Last Friday I encouraged you to watch Tucker Carlson inter Russian President Putin. I hope you did ! If not you can < click here >
This article will cover my thoughts and opinion on some of the content of that interview. Here goes…enjoy…
I thought the Carlson/Putin interview was very interesting and informative…and a little disturbing at the same time. The whole point for me watching the interview was to gain information. However, I also had two specific mission points:
- What questions would Tucker Carlson ask Putin?
- How would Putin justify the invasion of Ukraine?
Why worry about the questions Tucker would ask? Simple, trust but verify. I have already stated I trust Carlson and 
recommend him as a quality source of information. I also continually question and verify everything…including sources like Carlson.
Outcome: I though Tucker Carlson did a great job of questioning Putin. Did he ask the same questions I would? No, but that isn’t a criteria by which I judged Carlson.
As far as Putin justifying the invasion of Ukraine…well, I have mixed emotions on that one.
I tried to go into the interview with an objective and open mind. But, I am not without bias…of which I hopefully sufficiently suppressed while listening to and internalizing Putin’s responses.
A couple things came to mind prior to and during the interview:
- Russia is not the Soviet Union.
- Putin was trained by, and worked for, the KGB under the old Soviet Union. Hence, a master of deception.
- Putin is ultimately a politician, albeit possibly more of a ruler than an elected politician in a traditional western culture sense. Hence, in the final analysis, as with any politician…he can only be partially trusted when he speaks.
- Putin obviously loves Russia. No, it doesn’t matter ‘why’, he just loves his country and will put Russia first in relation to global issues. As he should, that’s his job as their President/leader.
I won’t cover the entire interview blow-by-blow…not needed, you can judge it all for yourself. I will point out several things that struck me…for various reasons.
250 years of history vs 1200 years of history –
As Putin was going over the history of Russia it reminded me that Russia has 1200 years of history under their belt vs 250 
for the USA. Russia started under the name Rus uniting two groups of eastern slavs…and their capital early on was in Kiev. Yup, that Kiev. So before 900AD Russia’s borders included the lands that are now called Ukraine. Yup, that is important.
This difference in nation age also means that a whole lot more, good and bad, occurred in Russia compared to the USA.
NATO as a threat –
My question that came to me…”Was Putin paranoid about NATO or was NATO a legitimate concern to him and Russia?”
This question I had during the interview caught me by surprise, so I had to think it through. NATO was established in 1949. Its 
sole original purpose was to be a deterrent to the USSR (Soviet Union) expanding more into Europe. However, if you read the revised version on the NATO website, now it states it was also to forbid the revival of nationalist militarism in Europe through a strong North American presence on the continent, and encouraging European political integration.
Objectively speaking:
- USSR no longer exists so there is no longer a threat of them expanding. And realistically, Russia contracted from its Soviet borders.
- Europe is almost 100% politically integrated. Technically speaking, Russia is in eastern Europe and Asia. However, 75% of Russia is in Asia. Why is that important? Is Europe politically integrated? Ah, it’s called the European Union (EU). And the two players not in the EU are Belarus and Russia. Both of whom the EU wouldn’t/won’t allow in. And why would NATO want a politically integrated Europe to begin with?
- Let’s talk ‘nationalist militarism’…weird term. Militarism is a philosophy or system that places excessive importance on military power. Nationalism is a belief that the individual’s loyalty and devotion to the nation surpasses other individual or group interests. So, nationalist militarism in the context of NATO would be an excessive importance of a strong military in a European country that places its importance above the EU as a whole. So NATO wanted the US military in Europe to prevent a EU country from building a strong military more so than other EU country’s.
Here is where I get bogged down in my thinking a little bit. The USSR is gone and no longer a threat to do any expanding. When the USSR fell, the subsequent Russia willingly let their satellite countries go their separate ways. And taking Ukraine out of the picture for a minute, Russia has not tried to expand into Europe since its revival/reversion. But NATO specifically referred to “USSR” and the USSR no longer exists. Based on all of that…NATO achieved its primary, maybe only, mission.
Speaking to ‘European political integration’…well, I would say that mission is just as accomplished…successfully so. Yup, virtually the only integration left is Russia and Belarus…both of which have not been welcomed into the EU.
Then all that is left is ‘nationalist militarism’ and that is just a plain weird one. Namely, why was the USA to keep a military presence on another continent to keep the peace? Who died and made the USA the military god of the world?
Oddly enough…NATO requires NATO member countries to spend at least 2% of their GDP on the military. Why odd? 
Because many of the NATO countries would not spend that much on their military were it not for NATO. So NATO in-effect ups the militarization of Europe by mandate. Again, oddly…2 out of the 3 largest militaries in the EU are Italy and Germany…both of whom were allies in WWII fighting against the rest of the Europe and the USA.
