Update from the Heartland
No.1247
1.12.25 – 7.12.25
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
The loose rhetoric and outright evidence-less conspiracy theories about President Volodymyr Oleksandrovych Zelenskyy of Ukraine, the Ukrainian nation, and their efforts to defend their nation against the blatant aggression of their neighbor—Russia—have not helped the peace process. Unfortunately, we have a president and his sycophant minions who believe that drivel and pass it on as facts. Despite the efforts of previous administrations, the current government of [the person who shall no longer be named] appears bound and determine to align the United States with the aggressor. The U.S. government presented a 28-point plan. Two stipulations of that USG plan were:
“6. The size of the Armed Forces of Ukraine will be limited to 600,000 personnel.
“7. Ukraine agrees to enshrine in its constitution that it will not join NATO, and NATO agrees to include in its statutes a provision that Ukraine will not be admitted in the future.”
The audacity of just these two of 28 conditions is striking. Apparently, the negotiators and We, the People, must be reminded that Ukraine has been a free and independent nation since 1991 with the dissolution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). The Ukrainians suffered and endured a series of Russian surrogate puppets like Belarus does to this day. In 2014, they shook off that shackle and freely elected their first truly Ukrainian president. Putin and his ultra-right-wing cronies were not happy and decided to punish Ukraine for their drive to be truly free of Russian domination. The Ukraine government made advances toward European Union membership and the umbrella protection of full NATO participation. Putin and his buddies did not like that, so they rattled their saber to intimidate and cower Ukraine and the former Warsaw Pact countries for that matter. The Russian army invaded Donbass with “Little Green Men,” i.e., Russian soldiers without identification, and they conduct an illegitimate plebiscite in Crimea; both actions in 2014. That deed did not accomplish what Putin wanted, so he initiated an outright invasion in 2022. To this day, Russians occupy around 20% of Ukraine. They continue to bombard schools, residential buildings, shopping centers, hospitals, and innocent Ukrainian women and children. Putin is not fighting a war of any kind or sort. Putin is attempting to destroy Ukraine—their brutal form of scorched earth . . . to punish them for daring to be free. What is distinctly and starkly missing from the Russian peace plan under a United States title is, there is no mention of prosecution of Russian war crimes. These are largely Russia’s conditions, not Ukrainian; they are not even American. They are Russian plain and simple.
I do not want war. I do not want Ukrainians, or Russians for that matter, to die because of a hegemonic dictator in Moscow. I want the Russian war on Ukraine to end. I also want Ukraine to be free . . . to be free, to choose their course in international relations. I support their efforts to join the EU and NATO. From my perspective, the orange one’s 28-point plan ‘for’ Ukraine is quite akin to the Munich Accord signed by Chamberlain and Daladier in 1938, when they unilaterally dissected Czechoslovakia, another independent, sovereign nation, to satisfy another hegemonic dictator. How did that work out? History will record the same judgment.
Just a sidenote of sorts, NATO has been, from its inception, a solely defensive organization. Russian claims of feeling threatened by NATO at its border is bogus, nonsensical, and verging upon irrational. They have had NATO on their border since 2004. Why did the former Warsaw Pact nations join NATO? Simple answer—protection . . . from Russia. No one has attacked Russia, but Russia sure as hell attacked other sovereign countries—Georgia (2008), Ukraine (2014). Russians love to point to the 27 million people they lost in fighting the Germans in World War II as rationale for their actions today. What they conveniently ignore or refuse to acknowledge are the million plus Russians killed by Stalin and his NKVD / NKGB agents to satisfy Uncle Joe’s paranoia. Punishing Ukraine for Stalin’s / Putin’s paranoia is wrong and absolutely unacceptable.
During my contemplation of Ukraine’s situation with the United States advocating for the Russian demands, a number of relevant questions came to mind.
1. Is Ukraine a free, independent, sovereign nation?
2. Does Ukraine have the rights of sovereign nations to decide its path to peace and prosperity?
3. Is Ukraine just a contemporary version of 1938 Czechoslovakia?
4. What right does Russia have to take territory from Ukraine by force of arms?
5. What authority does any nation have to dictate to Ukraine (or Czechoslovakia) how they should choose to live?
6. What is the difference between Putin’s claims on the Donbass region and Hitler’s claims on Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia?
I would genuinely like to hear how others answer the above questions, and how they see the Ukrainian situation? Or even, their opinion on the orange one’s 28-point plan. Let’s hear it—good, bad, or ugly.
