The left wants that money for more social welfare and anti-capitalist regulations (meaning more bureaucrats).  The right just does not want the federal government to spend so much … period.

While the position of those on the far left is isolationist, it is not as overt as those on the far right.  Frankly, I do not understand their vision – and how they cannot see the vital existential interests of the United States and the West in defeating Putin.

The division of opinion is particularly stark on the FOX network, where various personalities are in open debate with each other.  It is personified whenever you see Brian Kilmeade on the same screen with Pete Hegseth.  Kilmeade sees the need to support Ukraine in the national interest of the United States, while Hegseth is staunchly isolationist.

Most of the FOX daytime line-up seems to favor supporting Ukraine, but the big names – specifically Laura Ingraham, and Tucker Carlson – are vehemently opposed to helping Ukraine.  They have a let-Putin-have-it attitude that I do not understand.

The anti-Ukraine sentiment runs so strong that Ingraham’s comic relief character Raymond Arroyo was all over Zelenskyy for wearing his commander-in-chief “uniform” during his visit to Washington.  He called it “disgusting” and “disrespectful.” 

 Personally, I thought the attire was appropriate.  Rather than looking like a Wall Street banker or a Washington lobbyist, Zelenskyy’s attire brought home his role as a head-of-state under siege.  But Arroyo’s is the type of irresponsible cheap shot rhetoric that dominates FOX’s late-night lineup. 

It is in America’s interest to stop Putin’s ambition of a new Soviet Union – and maybe more.  Lose the War and America loses another democratic nation to the authoritarian enemy – even a potential future NATO ally.  We lose to Putin another strategic location … enormous natural resources …  a cooperative business relationship … intelligence gathering potential.

Fortunately, the small number of congressional members – on the left and right – is too few to prevent the full Congress from pursuing the critical security interests of both Ukraine and the United States.

As one of the television generals put it, this is the time to provide Ukraine with everything we have in the non-nuclear arsenal, so that the Ukraine military can drive every Russian soldier out of their country.  I tend to agree with that assessment.  Those who express concern about the money the United States spends on fighting Putin should understand that increasing our participation to the point of victory will cost a lot less in the long run.

And we need to understand what victory means.  There are three elements of total victory.  Most important is to have Putin withdraw all his forces from Ukraine – including the Crimea.  Second is to pay reparations for the destruction and loss of life.  Third is to have Putin put on trial for war crimes.  It is not likely that we will see a complete victory, but the first element is essential.

I find it unacceptable that America – and the western democracies in and out of NATO – will allow our mortal enemies gain yet another strategic, psychological, and immoral victory.  We are not only taking up a just war, but one that Ukraine and the world democracies must win.

So, there ‘tis.

About The Author

Larry Horist

So,there‘tis… The opinions, perspectives and analyses of Larry Horist Larry Horist is a businessman, conservative writer and political strategist with an extensive background in economics and public policy. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman. He has served as a consultant to the Nixon White House and travelled the country as a spokesman for President Reagan’s economic reforms. He has testified as an expert witness before numerous legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress. Horist has lectured and taught courses at numerous colleges and universities, including Harvard, Northwestern, DePaul universities, Hope College and his alma mater, Knox College. He has been a guest on hundreds of public affairs talk shows, and hosted his own program, “Chicago In Sight,” on WIND radio. Horist was a one-time candidate for mayor of Chicago and served as Executive Director of the City Club of Chicago, where he led a successful two-year campaign to save the historic Chicago Theatre from the wrecking ball. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He is praised by readers for his style, substance and sense of humor. According to one reader, Horist is the “new Charles Krauthammer.” He is actively semi-retired in Boca Raton, Florida where he devotes his time to writing. So, there ‘tis is Horist’s signature sign off.


  1. Joseph S. Bruder

    I would disagree with your reasons for both the “far” left and right opposing funding to Ukraine.

    I think that the far left is just anti-war, and the US spends roughly half of its discretionary budget on the military, and more than the other top 8 countries combined. They would rather see the people’s money spent on the people, and not on something as destructive as war. It has nothing to do with “creating new bureaucrats”, the typical conservative catcall. In this case, I think the war is justified – Putin started this war, is brutally trying to erase the Ukrainian people and culture, and will keep starting new wars until he’s stopped. We’ve been spending the money ever since the Cold War for this purpose, and its time to use it.

