Prof Mearsheimer on the Ukrainian war

Prof. Mearsheimer giving an invited lecture at the European University Institute on the war in the Ukraine.

Prof. Mearsheimer is not optimistic about the outcome of the proxy war in the Ukraine between the West and Russia. A war in which neither NATO nor Russia can afford to back down has a significant possibility of escalating to nuclear weapons and spreading far beyond the borders of the proxy. There is no serious interest in the West in seeking a diplomatic end to the war.

Given the stakes, it is strange that Western public interest in the conflict has almost evaporated – although the US Administration keeps shoveling Bidenbucks into the war zone.


Lithuania’s decision to block train supplies to Kaliningrad is the most recent escalation on the NATO side. The fact the Russians seemed to have been surprised by this development is not a good sign.

Will we end up going to hot war with Russia due to Article 5 triggered by this incident?

I hope cooler/saner heads will prevail. Many years ago I remember wondering what would it feel like to live during the late 1930s as the second world war began to brew. Today’s nearly instantaneous access to so-called information far exceeds what was possible in 1938, but it seems like we are now close to another similar discontinuity.


That’s because now, like then, we have no real access to honest facts. In the ‘30’ all was basically propaganda, ours and theirs. Today with all our multi tech media we’re still prisoner to BS, generally government-created, now like then.


That is something I have wondered a lot about too. Surely those people in the 1930s must have seen what was coming? Why did they not make serious efforts to head off the looming catastrophe?

From various readings over the years, there is no doubt that everyone who was awake in the 1930s could see the broad outlines of what was going to happen – not the details (England declares war on Germany over its invasion of Poland; USSR also invades Poland, and becomes the West’s ally), but the recognition that the system was unstable and destined to slide into war. Keynes saw the inevitability of renewed war as early as 1919 when the Treaty of Versailles was being written – and wrote “The Economic Consequences of the Peace” to convey his frustrations. When the Library of Congress later complied its report “Events Leading Up To World War II”, it started the clock in 1931. Everyone got to see the horrors of the Spanish Civil War in the 1930s. And yet global war came.

There are those who present the case that no serious effort to avoid conflict was made because some “leaders” actually wanted war. FDR was looking for a way out of the regulatory depression he had imposed on the US, while his staff was intent on making the world safe for Communism. Stalin was still a believer in communist revolution in the West, which he thought would be accelerated by the pressures of war.

The jury is still out on assertions like that, and probably will never return a final verdict. It would be very (as in extremely) unfortunate if similar hidden agendas led today’s “leaders” of the US & NATO to stumble their way into a civilization-destroying World War III. The only certain fact today is that no-one in the West is trying to defuse the conflict in the Ukraine.


Professor Mearsheimer’s analysis is entirely correct. Irrefutable. Remember the Monroe Doctrine? The Cuban Missile Crisis? Grenada? Are we the only nation with legitimate national and security interests??


Not a word on the U.S. and E.U. motivations for causing this war?
Why now? Why all this rage? How can Ukraine be so existential for the West?

This time the West defends its magic “fiat”-based monetary system… by taking it down to replace it by even worse (central bank digital currency imposed to captive citizen) - and this time, the rest of the World is not going to buy it.

Let’s start with the all-time motivation winners:

(weapons paid by the taxpayer)

“It is part of the general pattern of misguided policy that our country is now geared to an arms economy which was bred in an artificially induced psychosis of war hysteria and nurtured upon an incessant propaganda of fear. While such an economy may produce a sense of seeming prosperity for the moment, it rests on an illusionary foundation of complete unreliability and renders among our political leaders almost a greater fear of peace than is their fear of war.”
-General Douglas McArthur (1880-1964), 1952

(the 2008 crisis, infinite free money for “the markets” but not for all, the Covid scam, etc.)

“The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labour. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent.”
-Emmanuel Goldstein, “1984” (part 2, chapter 9)

But there’s a more recent trend:

Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi were killed and IRAK/LYBIA invaded after they started selling OIL in different currencies than the US dollar (impeding the petro-dollar system).

