If the USA was energy independent right now and exporting oil and gas, Europe would see the USA as a alternative source for their energy needs. Since the USA is dealing with its own energy crisis right now, Europe is reliant on their current source, Russia.
Ukraine's neighbors may consider stepping in and assisting the Ukrainian Nazi's resistance against Russia's invasion, however being that Russia is the primary source for Europe's energy, they do not want to jeopardize that energy trade arrangement. They will chose to stay neutral. (We have heard Trump talk about the EU reliance on Russian oil, Trump complained about EU buying oil from Russia yet we provide protection to the EU from Russia, he was gaslighting them)
Janet Yellen just gave Russia $16 billion to keep the oil flowing here to the USA. Biden said he wanted to sanction Russia but would not take steps that may harm the USA. Hasn't he already harmed the USA in many different ways? This stance is basically giving a green light to Russia without saying it.
The shutdown of the Keystone pipeline was essential to Russia's success. The approval of Nord Strean 2 pipeline was essential to Russia's success. Russia has been making a shit ton of money with oil reaching >$100 / barrel. All of this increased revenue has paid for the invasion of Ukraine. The money you are paying at the pump is helping pay for the clean up in Ukraine. We created this mess, you didn't expect Russia to pay for the clean up did you? Oh, thanks Biden, whoever you are.
We see many financial entities sanctioning Russia by denying privileges. This does not matter, Russia can function without them. Dave from X22 thinks this is the start of the central bank take down however, Russia has been disassociated from the central banks for a number of years. To the contrary, I think what we have building here is many different avenues leading to the takedown of the United Nations, WHO, NATO and WEF. (WHO = pandemic, NATO = Nazi computers, WEF = Klause Schwab's Great Reset [All together = United Nations])
I don't think the China/Taiwan conflict will kick off until Russia is done cleaning up Ukraine. Xi and Putin have had a series of closed door meetings in recent months. I'm thinking Xi may insist that the CCP hold off on any aggression toward Taiwan until Putin is done in Ukraine. Xi could use the excuse that Russia is now a military ally and they may need Putin's assistance if the USA decides to defend Taiwan. Puttin can't fight 2 wars at once, wink, wink.
Biden has already said that the USA was obligated to help Taiwan if China decided to take any military advancement against them. We do not technically have any defense agreement with Taiwan but we have sold them billions in military equipment. Biden would probably like to protect Taiwan for the sake of the defense contractors.
Sit back and enjoy the show, this shit show was written years ago and nothing will change the way this ends.
Take Don Jr's word for it. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/TUCQRCCfB2Y
Stay safe my frens,
WWG1WGA!!!
Well, most of this is speculation, isn't that part of the reason why we are here? None of us know for sure how this will turn out. We just have to look for the most reasonable solution that gets us to our goals. If the goal is draining the swamp, you have to include the whole swamp. I think taking out the CCP should be included in that.
We heard Pompeo give a speech to the governors and he warned them not to form any relationships with the Chinese. Then the Chinese released the virus and participated in election fraud and overthrowing a US President. Its almost like Pompeo knew what was coming.
What do you do when watching any good movie? You try to guess the ending.
Hmmm. No offense intended, JH but I find two-way communication with you quite challenging. Either crossed wires, or (speculating) you have an unusual way of thinking that is quite.... not .... common (normal?)
It's of not too great a consequence - maybe its something you are aware of, or not.
But your response above "isn't that part of the reason why we are here"" backed up with "none of us now for sure..." as if there is some need to bolster the reasoning of the first rhetorical question.
However, nowhere in my comment is there any assertion, suggestion or inference that speculating is not why we are here, that speculation is undesirable or invalid, or somehow any issue at all. So it's like you're responding to an idea that was whipped up out of thin air. Maybe you just read it too quickly, and misunderstood?
Just to clarify, not only do I not have an issue with speculation, I'll affirm that speculation is a critical part of hypothesis development and solution creation.
What I did say was that articulating speculation as if it is fact is grinding. Normally, in English, we indicate speculation by using present postulative: ie. would be, will be, could be, etc. When you write "The incursion into Taiwan is not to clean up corruption in Taiwan." this way of expressing - "is" is generally used for statements of fact. "the dog is happy", "America is ready".
That's all I'm saying. When you write "the incursion IS..." it implies the incursion is a fact, rather than a speculation... However, I also mentioned that this may simply be your stylistic choice.
Anyway, please continue to speculate. I found your ideas and the description pretty good.
Cheerio.