    For the far right, it’s obvious – Trump is and always has been pro-Putin and pro-Russian. The extreme far right still proclaim that Trump won the election, and still follow his every past autocratic policy and hateful comment. They are the core of the cult of Trump, and won’t give up until Trump is rotting in a federal prison for his crimes (and even then, an ever-shrinking minority will proclaim that it was a political witch hunt, even with all of the evidence against him).

    • larry Horist

      Joseph S Bruder … We seem to agree that fighting Putin is a just cause. Not sure if you agree with my view that the US and the West is not doing enough to defeat Putin. We agree that the left is anti war and would rather have the money spent on social welfare programs. How can you expand social welfare without adding bureaucrats. Just look at the past.

      Regarding Trump and Putin. The former President does not represent the vast majority of Republicans — who are very anti-Putin, pro-Ukraine, anti-Communist — and Trump is no longer in office. You just threw in a left-wing trope that is largely irrelevant to today — especially since we agree that Trump’s base is shrinking. Although we may not agree on the initial size. Not everyone who voted for him is his base. At the top, I put it at about 15 percent — maybe down to single digits today. My definition of “base” is those who will not support anyone else. Down here in Palm Beach County, seemed like all the folks in the local GOP were Trump supporters. Almost all I spoke with would vote for DeSantis over Trump in a primary. I think Trump is done politically — and you will see my opinion in a future column.

      • Joseph S. Bruder

        Trump is still defining the policies of the further right of the Republican Party , which is why some Republicans are calling for ending support for Ukraine. Trump’s candidates’ showings in the last election have reduced his influence, and the Jan 6th commission report and Trump’s eventual indictments will reduce it even further.

        You still throw out “bureaucrats” and “anticapitalists” like slurs at Democrats. Without the EPA, I doubt there would be a clean waterway in the country or breathable air in any city in the country. Why would companies recycle or properly dispose of waste if it was cheaper to just dump it in the nearest waterway or burn everything and throw it in the air? They can externalize the costs of cleaning up waterways and trying to make air breathable to taxpayers, which always costs 10’s or 100’s of times more once the pollution is released. In the 60’s and 70’s, most cities were disgusting cesspools, and rivers were burning, until Nixon signed the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts (a Republicans created those “bureaucrats”!), and even then it took 20 years to clean up most of the messes.

        There is a Superfund site not far from where I live where a tooling company dumped a bunch of barrels in the land next to the river, contaminating not only the river but the aquifer below. The cost to clean up is MANY times the amount of revenue the company took in during its 70-year history, and the aquifer is now polluted and unusable for drinking water for the next 50 or 100 years. One third of the towns water came from those wells, and now they have to import water from a neighboring town. Do you propose that we go back to the “good old unregulated days”?

        Given recent history, would you let the Elon Musks of the world run amok without any control? He tried to fire thousands of workers overnight, but was stopped by “anticapitalist” rules. He manipulates his stock prices with spurious announcements, and sells stock in his companies without warning. He operates on whim, while hurting consumers and investors. Musk is more open and brazen with his actions, but he hasn’t done anything that major corporations aren’t doing more subtly. If you don’t believe me, look at the oil and tobacco companies, or banking and credit card industries. Other companies get large enough to buy their competitors until no competitors are left, then they start buying adjacent industries. Do you really think capitalism will serve the people when you can only buy from one company? “Take it or leave it” capitalism leads to virtual slavery, like the old company mining towns that controlled not only the job, but also food and housing – can’t quit because “I owe my soul to the company store”.

        The government is full of hard-working people who regulate companies and protect consumers. “Bureaucrats” as you use it implies that they’re lazy people just trying to block the hard working corporate owners from making the profits they deserve, when it’s actually the opposite – we need checks and balances on those people who use their money to manipulate stocks, markets, laws, and public opinion and information to make even more profits. The Constitution was written by the wealthy capitalists of the day, but it only guarantees rights to the People, not the right for companies to make profits.

        We both agree that Ukraine needs the fullest support we can give, but you use your column every day to bash Democrats while ignoring the political realities. What would you have Biden do? He is pulling the Europeans along as best he can. They need (Russian) energy to get through the winter, and it takes time to get new sources. Biden is giving systems to the Ukrainians as fast as possible, but they also need to be trained on US systems and there’s a competing need to keep the US arsenal up to date and well stocked because of China’s threats to Taiwan. We could give them the latest aircraft, but they’d need a year to train pilots and 2 years to learn to maintain the equipment. We could just join the war and fly and maintain the planes ourselves, but then we’d risk nuclear war with Russia. He is bringing chip manufacturing back to the US as quickly as possible. He passed an infrastructure bill (that Republicans couldn’t do during Trump’s term) with only a few Republicans on board. At the same time, Republicans are fighting every move, reducing budgets, and blaming Biden for not getting enough done.

