The Three Colonels

The title, of course, is a play on "The Three Tenors."
But it does refer to three very real retired colonels, all of whom had distinguished careers in the U.S. Army.
Here they are:

Col. Richard Black 

Col. Douglas MacGregor 

Col. Larry Wilkerson 

What do those three men, all of about the same age, have in common besides being retired U.S. Army colonels?
All three are opposed to our support for Ukraine in its conflict with Russia.

(For people with experience in the intelligence community who feel likewise, see
Larry Johnson 
Karen Kwiatkowski
Ray McGovern 
Scott Ritter

Why do these seven people, with extensive experience in either the military or the intelligence community, 
have such a different point of view than so many politicians and media figures?
For example, 
Max Boot 
Josh Rogin 
Bill Kristal 
Victoria Nuland.

I think the difference in background should be obvious.
Who has America's best interest in mind?
I know my opinion on that.

Why do those four people named above hate Russia so much?
That shouldn't be too hard to figure out.

See also this 2h25m press conference


Comment from Keith Harbaugh:

I am sure those 80-year-old retired colonels got some things wrong, or at least imperfect, in their remarks.
But the very important point is this:
Why on earth are we risking nuclear Armageddon over, God help us, Ukraine?
I think the answer is extremely clear:
It's the Jews, stupid.

One might ask:
Why did Victoria Nuland care so much about who controlled Ukraine?
I don't think the average American cared that much.


Why Max Boot is pure scum

Because he has worked assiduously to talk Americans into policies against their true interests.
He is a poison within America.
Harming the American national interest.

If nuclear war breaks out, you can blame the likes of Max Boot.

Max Boot and his "alignment of evil"

Referring to 
the title of which is
"The Russia-North Korea pact bolsters a growing ‘alignment of evil’ ".

Let me say this:
I am extremely tired of Jews pushing America into hostility towards Russia.
Do they ever get tired of hating Russia?

Whom does Boot reference in his column?
"Yoel Guzansky, a senior researcher at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studiesx

Yeah, I get it.
Whom we should listen to, and obey.


Arnold Toynbee, Karl Marx, and Max Boot

Arnold Toynbee asserted there had been, historically, around 20 world civilizations

When he wrote the above-cited work, 
he asserted there were five civilizations still surviving:
Western, Orthodox Christian, Islamic, Hindu, and Sinic.
We can argue over the proper names and precise extents of each, but the idea should be clear.

In the 19C, Karl Marx had a different way of dividing the world, into the oppressors and the oppressed
"Workers of the world, unite!".

Now, in 2024, here comes Max Boot, who writes of an "alignment of evil", which he defines as Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran, 
all of whom are united by "anti-Americanism".
"The Russia-North Korea pact bolsters a growing ‘alignment of evil’
The democratic world needs increased solidarity to counter Russia, China, Iran and North Korea."

Well, Russia is the descendant of the Orthodox Christian civilization, China of course is the descendant of the Sinic civilization.

So Max Boot and his ilk would have us at odds with two and a half of the four non-Western civilizations.
I say, yuck!
Enough with your perpetual conflicts.

Some say, "But wait. Russia, China, and many of the Muslim countries aren't democracies."
I say, it is up to the people in those countries, nations, or civilizations to decide what form of government they desire, what works best of them.
It should not be up to the U.S. to decide for them.
Each society should be allowed to make its own decisions on how it should be run.

We see this clearly in Russia.
Some say Putin is a dictator, or an authoritan, or an autocrat.
But many say he reflects the majority view of the Russian people.
It seems hard to argue with that.


Against the U.S. strategic interest

It should clearly be in the interest of the U.S. to isolate North Korea, make it a pariah state.

But see this;

Why is this?
Because Ukraine-loving politicians in the U.S. have pushed Russia away from the U.S., into the arms of North Korea.

Why did those U.S. politicians do that?
Well, various reasons can be offered, but one I think must have been significant was 
that was what their campaign donors wanted.
The politicians surely are sensitive to the desires of their campaign donors.

