Basic

https://ericzuesse.substack.com/p/why-kamala-harris-will-kill-at-least

https://theduran.com/why-kamala-harris-will-kill-at-least-5-billion-people-if-she

[This is free to publish, with credit to the author.]

Why Kamala Harris Will Kill at Least 5 Billion People if She Becomes President

27 September 2024, Eric Zuesse

Kamala Harris said on September 26th that the United States is at war with Russia in Ukraine, and that Donald Trump would “surrender” to Russia if he becomes President again. She made clear that the war between Russia and Ukraine is also war between Russia and America — it is America’s war, just as-if Ukraine were a U.S. state. Here is how this was reported by France’s Agence France-Presse, under the headline “Harris meets Zelensky and slams Trump's 'surrender policy' for Ukraine”:

Harris did not mention Trump by name but said there were "some in my country who would instead force Ukraine to give up large parts of its sovereign territory."

"These proposals are the same of those of (President Vladimir) Putin. And let us be clear, they are not proposals for peace. Instead, they are proposals for surrender," she said, referring to the Russian leader.

She was virtually repeating President Joe Biden’s statement on the same day, that Ukraine must and will win this war against Russia with America’s help, and must never yield any of the territory in Ukraine that Russia now occupies. “Russia will not prevail, Ukraine will prevail, in this war”, he said. He made this commitment there, in the presence of, and to, Ukraine’s leader, Volodmyr Zelensky. In other words: If WW3 is necessary in order defeat Russia in Ukraine, then America will do it.

On the night of September 25th, CNN headlined “Republicans follow Trump’s lead of icing out Zelensky”, and reported that,

Former President Donald Trump on Wednesday criticized Volodymyr Zelensky and claimed the Ukrainian president “refuses to make a deal” amid Russia’s war in Ukraine, marking Trump’s most explicit criticism of Zelensky’s handling of the war to date. 

“Those cities are gone, they’re gone, and we continue to give billions of dollars to a man who refused to make a deal, Zelensky. There was no deal that he could have made that wouldn’t have been better than the situation you have right now. You have a country that has been obliterated, not possible to be rebuilt,” Trump said during a campaign speech in Mint Hill, North Carolina. …

 Republican leaders are so far declining to meet Zelensky while he is in Washington, DC, while Democrats are embracing the opportunity. Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson are not currently scheduled to meet with the Ukrainian president, sources told CNN, while House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Vice President Kamala Harris are scheduled to have meetings. …

“Every time he came to our country, he’d walk away with $60 billion. He’s probably the greatest salesman on Earth,” Trump said of Zelensky on Wednesday.

Trump says Ukraine should have given up territory to stop the war earlier

In his speech, Trump blamed Biden and Harris for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and claimed they “caused this situation by the stupidity of what they said, by every move they make, but they caused the situation and now they’re locked in.”

“They just don’t know what to do. They’re locked into a situation. It’s sad, they just don’t know what to do. Because Ukraine is gone, it’s not Ukraine anymore. You can never replace those cities and towns, and you can never replace the dead people, so many dead people,” Trump said.

He said making a deal earlier in the conflict to cede some territory to the Russians would have prevented more catastrophe. Trump argued Biden should have been able to orchestrate a deal between Russia and Ukraine that avoided any bloodshed and argued that even a “bad deal” and one where Ukraine had “given up a little bit,” would’ve been preferable to the war.

Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and the Democratic Party, have made clear, again and again, that the U.S. will never allow Russia to win in Ukraine. Everyone by now agrees that Russia is winning in Ukraine. Zelensky is asking Biden for permission to use U.S. weapons in order to strike deep into Russia, including The Kremlin itself — with U.S. weapons.

Also on September 25th, The Hill headlined “Putin issues new nuclear threat against the West”, and reported:

Russian President Vladimir Putin made new threats Wednesday to use nuclear weapons against the West, suggesting any nuclear power supporting a country that attacks Russia would be seen as participating in the aggression.

Addressing Russia’s Security Council, Putin said the country’s nuclear doctrine has been revised in light of an “emergence of new sources of military threats and risks for Russia and our allies.”

“The updated version of the document proposes that aggression against Russia by any non-nuclear-weapon state, but with the participation or support of a nuclear-weapon state, should be considered as a joint attack on the Russian Federation,” Putin told the council.

He did not specify whether Russia could respond to such an attack with nuclear weapons, but said the conditions for their use would be “reliable information about a massive launch of aerospace attack means and their crossing of our State border.”

He added, “We reserve the right to use nuclear weapons in the event of aggression against Russia and Belarus as a member of the Union State.”

Putin’s decision to change Russia’s official nuclear doctrine comes as the United States and the United Kingdom are considering whether to give Ukraine permission to fire Western-provided missiles deeper into Russian territory.