        You’ve accused me of being obsessed with Trump, but while he may still only control 15% of Republican voters, he’s still influencing the actions of a majority of Republicans in Congress. Or maybe he is just the culmination of the rot that has infected Republicans since the Reagan era. And yet, you continue to bash Democrats because of your experiences with the Chicago Democratic Machine of the 1960’s. Even though we agree on the need to support Ukraine, I’m saying that your own obsession is clouding your judgement, and if you’re going to place blame, you should look more closely at Republicans and (gasp) Conservatives.

  2. frank stetson

    TY and +10 for josepi’s bro. My first reaction was “what about the pacifists?”

    But I do agree in getting them arms. I would love to see them take a crack at Crimea where Obama first dropped the ball.

    They are getting Patriots, but why only one battery? They got the Norwegian NASMS and are becoming part of the EU Sky Shield; that’s a good possibility for the demise of the MOSKVA. We gave them a ton of munitions for those.

    I think the weapons are there with more coming.

    I think the best way to move forward, faster, is Ukraine’s rapid entrance to NATO. It’s a non-nuclear solution that means total nuclear war IF Russia continues to attack a NATO nation.

    Check this one out Larry:

    It’s “The Untold Story of ‘Russiagate’ and the Road to War in Ukraine: Russia’s meddling in Trump-era politics was more directly connected to the current war than previously understood.”


    • Tom

      Frank, OMG!!! You are making my Christmas very merry! First we agree on Bowie (and I hope you like Stewart), second we agree on not abolishing or circumventing the Electoral College and on the value of “pause time”, third we agree on NATO and supporting Ukraine!!! And we also agree on more Patriot systems for Ukraine! And we agree (in as you say hindsight) that Obama dropped the ball.

      As AN Independent, I have never been in favor of an ostrich approach to international relations. As a world leader and leader in NATO, isolationism is not an option, otherwise, why bother being in NATO. Good leaders roll up their sleeves and get the job done. And we cast our vote by the things we fund. So those that wish to cut funding for Ukraine, are voting to defund democracy which by default becomes a vote for autocracy. We all need to be concerned about the shrinking number of democracies in the world.

      Washington – March 3, 2021 — Authoritarian actors grew bolder during 2020 as major democracies turned inward, contributing to the 15th consecutive year of decline in global freedom, according to Freedom in the World 2021, the annual country-by-country assessment of political rights and civil liberties released today by Freedom House. This is an eye opening report at “”

      I hope my use of the word “AN” pleased you. I do feel I speak for many Independents when I say that the Independent view is aligned with you and with Larry! OMG, this is a trifecta of joy!!!!

  3. Joseph S. Bruder

    I don’t think that Obama dropped the ball on Crimea – there was no ball to drop. Russia had installed a bunch of puppet rulers and the country was rife with corruption. Ukraine had no organized military. Obama see the stage for everything happening today. Trump tried to take Putin’s side and was impeached for it, and Biden has done his best to keep Ukraine from getting overrun.

    • frank stetson

      Hindsight indeed is a wonderful thing, but one our leaders should never be corrected by. If possible.

      Yes, Ukraine was corrupt, no army, etc. So not a great option and I have no answers. Still, did we need to “normalize” relations and not ostracize Russia from the world as well as anyone who crossed that line?

      By the time of Crimea, weren’t we on the downside of “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice and shame on me?”

      • Joseph S. Bruder

        Trump certainly tried to normalize relations with Russia… I don’t think that Obama did, and I don’t know anything he didn’t do that he could have. Before Trump took office, both Dems and Reps were firmly anti-Russia, and at least Obama was working both the anti-corruption issues and working on building Ukraine’s defenses. Most of that continued during Trump’s term in office, with little help from Trump, and a whole lot of opposition. Trump was following Putin’s wishes, trying to cut funding, cut NATO funding (and even threatening to withdraw), and encouraging splits in the EU. And don’t forget Trump’s blackmail of Ukraine.