From the NATO website…”NATO’s essential and enduring purpose is to safeguard the freedom and security of all its members by political and military means. Collective defense is at the heart of the Alliance and creates a spirit of solidarity and cohesion among its members.” Really?
So NATO’s original purpose is no longer valid…and they simply make up a new mission. But hang on a second…what is the whole purpose of the United Nations?
You only have to read the UN Charter, Article 1 Section 1 for that, “To maintain international peace and security…” Odd, that sounds pretty much like NATO…doesn’t it? So why the redundancy?
Let’s touch on this point for a minute…
“It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world.”
September 19, 1796 President George Washington’s farewell address.
What? Why?
Let me share this with you from Marc Chieppa at the Tenth Amendment Center…
“The Founding Fathers of the United States envisioned a government just large enough to defend the country’s borders and it’s citizens. They warned against war for resources, brought on by a politicized economy. They warned against treaties and agreements with foreign government, and the loss of control Americans would have over why war was fought. Finally, they warned against the industry of war.”
Anyone who knows US history and the Founders at all knows Chieppa is spot on! And Washington was no slouch either when it came to guiding the USA. And yet here we are, tied up in an entangling alliance with NATO and dozens of countries that could force the USA into war. Why would we do that? Why would we want that? Why would we fly in the face of our first President, a Founding Father, the man who led our military to victory over a tyrannical and oppressive empire?
Would it be fair to say…the answer is simple…no patriot would…nor would any patriot advocate that we would. Yup, why would any patriot so blatantly go against the wisdom of Washington and other Founders? Yeah, they wouldn’t, plain and simple. Is that fair of me?
Yeah, let’s now do this…what is an empire? The dictionary states, “An empire is a major political unit with a large territory or a number of territories or peoples under one ruler, or something resembling such a unit.”
The I beg the question…Is NATO a unit that can rule over their member countries? The answer is a resounding YES!!
- Article 2 “The Parties will contribute…” “They will seek…”
- Article 3 “the Parties, separately and jointly…will maintain…”
- Article 4 “The Parties will consult together…”
- Article 5 “The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all…will assist the Party or Parties so attacked…”
Need I go on? NATO does in-fact rule over its member countries. The word “will” in the The North Atlantic Treaty document leaves no room for question or challenge on that question. And the US is a signatory to that agreement. Hence, the US is ruled by NATO…at least to a significant degree in military matters…a very significant degree.
So my friends, in my opinion, NATO fits the description of an empire and NATO certainly is 100% contrary to George Washington’s and Thomas Jefferson’s warnings. And Washington’s and Jefferson’s knowledge and wisdom is good enough for me.
Why is this important? Because NATO is squeezing Russia. A simple review of history clearly shows that the geography of present day Ukraine was originally part of Rus (Russia’s original name) 1200 years ago. Granted, parts of that geography has changed back and forth as far as who ruled over it. But, tell me this…when did a “Ukraine” first show up as an actual country? Yeah, you can’t really define that as far as its current boundaries and/or ethic group. There are historians, and with some credibility, can define Ukraine’s start as the early 1900’s when it became part of the USSR. Then Ukraine declared its independence in 1991 but still under Russian influence. Then in 2014 the USA helped a rebel Ukrainian political element overthrow the elected government of Ukraine for the sole purpose to come under the influence of the US.
So my bottom line on NATO becomes clear:
- Yes, NATO is a legitimate concern for Russia and Putin, at least from his perspective. A huge military alliance, an empire, that was formed to dominate over a single country…USSR originally, but now Russia. And NATO country’s political leaders have made it clear…Russia must be defeated and a regime change must occur. No, Putin is not paranoid, NATO is out to get him and destroy or at least subjugate his country.
- The USA has no business whatsoever being part of NATO. It is an entangling alliance that our Founders worried would take us to war…and George Washington specifically warned us not to be a part of anything like NATO. We ignore their wisdom and knowledge at our peril.
- My opinion on NATO won’t be a popular one with the military-industrial complex folks, the authoritarians, the military idol worshipers, and the globalists. But that is okay, I am happy, comfortable, and confident siding my opinion with the Founding Fathers.
So realistically and objectively the whole Russia, USA, NATO, Ukraine thing is far more complicated than at first glance.
Ruling Elites –
Putin made an interesting comment when Tucker was talking about why the US wouldn’t engage Russia diplomatically for 
a solution to the Ukraine War. Putin mentioned the ‘ruling elites’ are calling the shots in the US. Man, did Putin nail that one on the head or what!!
