A Prelude to Conflict or a Path to Peace?

From the moment Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was ousted, purportedly with the aid of Western intelligence agencies, the stage was set for a potential third world war. Both sides appeared to be maneuvering in ways that made conflict inevitable. Russia's decision to support IMF intervention in stabilizing Ukraine's economy initially seemed puzzling. Subsequently, the IMF conditioned financial aid on Ukraine's willingness to confront Russia in the Donbas region. Was this irony, or was there a deeper agenda at play? NATO's decision to arm Ukraine resulted in civilian casualties in the Donbas as Ukraine sought to suppress the eastern population's desire to align with Russia. The specter of Ukraine joining NATO further exacerbated tensions. Russia's subsequent intervention in the Donbas only heightened the volatility of the situation, pushing both sides closer to confrontation. Setting aside any alleged globalist interference, a critical examination of the situation suggests that Russia may have a more justifiable stance, albeit not necessarily for the reasons typically espoused by conservatives. While some on the left may reflexively align with establishment narratives, others, including figures like Tucker Carlson, are willing to consider perspectives from both sides. Consider if China were to forge a military alliance with Mexico, potentially stationing troops and weaponry along the U.S. southern border. The chaos and alarm such a scenario would evoke parallel Russia's concerns with Ukraine's alignment with NATO. History, notably the Cuban Missile Crisis, underscores the seriousness of military operations in such proximity to major powers' borders. Putin's rationale, as articulated in his interview, resonates when viewed through this lens. However, beyond geopolitics, one cannot ignore the broader implications of the conflict. Distrust of Putin notwithstanding, the behavior of Western political leaders also raises questions. There appears to be an agenda transcending traditional power plays, one that serves the interests of a select elite. Elements within both Russian and NATO governments may be unwittingly or knowingly advancing these interests. The undeniable reality is that many political leaders and institutions are mired in corruption, seeking authoritarian control and economic restructuring. The COVID-19 pandemic laid bare their intentions. These individuals are not merely misguided; they represent a genuine threat to global stability. The East/West dichotomy conveniently aligns with their agenda. The BRICS nations, positioning themselves to abandon the dollar as the world reserve currency, underscore this shift. Continued escalation of conflicts like Ukraine could prompt nations, led by China, to divest from the dollar, precipitating a catastrophic inflationary spiral. This prospect is poorly understood by many Americans. Globalists stand to benefit, having long sought to undermine the U.S. economy and usher in a new world order anchored by central bank digital currencies. The BRICS' collaboration with the IMF may reflect a desire to assert greater influence in a post-dollar world or, conversely, may signal controlled opposition vying for inclusion in the new order. Regardless, the dollar's fall would mark a pivotal moment in reshaping the global financial landscape. Moreover, globalists stand poised to portray themselves as saviors amidst the chaos they've cultivated. Decades of economic manipulation have primed the U.S. for collapse, with war serving as a convenient scapegoat. The ensuing crisis would pave the way for their dystopian vision of a centralized global currency. An East/West conflict, therefore, represents the linchpin of the Great Reset agenda. Yet, resistance from a skeptical public poses a significant obstacle. The establishment's outrage over the Putin interview betrays their fear of a growing disillusionment with their narratives. Nevertheless, NATO and Russia may yet escalate the crisis, whether through military means or financial manipulation. Liberty-minded individuals must eschew the establishment's binary framing and instead unite against the true threat: Globalist tyranny. Only by reclaiming autonomy can we hope to avert the calamity looming on the horizon.