        • larry Horist

          Joseph S Bruder — Trump made a lot of threats about NATO, but it appears he had only one purpose. To get them to get other members to meet their financial commitment. His threat to pull out was nothing more than pressure. Once the member nations increased their commitment to NATO, you never heard Trump complain again. He had achieved what previous presidents only called for, but failed to achieve. You seem to be taking the position that Trump tried to undermine NATO by making it stronger financially and militarily. He also backed the admission of Montenegro and North Macedonia — which pissed Putin off. Trump pressured to get information on Hunter’s activities — which are still in question — but never withheld any aid. He also sent weapons to Ukraine while Obama would only send humanitarian aid. That was another action that upset Putin. Trump also criticized Germany for purchasing Russian oil — and opposed the Nord Strand pipelines. Trump denied conspiring with Putin’s meddling in the 2016 — and was vindicated in the Mueller Report. I would give you Trump’s claims that Putin was not meddling as one example of his accommodating Putin — but that is it. Out side of a proposed hotel in Moscow — which he cancelled when ran for President — I am not sure what financial interests Trump had. The public record seems to show that the Bidens got more money from Putin inner circle than Trump. If I am wrong, I would like to hear the facts.

          • Joseph S. Bruder

            Larry… well, it would take me about a month full-time to catalog all of Trump’s transgressions, so I’m going to rely on a few good articles.

            Here is an article by CNN that catalogs Trump’s bias towards Russia. It lists 37 instances of Trump favoring Russia or doing something that helped Russia. Clearly, Trump was favoring Russia and not just trying to get other countries to cough up money (really rich, coming from the King of Not Paying Bills). He was actively snubbing NATO members in favor of despots and dictators. Even then, I note a couple of things missing, like some of Trump’s advisors saying that Trump would shut down any talk about Russia during his (very occasional) security briefings, and the fact that Trump’s idiot spawn claimed publicly “we love Russia, most of our income is from there” while Trump Sr. denied having any business with Russia.

            Here is another article by The Hill that summarizes a New York Times article that catalogs 100 contacts with Russian officials by Trump’s campaign staff. The NYT story is behind a paywall, but I’ll include the link anyway. What’s important to note is that Paul Manafort, who was Trump’s campaign chair, spent 10 years as essentially a Russian spy in Ukraine, consulting while posing as a US businessman to help Russia take over Ukraine. He is currently in prison for multiple Russia-related offenses. And Trump’s campaign staff also changed the Republican Party platform to remove support for Ukraine, although Mueller couldn’t find evidence that the Russians asked directly for it (they know of lots of meetings with the Russians, but people tend not to record or take notes when they’re doing something illegal). It seems pretty clear that Manafort would have insisted on it, since the Russians paid him for 10 years for that very purpose. Trump Junior had at least 17 contacts and Kushner had at least 6 documented contacts with Russians during the 2016 campaign. Manafort and his cohorts seemed to communicate on a daily basis.

            Most of Trump’s campaign officials have been indicted for crimes related to Russians, blocking investigations, or some purely for criminal activity. Unfortunately, the investigations generally kept a hands-off approach to Trump’s family.

            In the 2020 campaign, Trump was still threatening to pull the US out of NATO, contrary to your assertion above. I’m no fan of war-mongerer Bolton, but he was close enough to Trump to know what he was thinking:

            And add on top of all that, Trump’s tax returns, that he fought releasing for the last 6 years, according to reports show clear evidence of fraud. And Trump’s conspiracy with members of his staff and a dozen members of Congress to overturn the will of the people by creating false electors, trying to kidnap the VP, and starting an insurrection. There’s Trump’s unmarked military that assaulted black portestors, and all the times that Trump called out whole groups of people (Mexicans, Chinese, Muslims) as well as private citizens, making them targets of right-wing nationalist groups (which he often praised). Don’t forget separating children from their families at the border and “losing” the records. Or 16 rape allegations. And even before Trump was elected, there were many allegations of him not paying bills, intimidating people (corroborated by Cohen), and various scams along the way.

            That’s a start. I’m sure there’s more. I read in the Mueller report that the campaign staff passed polling and demographic data to Russian contacts, but I don’t have a searchable version of the report, so it would take forever to find. There are literally hundreds of contacts with Russians listed in the report.