This is yet another example of how 
love for Ukraine is 
harming the United States.

There are two groups in America:
Russiaphobes, and 
campaign donors.
Unfortunately, I suspect there is a positive correlation between those two groups.

In whose interests is war with Russia, thermonuclear or otherwise?
Certainly not America's.


How to rebuild relations with Russia

1. Return the Russian assets that have been confiscated.
2. End all the sanctions that have been imposed on Russia.
3. Persuade, or strong-arm, Zelenskyy to accept, on the nose, the peace plan that Putin offered on 2024-06-14.
4. End U.S. military support for Ukraine.

I don't think those would instantly rebuild friendship with Russia.
They've had to accept too much hostility from the U.S.
They couldn't be confident we were sincere.
In English we have a saying "The leopard doesn't change his spots."
I imagine the Russians have an equivalent saying.
But over time, they might accept that we really wanted to end the period of misguided American hostility to Russia.


Putin issues another warning: 2024-06-14

Putin's warning is quoted, and commented on, by Larry Johnson here:
"American and her NATO allies are fools if they dismiss or ignore Putin’s stark message today."

I want to add two comments:

1. People who buy stocks are familiar with a common slogan coming from brokerage houses'
"Past performance is no guarantee of future returns."
I want to modify that to 
"Past restraint is no guarantee of future restraint."

We are told over and over again, by "experts", 
that Putin has issued threats in the past and not followed through on them.
True, but this is no guarantee.
We might recall an old saying 
"There's always a first time."

2. We really are now in uncharted territory.
The U.S. and Russia, or its predecessor the Soviet Union, have on at least two occasions, been on opposite sides of shooting wars.
In Vietnam, not only did the U.S. back the South Vietnamese militarily, but we were heavily involved ourselves, with ground troops and aircraft, to the tune of 57,000 casualties, 
against the North Vietnamese backed, and supplied, by the Soviet Union.
But this never involved U.S.-supplied weapons directly striking the Soviet Union.

Likewise in Afghanistan the U.S. and the Soviet Union backed opposing sides.
But again, there were no direct attacks on Soviet territory using U.S.-made weapons.

Now, in 2024, that critical line has been crossed.
U.S.-produced weapons are being used, with the approval of the U.S., to attack military targets in Russia-proper.
And there is clamor from politicians, the media, and various "experts", on both sides of the Atlantic, to strike more targets in Russia.

Some "experts" are claiming that Russia's real red line will be if their population centers, e.g. Moscow and St. Petersburg, are attacked.
I think this is absurd, and belied by Russia's own statements.
The Russian military, like that of the U.S., has various facilities critical to its strategic deterrence, 
some of which are within Ukraine's striking range.
If those facilities come under attack, they have said they will respond strategically, to what is behind the attack.
Like Larry Johnson, I think they are dead serious in that.

I want to stress that this is the most fateful thing I have seen in my 77 years.
Putin, like his predecessors as leaders of first the Soviet Union and then Russia, has the complete power to destroy the civilized world.
We, the U.S., never gave his predecessors any cause to start a global thermonuclear war.
Correspondingly, they never threatened one.
Now, in 2024, the West is clearly giving Putin cause for retaliation, and he is quite clearly saying, 
if you don't stop provoking Russia, you may get exactly what you don't want.

How stupid do you have to be to not see the danger the West is getting into?


Nuclear fears: who and what is leading us towards WWIII?

See, e.g.,

Paul Craig Roberts 

Larry Johnson and Judge Napolitano 

Scott Ritter and Judge Napolitano 

Larry Johnson

In the Ritter video, the part dealing with the threat of WWIII starts at 135s
In that video, Ritter goes into quite a bit of detail about war-fighting techniques, and U.S. policies thereon.
I don't know how accurate his claims are.

I have assembled the three YouTube links above into a playlist, which I may expand later if appropriate.
I have already added a Larry Wilkerson video to that playlist.