The title of this text is most likely “unacceptable” for all defenders (“the curators”) of our folly.
By the way, it is worth knowing that with those who usage this "argument" in discussion (they share statements on those who "accept" and those who "do not accept") it is simply not worth talking about (they cannot be helped and we will not learn anything from them). The title itself will most likely upset all pro-American politicians (until late there were no others) and their media servants, as well as propagandaists most frequently posing as journalists and scientists. In their view, the US is by definition anti-Russian and their historical function is "the defeat of Russia" and an unselfish mission to spread in the planet of "freedom and democracy" (especially in Iraq and Afghanistan). Russia in their consciousness was (as though), is and (always) will be a "imperium of evil", and the symbol of the US is simply a mediocre actor who besides played the function of president of the country in a weak way by 2 terms.
The curators of our folly cannot (and will not fit) in the head that the US had their historical successes at a time erstwhile they could coexist with Russia, and periods of hostility between these countries frequently ended in defeats for the US little often. I will give just 1 of many examples: alternatively of quietly giving russian aggression to Afghanistan, the U.S. authorities began armed with the rape of the mujahideen there, giving them a weapon they had never given back. After all, sooner or later the russian Union would pacify this country by suffocating, or simply locating local opponents. With the support of the US, however, they won the war with the USSR and then defeated their stupid sponsor, who later invaded their country. What was the point of doing this, knowing the finale of russian aggression against Afghanistan? After all, the U.S. support for the "fighting Afghanistan" has been "bred" for generations of unconvinced enemies of the West (for the mujahideen, the "West" are not only English and American, but besides Russians), who present have victories over 2 superpowers. With specified patterns, all pauper in the alleged 3rd planet can believe that the victorious rematch over (as though) the all-powerful “West” is at hand. simply put, it was the nonsense of American politics at a time erstwhile it was anti-Russian (then anti-Soviet) that caused Washington's politics to fail.
Perhaps the fresh president of the United States simply does not want defeats (he is only 4 years old) and has decided to accomplish territorial and political successes. If he's on his way with Russia, he'll choose this variant. He knows that American support for Ukraine has failed for the US, so we request to turn the alliance and turn this war into political success. And that it is possible to demolish the alleged European task or transform the EU into 1 superstate. There's nothing to put into this business, why? The war in Ukraine is to end with a common American-Russian triumph at the expense of the erstwhile vassals: they will pay for it – especially by guarding the demarcation line dividing the "warring Ukraine".
Witold Modzelewski
Think Poland, No. 11-12 (16-23.03.2025)