            I can’t recall, going back the last 50 years, an administration that was as corrupt as Trump’s or had as many people around the President indicted for crimes, including Nixon. I saw it every day before, during, and after Trump’s administration – I remember every time he did something and I thought “that’s corrupt as hell”, or if not outright corrupt, it was devisive, pushing the bounds of human decency, or at the minimum, just something that I was ashamed that a US President would do. Contacts with Russians by candidates? I can think of none, other than Trump’s staff. Even all the other Presidents had little or no contact, since Russia is pretty much an enemy of the US and has been except for a small window of perestroika in the 1990’s, and all of those meetings were public or conducted by diplomats of the US.

            The public record PROVES that Trump was corrupt. You have nothing but accusations against Biden (or Obama, or Clinton, for that matter), and yet you tar them both with the same brush. Like I say, to catalog all the bad and disgusting things Trump did would take a really long time, and would be several times longer than your last 5 articles put together.

          • Joseph S. Bruder

            My reply pending “moderation”… because of links to articles?

          • frank stetson

            too many facts must be slowed down….. it’s pbp

            think two is the magic number.

            email address typos another hold metric,

  4. Frank stetson

    You’re right, I’m wrong. Obama, and the world put sanctions on and “invented” the s personal ones for the oligarchs. Trump added more on top and took none away.

    It’s just appears that it not only wasn’t enough, but if it was the harshest we could muster, how could Biden add so many more?

    So, normalized is wrong, but not tough enough if all the gas, oul, and other things flowed like crazy. I still think we’d be far better off if we had put peddle to the meddle dyring the obsma and trump years over Crimea.

    • Tom

      Biden only santioned one of five banks Russia uses to fund its economy and military efforts through oil. He could have sactioned the other four.

      • Frank stetson

        I thought most banks by feb 2022?

        Swift payments are the hard part.

        But I agree. Anytime I hear “new sanction,” I wonder why did we wait.

  5. Chipper

    ALL of you blowhards should be in Government!!

  6. Frank stetson

    I should add, in a weird way Trump spoke as if normalizing, but actually added sanctions. Weird

    • Sam

      Ukraine people are doing a good job. Thanks to armed citizens The American gun grabbers are wrong

  7. Frank stetson

    They are not protecting themselves with citzen-guns. They are on mil spec weapons. American gunnies are deluded if they think they be going all Red Dawn with their home weapons.

    • Sam

      We sure as hell will go down swinging. Not die like pussy liberals And you would be surprised at what some of us have. Don’t fuck with a truck. You’ll get ran over.

      • frank stetson

        Why are you threatening me for just stating the truth? All I said was gun grabbers, citizens guns, have nothing to do with how Ukraine is waging this war. Am I wrong?

        Pussy liberals? That’s always a good one. If liberals were pussies, we would have lost every war. We are a major component of your military. Why would you piss on your partners in war?

        Now, your grand leader, Captain Bonespurs, there’s a pussy. I don’t think anyone in his family has ever served.

        • Sam

          He’s not my leader. My money is on DeSantos. Yeah, liberals serve in the military. But they don’t believe in freedom. Just more government control. Or “freedom “ to murder babies and be queer. Or release violent criminals to run the streets. If trump had bone spurs I don’t know and don’t give a shit. He did a great job while in office but his ship has sailed. He won’t even be nominated. Your crowd did a good job trashing trump. But if and when America falls it will be because of socialism and liberalism. And I believe that it will probably happen. Threaten you? Why??? Speaking of red dawn that was Hollywood. And Hollywood will get you killed if you base survival on the big screen and tv. I have laughed often at Dirty Harry. All bull crap. If people really want to engage in real discussion about defense of home and country there’s much better ways and means to learn.

  8. Frank stetson

    Liberals don’t believe in freedom? I’m liberal. I believe in freedom.

    I don’t believe in too much government control.

    I think murder is illegal, whatever the age.

    And the gay stuff is your phobia. I don’t care about someone’s sex life. That’s your personal issue.

    America almost fell and it was Trumplicants.

    I don’t know why you felt obliged to threaten violence. I sense it is in your nature.

    We don’t release violent prisoners as standard practice.

    Trump trashed himself. We just pointed it out.

    And thank you; I am fine with my home defense and our military. And so far, I have yet to see you engage in any real discussion and don’t expect that to change c

    • Sam

      All lies. You people are so crooked you will have to be buried with a fork screw when you die. And I’ll be buried face down so any liberals attending my funeral can kiss my ass

  9. Frank stetson

    More of your real discussion?