Yet another MAGAt fallacy becomes clear. The orange one likes the term ‘narco-terrorism’ in his warped rationalization for the deployment of massive military force to interdict narco-traffickers in the Caribbean Sea. This administration joins previous administrations—Nixon, Reagan, and now the orange administration. No name wants us to believe there is an active program to contaminate our society with illegal drugs. The fallacy in the whole process is, they ignore demand. If there was no demand for those substances, there would be no smuggling. Case in point from history, the massive smuggling and criminal operations that existed during the prohibition era (1919-1933) brought significant direct and collateral crime to feed demand. No demand, no supply. Worse, no name has initiated extra-judicial executions in the name of stopping narco-terrorism without due process of law. At least one of those attack videos showed what appeared to be an empty boat. Just another necessary reminder, only Congress has the authority to declare war, or short of that, to authorize the use of military force. None of those actions have occurred. Congress has remained impotent and immobile. These are the times in which we live.
Comments and contributions from Update no.1246:
Comment to the Blog:
“Those of us who have consumed too much fiction expect the villains in this situation to be brilliant, but evil. Someone pointed out recently that in reality, most of them are barely competent. They’ve stumbled upon circumstances they can exploit. Here we are. Bondi’s and Halligan’s attempted persecutions of James Comey and Leticia James are outstanding examples of this. In other situations, individuals just like these don’t thrive.
“On the same note, while I hope Mark Kelly remains impervious to this nonsense, Agent Orange has drawn much more attention to the duty to refuse illegal orders. That could set up prosecutions.
“I agree that Agent Orange committed sedition on January 6, 2021. He might not live long enough to receive sentencing for that.
“The people making the decisions about health insurance and other issues at the Federal level have so much money that they needn’t worry about paying for healthcare. They are the goats. The MAGAts are the sheep.
“I await the release of the Epstein files (not redacted other than victims’ identities), and I support the calls to listen to the victims who continue trying to get Americans’ attention.”
My response to the Blog:
I cannot argue with your assessment. The orange one’s penchant for choosing bootlickers for important jobs is pervasive, demonstrable, and well-known. Most intelligent citizens see them exactly for what they are—bootlicker sycophants. Any individual who cozies up to the orange one like a moth to the flame should always remember loyalty is a one-way street with that con-man. He will use you and throw you away; easy come, easy go.
I am not sure I see the “drawn . . . to” assessment. I think he knows he is guilty and is screaming to obfuscate and deflect. Now, they are throwing the CinC South Command, Admiral Bradley, under the bus.
Whether the orange one lives long enough is not what I am concerned about. I want history to record his malfeasance.
Interesting observation about health insurance agents.
I am with you on the Epstein files. I want the consumers of Epstein’s services to face the public humiliation, and if possible, the prosecution they deserve.
. . . Round two:
“I never said Agent Orange intended to draw attention to military law. That's the result, though.
“I didn't say anything about any insurance agents. They are not the ones making policy decisions. The wealthy people who operate the party Central Committees make the decisions.”
. . . my response to round two:
OK. Noted. ‘Nuf said.
It is unfortunate that you apparently took my comments as a direct statement about you. When Congress grappled with the PPACA legislation, they struggled with who would pay. A portion sought a universal health care system similar to numerous other countries. We are part way toward that objective, e.g., Medicaid, Medicare, and to a certain extent, the original PPACA. From my perspective, Congress buckled under the enormous pressure from the health insurance companies to utilize the existing payor system, i.e., their companies. It was a compromise that created numerous deficiencies thus making PPACA an easy target for conservatives, who do not care a twit about people.
We have long agreed that money corrupts our political systems. We like to claim purity, but we are a very long way from democracy. It is no wonder so many citizens are and become disheartened by the political process. We must continue the struggle to achieve true democracy.
. . . Round three:
“I think I know where I went off track in the discussion about health insurance. I didn't say or read anything personal to me. ‘The people making the decisions’ about health insurance that I referred to aren't me, you, or the politicians enacting the decisions. They are insurance executives and Wall Street players.”
. . . my response to round three:
I am not so sure it is that simple. One of the many flaws in the PPACA is the ceding of payer authority to the for-profit insurance companies. I am running into those insurance decisions in my medical treatment. So far, we have been successful, but the request for approval, rejection, and appeal process takes time that I do not have much of it these days. I’m not sure I want Congress making those decisions either. I feel the total rejection day coming as my treatments get more complex and my capacity to tolerate those treatments decreases. Sooner or later, an ‘enough’ decision must be made. Money is not in limitless supply for anyone, including me. That’s the difficult part.
Just some thoughts of first-hand observations.
. . . Round four:
“I support your personal observation, and it generalizes to all of us. I hope one day we'll emulate countries with better health outcomes, which have single-payer systems. The problem about that is how we can push those who are making personal and corporate fortunes out of the way.”
. . . my response to round four:
Thank you for your support.
I would suggest in the same way Roosevelt pushed for the massive reform during the Great Depression era. Health care is a very complex matter. Yet, there are simple axioms, e.g., early detection improves outcomes. We will continue to advocate for universal health care (of some form).
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