U.S. policy restricts Kyiv from using the American-made weapons such as the long-range artillery like the Army Tactical Missile System to hit airfields and logistical hubs across the border.

Also on September 25th, the Wall Street Journal headlined “U.S. ‘Unimpressed’ With Ukraine’s Victory Plan Ahead of Biden-Zelensky Meeting”, and reported:

The Biden administration is concerned that the Ukrainian leader’s plan for winning the war against Russia lacks a comprehensive strategy and is little more than a repackaged request for more weapons and the lifting of restrictions on long-range missiles, U.S. officials said. …

Senior U.S. and European officials knowledgeable of the broad outlines of the plan say it offers no clear path to a Ukraine victory, particularly as Russian forces make slow but steady gains on the battlefield.

“I’m unimpressed, there’s not much new there,” one of the senior officials said.

While the U.S. and Ukraine hoped to be united on a way forward, they now find themselves at a crucial point in the war without a shared vision. …

A centerpiece of the plan requires the U.S. to give Ukraine the green light to use the weapons as Kyiv sees fit, Finnish President Alexander Stubb said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. Without that authority, he said Ukraine’s proposals would ultimately be “less relevant.”

If Biden will allow this, then in the view of Russians, the U.S. missiles etc. that Ukraine will be using against Russia will place Russia at war against not only Ukraine but also the U.S.

A 2022 peer-reviewed scientific analysis of the number of deaths that would result from a nuclear war between the U.S. and Russia, which was published in a prestigious scientific journal, concluded that at least five billion people (over half of the planet’s human population) would be dead within just the first two years after the blasts.

There would be no winner from a WW3. This doctrine — which was called “Mutually Assured Destruction” or “MAD” — was the official U.S. and Russian policy until under George W. Bush’s Administration, and America’s entire political Establishment or “Deep State,” this doctrine became tacitly replaced by “Nuclear Primacy,” the belief that the U.S. Government would win a nuclear war if the U.S. suffers less damage from it than Russia would suffer, and so America ought to plan to do this. Then, on 1 March 2017, America’s top scientists on nuclear war concluded that what the U.S. Government was now doing was “exactly what one would expect to see, if a nuclear-armed state were planning to have the capacity to fight and win a nuclear war by disarming enemies with a surprise first strike.” Of course, if that is actually the case, then the U.S. Government’s objective would be to fire a missile or other weapon — F-35 perhaps — from as near to The Kremlin as possible. Ukraine has, by far, the nearest border to The Kremlin, which is less than 317 miles away — the U.S. missile would annihilate The Kremlin within just 5 minutes from launch. This is the main reason why Russia invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022 — to prevent that possibility.

The war in Ukraine started in 2014 when the Obama-Biden Administration carried out a coup in Ukraine, which replaced that country’s democraticaly elected neutralist leader and installed a rabidly anti-Russian one, thus starting the war in Ukraine.

The U.S. armaments lobby is so huge that even its sub-lobbies are huge. For example, the InterContinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) lobby is huge. The owners of these companies own (or at least control) the U.S. Government. They dominate the Congress and the White House. (They need to, in order to control their market, which is the U.S. Government and its colonies or ‘allies’.) Consequently, for a long time now, the armaments-producing industry has been far more profitable than any other segment of the U.S. stock market. (In fact, most of America’s military aid to Ukraine stays right in the U.S. itself. This is what happens when a nation’s Military-Industrial Complex controls its Government. And most of that money goes to the owners of these corporations — not to their workers.)

For Russia, the stakes in Ukraine are everything, because for America to post a missile 300 miles from The Kremlin would mean the end of Russians’ sovereignty over their own land. Vladimir Putin has therefore repeatedly stated that he will not accept that and that he would initiate nuclear war against any country that would do such a thing. For America, the stakes in Ukraine are to “keep the good times rolling” for America’s billionaires — the people who provide most of the funding for U.S. political campaigns. Ukraine is not a U.S. state. And it borders Russia, NOT the U.S. That is the reason why the U.S. Government took it in 2014. 

Anyone who says that Russia’s 24 February 2022 invasion of Ukraine was “unprovoked” is either a fool or a liar, because that’s demonstrably false.

As for Vice President Harris’s statement that Trump as President would “surrender” Ukraine, she is alleging that the U.S. owns Ukraine — which is true in the sense that ever since the Obama-Harris Administration in February 2014 seized it in a very bloody coup that was hidden behind anti-corruption demonstrations, the U.S. Government has been controlling Ukraine’s government. However, that still does not make Ukraine a U.S. state; and, so, the U.S. Government has no right to treat it as-if it were. If America will go to WW3 over Ukraine, there would be no legal justification for that under international law. The U.S. Government stole Ukraine. It does not legally own Ukraine. The U.S. Government’s coup in Ukraine was entirely illegal. So, Harris’s statement is false as a matter of law. And, of course, Harris is, herself, a lawyer.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.