  10. jboo7

    I hope, everybody here has heard of North Stream and the NATO Central Baltic Control Station on and around Bornholm Island – right, exactly where nobody else could have imploded those pipelines – not without coming under massive NATO firepower! The close distance to BORNHOLM points the finger clearly on NATO or a main power within NATO: Bornholm is the CENTER OF NATO’S INTELLIGENCE CONTROL OF THE BALTIC! Nothing can get anywhere near it, except with NATO approval!
    We have to see and admit that these two pipelines were the original cause of the entire Ukraine conflict – which has, actually, not that much to do with Ukraine but rather with the connection and COOPERATION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND GERMANY which was seen in Washington as an imminent danger to the post-WWII system of US HEGEMONY AROUND ATLANTIC AND MEDITERRANEAN! The GERMAN INDUSTRIAL, TECHNICAL AND SCIENTIFIC POWER COMBINED WITH SIBERIAS RESOURCES was feared as an INDEPENDENT SUPERPOWER BEYOND US CONTROL!
    Added to this came the German and French refusals to obey US orders of joining US-planned and started wars like Iraq and Libya/Syria.
    Added to that the growing tendency and realistic plans of an INDEPENDENT EUROPEAN DEFENSE FORCE.
    It is with this – which the Underground Real Rulers (Military Industrial Complex) in Washington sees as “GREAT THREAT” – which has led to a number of powerful military (see around the Med. but also in mid-Europe: Yugoslavia, now Ukraine and expanding NATO) and civilian (COVID and curtailing of Civil Liberties, Information, Opposition) interventions, under the name of a “RE-SET”.
    The war in Ukraine – started like Libya/Syria as Civil War, using existing ethnic, historical, cultural and linguistic differences plus a fascist- (or jihadist) originated “nationalism” – serving as PROXY WAR AGAINST GERMANY AND RUSSIA, and the entire EU as Independent Economic Entity and Power. – I recommend here the great study by the RAND Corporation handed to certain Government (and Deep State) Departments, around 25 January 2022, shortly before the increased bombardment of Donetsk brought Russian troops across the border with Ukraine.
    This, again, looked suspiciously like a repeat of the artillery operation of 2008 (Obama’s first year in office) with Pres, Saakashvili in the Russian-linked autonomous region of South Ossetia in Georgia – which made it look like a “test run for Donetsk”: Kill as many Russians or Russian related minority people as necessary to lure the Russian army into helping them! That Mr. Saakashvili -then exiled, fled from home, also still sent 3 professional snipers to take part in the Maidan Killings (how did he know about that? – he was in Washington!) makes the case even more convincing! And the RAND researchers found that “getting Russia involved in the Ukrainian Civil War was a necessary step for getting Germany into it as well – and so, fully destroy the competitive German industry!
    – Now, look a North Stream – and the latest about, say BASF and other oil and gas dependent industrial giants!
    [The cutting off of Brexit was only part of the strategy, making sure of having an unsinkable aircraft and troop carrier as secure US bridgehead closer to the Proxy Operations.]
    Looking at the edges of the damaged pipelines makes it clear that the “cutting” was not caused by “an explosion” in the sense of an extravert power expansion, but as an IMPLOSION WITH WELDING FUNCTION – an effect best reached with “hollow-load-armour-breaking-devices”.
    That would indicate a close-up operation -resp. operations- and that a number of these could follow each other -and this WAS NOT ONE MOMENT’s deed- so close to a NATO INTELLIGENCE CENTER is absolutely impossible!
    Maybe, Mr. Biden should not have “let the cat out of the bag” that early, as when he openly spoke of doing exactly what was done in the shallow Danish/Swedish intelligence-infested waters of Bornholm.
    The other persons who let more than one cat out of their bags were, of course, those Georgia snipers who testified before a Court in Georgia
    (which was, actually set up for blaming Maidan on the, totally innocent police) about the Nationalist shooters from Lvov, their leader Mr. Parasyuk (who was rewarded with a seat in Parliament for this), and the US sniper specialist of the 101 Airborne, Mr. Bovenger!
    An now, tell me anyone in the Obama and Biden Inner Government Circles, the Pentagon, CIA (of whom many agents were reported o the Maidan – but non was shot at!), etc. who would not know all this as an OPEN WHODUNNIT – NYT and WaPo etc. included!