Wars are started to preserve the USD status of the main international reserve currency.


Until recently:

“Bankers dominate both business and government because they have the ability to supply or refuse to supply the capital required to anyone. Controlling the [fiat] money supply allows manipulators to create alternate cycles of boom and bust, scarcity and abundance, at will, hereby controlling the world economy.”
-John Coleman, “Conspirators’ Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300”

And today in 2022:

"The game of nominal value of money is over, as this system does not allow to control the supply of resources. Our product, our rules. We don’t play by the rules we didn’t create."
-Alexey Miller, head of Gazprom, Saint Petersburg International Economic Forum (June 16th, 2022)

Russia just introduced monetary system based on natural resources (tangible assets).

The model that Zoltan Poszar (“Bretton Woods III”, Credit Suisse) called “outside money”: natural resources, as opposed to the occidental “interior money” based on confidence (fiat money) and which is created by expanding debt forever - a model used to dominate without ever delivering value (through tangible counter-parties generated by work and natural resources).

“From the Bretton Woods era backed by gold bullion, to Bretton Woods II backed by inside money (Treasuries with un-hedgeable confiscation risks), to Bretton Woods III backed by outside money (gold bullion and other commodities).”
-Zoltan Poszar (“Bretton Woods III”, Credit Suisse)
(click on “more” and then “Save PDF/Print”)

“Bretton Woods” refers to the international monetary system put in place after World War II.
It was based upon a hybrid reserve standard of gold and the U.S. dollar.

In 1971 Richard Nixon unilaterally broke the link between the U.S. dollar and gold, defaulting on the U.S. obligation to exchange dollars held by other central banks for gold at a fixed exchange rate.

“Bretton Woods II” introduced a system of floating exchange rates among fiat currencies not backed by gold. This is “inside money”: fiat currency reserves held by and at central banks, and the belief that these assets were as good and as safe as physical gold held in central bank vaults under the original Bretton Woods regime.

This system exploded in March 2022 by the decision of the U.S. and other large central banks to freeze the foreign exchange reserves deposited with them by the Russian central bank. Confidence has been destroyed, and everybody wondered who would be next on the U.S. target list.

“Bretton Woods III” comes back to tangible assets: “outside money” (gold bullion and other commodities). This implies the demolition of “Bretton Woods II” - the international financial system which has been in place for half a century - and a most likely “haircut” for stock/real-estate investors (since the value of these assets has been inflated by money created out of thin air).

“There are few historians who would challenge the fact that the funding of World War I, World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War was accomplished … through the Federal Reserve System. An overview of all wars since the establishment of the Bank of England in 1694 suggests that most of them would have been greatly reduced in severity, or perhaps not even fought at all, without fiat money. It is the ability of governments to acquire money without direct taxation that makes modern warfare possible, and a central bank has become the preferred method of accomplishing that.”
-G. Edward Griffin, “The Creature from Jekyll Island”


The alleged distinction between currency versus money deliberately ignores and misunderstands the actual history of the emergence of metal money as means to pay mercenaries, which was the actual context inside of which gold became the money of the War Kings, which gradually morphed to become the electronic money of the Fraud Kings, the international bankers:

“The first panacea of a mismanaged nation is inflation of the currency; the second is war. Both bring a temporary prosperity; both bring a permanent ruin. But both are the refuge of political and economic opportunists.” -Ernest Hemingway (1899-1961)

“Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”
-James Madison (1751-1836), fourth president of the United States (1809-1817)

“They say the problem is civil disobedience. But that is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience. Our problem is the large number of people around the world who are following the dictates of their government and are therefore going into wars where millions of people are killed because of this civilian obedience. Our problem is that people are obedient, filling the prisons for trifles, while the big criminals do the state business. That’s our problem.”
-Howard Zinn, American historian (1922-2010)