Op-ed views and opinions expressed are solely those of the author.
In the face of national division not seen since 1860, Americans are questioning institutions once seen as hallmarks to national security and the freedoms that we all hold dear. The division is not confined to North America.
We saw it in the recent French election. Only by a whisper did French President, Emmanuel Macron hold on to power. In doing so, he alienated supporters of Conservative, Marine LePen, by making a deal with France’s Far-left, Unbowed Party led by Jean Luc Melenchon.
Don’t look now, but a similar right-wing movement is materializing in Germany. “Alternative fur Deutschland” (AFD) is the most prominent right-wing party since the NAZIS. Its proclamation, “Deutschland Zuerst” takes exception to Angela Merkel’s globalism, green energy initiatives and immigrations policies in the same manner that LePen’s “National Rally” (RN) takes exception to Macron’s.
It is the same discussion that the United States currently finds itself embroiled in: “Faith based, National Populism versus Secular Global Socialism.”
Does N.A.T.O. Remain Practical?
With the divide comes a new question: “Does the United States want to continue contributing an inordinate amount of tax-payer money to N.A.T.O., when some of the bigger players, such as Canada are sandbagging?”
Donald Trump asked this question in 2017. Initially, he was ridiculed and chastised by everyone from European members to representatives of his own party. His vow to make NATO countries step up the plate and pony up, angered many players, on both sides of the Atlantic.
There is a growing question of U.S. participation in the Ukraine conflict. Democrats largely support the war. Those who don’t, such as RFK, Jr. have been essentially blackballed. Republican Neo-cons such as Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham and Nikki Haley never encountered an “overseas military adventure” that they didn’t like.
Slowly but surely, Americans and kindred spirits around the world are seeing linkage between costly green energy initiatives, anti-faith-based ideology, wokeness, relativism and corruption. As a result, there are emerging voices, many choosing anonymity, who are expressing views previously considered verboten.
The following blog post was seen this past week on Yahoo in response to the question, “will Donald Trump, if elected president, instigate a deal with Vladimir Putin?”
A separate deal with Putin is exactly what we do need, if we are interested in avoiding WWIII. Unfortunately, there are those who stand to make a lot of money from such a war! Conversely, if the two men could meet in Honolulu this upcoming February, a “Coalition for World Peace” might be orchestrated. The primary goal would be to “expunge Marxism from the planet.” Putin would be quick to agree, echoing the fact that Marxism was responsible for “100 million deaths” in the previous century. The agreement would call for a “cessation of hostilities” in Europe. It would begin with a “nuclear proliferation agreement” and a “non-aggression treaty” between Russia and former Warsaw Pac nations, including the Baltic countries. Ukraine and Belarus would return to Mother Russia. South Ossetia and Abkhazia would return to the Republic of Georgia. Russia would recognize the Monroe Doctrine and promise both political and military aid to enforce it. America would recognize Outer Manchuria as Russian territory. Putin would agree to join Trump in convincing North Korea that nuclear weapons were not in their future. The two countries would agree that A.I. could not be utilized in anything other than Agriculture and space exploration, using our combined military might to enforce this insightful standard. The result: “Checkmate China.” Countries would flock to join the new “CWP,” beginning with Australia, Hungary, Japan, Italy, India, Saudi Arabia and Viet Nam.
Such a development would defy the existing narrative! Yet it would be consistent with Trump’s original assertion to “drain the swamp.” It would require Secretary of State candidate, Vivek Ramaswamy to clean house at the State Department, by following through on his proposal to “term limit” it’s members.
Without question, Democrats and the bulk of the media establishment would “cry foul” at the thought of abandoning Ukraine, even though some of its western parts would be returned to Hungary and Poland. Defenders would counter that it would be more than worth it, if it forced China to exit the Western Hemisphere. Russians know the value of U.S. recognition of Texas sized, resource rich Outer Manchuria. The region includes the port of Vladivostok. It has been in territorial dispute since 1862.
The Deep State Deterrent
Russia would need to be convinced that the American President had the latitude to formalize such an agreement. In Angela Stern’s, “The Limits of Partnerships” Putin reminded that he had dealt with five different U.S. Presidents but the “men in black suits in the background” wielded the true power in the United States.
Trump’s original notion of reforming the administrative state proved unrealistic. It is simply too deep and has been around too long. Only through term limiting, mass layoffs and forced relocations will power be wrenched away from entrenched bureaucrats who have learned to “slow walk” initiatives that they don’t like.
Joe Biden represents the Deep State. Ditto for the Clintons and the Obamas. Donald Trump is the unwanted guest, who crashed the party in 2016. The 2020 decision to play Identity politics with the Vice-Presidential selection is coming back to haunt Democrats in 2024. Biden is alarmingly feeble but remains a stronger option than Kamala Harris.
It was thought that endless indictments, courtesy of a weaponized, partisan DOJ would either drive Trump from the race or worse. If anything, this strategy has backfired. The June 27th debate was seen by some as an opportunity to reverse the momentum. Instead, it exposed the hidden truth of the President’s medical condition.
Faced with the looming inevitability of a Trump White House return, it appears that Deep State players ultimately turned to the unspeakable option. On Saturday, July 14th Donald Trump narrowly (two centimeters) averted an assassin’s bullet.
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
- Trump’s global strategy should not come as surprise. - December 30, 2024
- Academia first stop in Trump revamp - December 23, 2024
- Retribution may be on tap for aggrieved Americans - December 16, 2024
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
BPR INSIDER COMMENTS
Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!
