© Strategic Culture Foundation
Just what is Emmanuel Macron thinking with his recent media trysts which have gained the attention of the world? Initially, we thought his statements about sending French troops to Ukraine to fight Russian forces was merely chaf to throw up in the air to distract journalists and a gullible French public. It's true, it has rattled Germany which promptly replied to Macron, reminding him that EU countries are not "at war with Russia" - a curious statement given that just a week earlier, a leaked audio conversation with German air force chiefs revealed that they wanted to send Taurus missiles to Ukraine so as to hit the Crimean bridge.
Of course, now that we all know what the intentions of the Germans were, Scholz has been forced to backpedal and downplay the scandal, sticking to its position of neutrality.
But if you think that's funny, wait until you see what Macron has in store for Old Europe. Could it be really true that he believes French troops could end up in Ukraine? A quick glance at the actual quote from
Le Parisienne interview
would suggest the opposite and that he's hedging his bets, or, as some suspect trying to bait the Americans into wanting to get there first. Is this what the British expression "jumping the gun" really means?
"Maybe at some point - I don't want it, I won't take the initiative - we will have to have operations on the ground, whatever they may be, to counter the Russian forces," he is quoted as saying. In reality, it seems as though he has been misquoted as there is no story here. Even he is saying on the record that he won't authorise it. So is he hinting at other western countries taking the lead, perhaps the Poles, Lithuanians and Latvians? Possibly.
But in reality, the most likely scenario would be the U.S. biting the bullet and financing a private army made up of various nationalities.
Yet even this initiative would need to be prepared for media and even Russia itself so that the underlying point is clear: this is not a NATO war.
Of course, this thinking is fatally flawed as it is based on a premise that Putin wouldn't dare retaliate against those units of troops who he knows are located in a particular spot, as this could invoke Article V of the NATO treaty itself. Yet any two-bit geopolitical hack who knows Putin, knows this would not stop him as killing western troops - or even better capturing a small number - would mean the end of the West's intervention. Western elites have the technology and well-trained soldiers. What they lack is the stamina and political courage to face the baptism of outrage once body bags start arriving back on home soil. It may well mean, for Macron, if he were ever to entertain the idea of French troops, that it would or could be African troops from former French colonies enrolled under private contracts as mercenaries.
But as I saw in Somalia in 1993, Western leaders like Clinton had no stomach whatsoever for even a small number of their own being killed or captured. Osama bin Laden watched how Clinton soiled his own pants when just 18 soldiers died in the spectacular U.S. Rangers failure in Mogadishu with an operation which was supposed to take an hour.
Black Hawk Down and its implications inspired Bin Laden to bomb both the Dar Es Salam and Nairobi U.S. embassies after seeing how vulnerable the West is fighting terrorism, or merely sticking its nose into other countries problems. All it actually took was
Newsweek to run a cover of a U.S. soldier's body being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu to make Clinton not only pull out of Somalia altogether, but convince the UN itself to leave later in 1995. It also meant that the West would not help hundreds of thousands of victims of the civil war in Rwanda which led to the genocide in 1994. One U.S. soldier. One
Newsweek cover.
The idea of western troops in Ukraine is a non-starter and represents, if nothing else, yet another jaw dropping miscalculation of western leaders struggling to come to terms with losing a war in Ukraine. But if all Macron wanted was media coverage and
something to distract the French away from the more tawdry reports circulating if his wife actually being a man, then this fitted the bill. Macron, we should remember, is in his last three years in office as President and desperately
wants to carve his name into the history books as a French president who actually did something. Anything. So, his media people are cooking up a number of stories which are aimed towards those who write the history books to be kind to him and airbrush out how he lost at least three Sahel countries to Russia during his term due to his own stupendous arrogance and belief in the Republic and its importance in African 50 years ago.
How does such a weasel of a politician boost his popularity and make himself look more of a man than his wife when the whole world sees him for being a coward, a failed statesman and a liar? Produce a photo of him as a boxer punching a sack, of course! Voila.
Reader Comments
--
French elections have two rounds of voting, and given it's choice of candidates.the first round is the most revealing,
Results In the 2022 election, with 48 million registered to vote ( French population 68 million) and a turnout of 35 million, Macron took 27% of the first round Vote, totalling to only 9.5 million voters who made Macron their choice, meaning - 38.5/58.5 million didn't.
and thats a democracy ?
this time, with the link.
Meet Emmanuel Macron: Rothschild banker, Bilderberger, 'anti-Establishment' candidate in French election
The last thing I ever wanted to do was write about France's likely next president, Emmanuel Macron, but here we are. This post was inspired by a very telling Financial Times article sent to me by...I prefer the discipline of knowledge vs. the anarchy of ignorance.
Design without discipline is anarchy, an exercise of irresponsibility aka the scapeGOAT.
Apart of his genetically mutated halfwit wife...
Are any of them intelligent enough to frame that?
Osama bin Laden? Really? Bringing in 'Black Hawk Down' to make it sound more 'real'?
I was taking the article seriously up to that point, and I generally trust Strategic Culture.
Though I did hear that Clinton was thrown off the political stage for consulting with his conscience and not fully engaging in the War on Terror... Exit Clinton stage-right, enter Dubya Bush stage-left.
Given that, it's unclear whether he's off script or not. It's entirely possible that he's unaware that he has a "Kick Me!" sign on his back. In either event, "they" appear to be content to let him rant and drool.
The plot line divergence possibilities are numerous. I can even see one in which his elderly "wife" goes to her reward, the same week that Charles snuffs it, William perishes in a car wreck, along with his entire family, and the next King Harold takes the UK throne. MacRon and Zelensky announce their betrothal and they retires to the Cote d'Ivoire.
Show the World You are One
[Link]
This from 9 years ago, talking singing about unity of humanity, note that the audience is not participating, it is just a spectacle of entertainment.
Quote: " The idea of western troops in Ukraine is a non-starter and represents, if nothing else, yet another jaw dropping miscalculation of western leaders". There are already Western troops in Ukraine dressed up as mercenaries. Wherever they gather they get blown up.
An AI driven military. For the first time in human history as we know it.
All driven by AI. Thing is they need people to input the information depending on individual ideology entering the data, we come up with some distorted vision of reality.