Anyone with eyes to see or ears to hear know that the US is run by ruling elites. All one has to do is look at the last two Presidential elections as well as the coup against Trump led by the FBI and CIA.
Now I ask you this…why we are subjugated to NATO? No nation has ever been a threat to the US. Well, not since 1812 when the British Empire invaded us. Why are we so worried about other countries that have been fighting each other for hundreds if not thousands of years? Why are we spending trillions of dollars on defending countries that are none of our business and have nothing to do with the security of the USA? And why are we racking up massive national debt to do it!!
Why do we get ourselves involved in entangling alliances that our Founders warned us not to do !?!
So who are the ruling elites? That is a really interesting and intriguing question…but you can answer at least part of that.
Tucker Carlson / Putin / Biden –
I am very grateful to Tucker Carlson for his interview with Russian President Putin. A lot of information came out that made me think through a number of issues from a new perspective. Putin is obviously very smart, but also devious, he is dangerous, a politician, a ruler, and from what I can tell a criminal (the criminal part not gained from the interview). He is also very proud of Russia, its history, and has a Russia-First vision. And to sit there for 2 hours being questioned by Carlson…well, few heads of state could do that.
As an outcome of the interview I cannot help but think of Biden. Biden is (at least has been) politically smart/savvy, he is very devious, he is very dangerous, a typical politician, a tyrannical ruler, and we know he leads the Biden Crime Family. And I think Biden is only proud of the US because it gives him power. And he has an America-First vision…but only when it comes to making his crime syndicate family money.
What is the difference between Biden and Putin? Putin is intelligent, Biden is dumb as a rock. Putin is tough personally, Biden is a bully (weak of character). Putin is driven by a Russia-First vision, Biden is motivated only by a Biden-First policy.
Summary –
Back to NATO. Is NATO or the United Nations more dangerous for the USA? For me…NATO is extremely dangerous for the USA. Because…NATO can control the US military. Anyone who says differently…well, they must be ignorant, stupid, or have an agenda that doesn’t match up with George Washington and Thomas Jefferson…and the reality of the actual situation. One only has to read the NATO documents to know that much. Test me…Who could get us in a world war the easiest and quickest? Yup, NATO…virtually overnight.
For me, the interview brought into clarity who might just be the biggest global threat to America. And you are right…it ain’t Russia.
But what the interview didn’t do…it didn’t tell me who the ‘ruling elites’ are. But, it did give me a better clue as to what organizations they belong to…or at least which ones they use.
You know the phrase when investigating crimes, “Follow the money!” Yeah, who makes money off of war? The military-industrial complex. And who dictates that countries MUST spend money on equipment bought from the military-industrial complex? NATO. Oh, and who is prolonging the war in Ukraine? Let me think for a minute…oh, yeah…NATO.
Clues are just laying around for those who really want to see them. But what about those who can’t see them…or who try to hide them? If they can’t see…that is ignorance. But those who try to hide those self-evident clues…like NATO and military-industrial complex advocates…I wonder exactly what their motives are, their backgrounds, who writes their checks, what is their endgame?
The interview was very informative, shed more light on who Putin is, revealed a lot about the Russia-Ukraine war, reminded me of Russia’s history. And one more thing…
Russia wants the war to end.
Sure Russia could just declare victory and withdraw to borders it now controls and cease offensive operations. But that would be hugely embarrassing to Russia and it would destroy Putin.
Russia could declare defeat and withdraw back to Russian borders. But that would be intolerably embarrassing to Russia and it would destroy Putin (probably get him killed).
Here is an interesting thought…since the USA ordered England’s PM to stop the negotiated peace plan between Russia and Ukraine 1-1/2 years ago…the USA could initiate new peace talks. But the US won’t do that. Why? The US government and the authoritarians want that war.
It is not our citizens dying everyday, not our towns and cities being destroyed, our military isn’t suffering daily in the trenches…what do we care!? But most of all, the US government, along with NATO, are accomplishing two goals; 1) we are destroying Russia, 2) making 100’s of billions of dollars for the global military-industrial complex. And who owns the global military-industrial complex? Yup, the global elites…and what is their goal?
But…I could be wrong about all of it! What do you think of this Carlson / Putin interview?
FWIW…Watch what governments and the specific people who criticize Tucker Carlson for interviewing Putin. That will tell you volumes!!
Related Articles –
Q & A Time…Ask me a question or send a message…
2009 - 2024 Copyright © AHTrimble.com ~ All rights reserved
No reproduction or other use of this content
without expressed written permission from AHTrimble.com
No legal, economic, or financial advice is given, no expertise to be assumed.
See Content Use Policy for more information.
A.H. Trimble - Emergency preparedness information for disasters and grid-down 