0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
770 $

“Loud Drums of War”: The Dangers of a “Longer and Extended War” in Ukraine. Towards a Unipolar World?

Support SouthFront

“Loud Drums of War”: The Dangers of a “Longer and Extended War” in Ukraine. Towards a Unipolar World?

Illustrative Image

Written by Wolfgang Effenberger. Originally published on Global Research

After EU Council President Charles Michel proposed to make Ukraine and Moldova candidates for EU membership, the draft final declaration of the June 23-24 EU summit in Brussels on June 21, 2022, stated,

“The European Council has decided to grant candidate country status to Ukraine and Moldova.”(1) (Georgia is to be granted candidate status as well.) It is assumed that the 27 heads of state and government will follow the EU Commission’s recommendation.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky reiterated that he believes Ukraine already belongs to Europe. The country attacked by Russia proves every day that it is already part of a united European value area, he said. 

“Loud Drums of War”: The Dangers of a “Longer and Extended War” in Ukraine. Towards a Unipolar World?

Click to see full-size image

Since June 21, the self-propelled howitzer 2000 promised by Germany “has finally become part of the 155-millimeter howitzer arsenal of the Ukrainian artillery,” Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksiy Resnikov wrote on Twitter. In doing so, he thanked Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht (SPD) “for all efforts” to support Ukraine.(2)

On the eve of June 22 – on this day in 1941, Nazi Germany invaded the then-Soviet Union (killing over 26 million people) – shells from Western-supplied guns hit Luhansk and Donetsk. In Russia, candles were lit to commemorate the Great Patriotic War.

This June 22 would have been an opportunity to pause once to remember the catastrophe of World War 2 and to look for ways to peace. But the opposite was the case. On that day, the German mainstream media again incited action against Russia.

“Loud Drums of War”: The Dangers of a “Longer and Extended War” in Ukraine. Towards a Unipolar World?

Click to see full-size image

While British Prime Minister Boris Johnson warns the West of a “long war” in Ukraine(3) in the Times, the Chief of the British Army Staff, General Sir Patrick Sanders, tunes soldiers to fight alongside their allies to defeat Russia: “Russia’s invasion of Ukraine underlines our core mission to protect the United Kingdom – by being prepared to fight and win wars on the mainland,”(4) Sanders said on Sky News on June 19. 

British army chief warns ‘must prepare to fight in Europe'(5)

On the same day, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg also expressed his concern in an interview with the Bild newspaper that the war could drag on for years; should support for Ukraine weaken, a heavy price would be paid.(6) 

The most incredible statement was made on Friday, June 17, 22 by Germany’s Air Force Chief Ingo Gerhartz (56) at the Kiel International Sea Powers Symposium:

“For credible deterrence, we need both the means and the political will to implement nuclear deterrence if necessary.”(7)


In view of the ever louder drums of war that can currently be heard, a reference to the parallels of the present situation to that before 1914 seems not only permissible but even necessary.

After the imperial wars of 1898 (USA against the great power Spain in Cuba and the Philippines), 1899- 1901 (UK against the Boers in Africa) and 1900 (the “value West” against China), tensions were building up in the world and especially on the part of Great Britain, France and Russia against Germany. From early December 1907 to February 1909, U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt(8) had a large part of his new war fleet steam around the globe in sensational voyages, to the delight of naval strategist Alfred Thayer Mahan.(9) Sixteen modern armored battleships and cruisers demonstrated their superiority in striking power and mobility all around the world. 

Today, 11 nuclear-powered U.S. aircraft carriers are in service on the world’s oceans along with their accompanying fleets.

In 2020, NATO and U.S. military spending totaled $1,102 billion, while that of China and Russia was $314 billion. Of this, Germany and Russia’s spending balanced out at about $60 billion.(10) 

Such an imbalance(11) was also evident before World War I(12):

“Loud Drums of War”: The Dangers of a “Longer and Extended War” in Ukraine. Towards a Unipolar World?

Armament budgets 1880-1913 in U.S. Dollars (in thousands)

Only a few weeks after the assassination in Sarajevo on July 28, 1914, the time had come. On the morning of August 5, 1914, the New York Times ran the headline,

“Loud Drums of War”: The Dangers of a “Longer and Extended War” in Ukraine. Towards a Unipolar World?

Click to see full-size image

In the same issue, the NYT published a column by H.G. Wells in which he wrote that “the sword is now drawn for peace” and “never was a war so just as the war now against Germany.” Wells was convinced that Germany would be crushed and ripe for revolution in 2 to 3 months.(13)

Even before this issue of the NYT appeared, the British cut the German-American Atlantic cable in the early hours of the morning; thus, news from Berlin no longer reached the U.S. and vice versa.

With the beginning of the war, Russian news portals were blocked and further dissemination of Russian news was made a punishable offense. 

One day after Woodrow Wilson’s pledge of neutrality on August 19, 1914, the naval blockade of Germany by Great Britain, which was contrary to international law, began without any major protest from the United States. This blockade was intended to isolate and economically strangle Germany. According to the official historian of the Royal Navy, Sir Julian Corbett, this blockade had been planned from 1908  by Lord Hankey in the Committee of Imperial Defence (CID) with “an orderly completeness of detail which has no parallel in our history”(14).

In fact, little is known to this day about “how and why a scant dozen leading U.S. investment bankers supported Britain from the beginning through illegal acts of war.”

With the election of a clueless U.S. president in late 1912 and the creation of the FED in 1913 (unlimited debt), the decision to go to war had been made.(15)

Realignments after World War I

Three times in the 20th century the international order was “reordered”(16) 

1) With the Versailles system of peace treaties and the creation of the League of Nations in 1920,

2) With the Potsdam Agreement and the creation of the United Nations in 1945, and

3) After the end of the Cold War in 1990 with the “Charter of Paris” and the creation of the OSCE.

With the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact (and the Soviet Union), the world hoped for a peaceful future.

US-NATO Wars of the Post Cold War Era

But after the victory of the “West” in 1990, “wars of order” [responsibility to protect] were instigated in many places in the world, such as the war against Iraq orchestrated by Bush Sr. in 1991. Some may still remember the unsavory Kuweit “incubator lie” that ultimately tipped the scales in favor of the UN’s blessing for that war.

When, on March 24, 1999, NATO launched the first war of aggression in its history without a UN mandate and thus in violation of international law against a sovereign country, it was immediately followed by a new doctrine permitting future interventions without a UN mandate. 

The wars of the so-called “Value West” [“Humanitarian West”, under “Responsibility to Protect”] in Iraq as well as in Afghanistan, Libya and Syria did not reorganize anything, but only led to “failed states”, i.e. into never-ending chaos – also a war crime. 

NATO’s war in Yugoslavia began on March 24, 1999 – 12 days earlier Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary had joined NATO. Was this just another war in the wake of the post-Yugoslav secession wars since the early 1990s? Certainly not, because 4 imperial motives of the USA can be identified(17)

1) A war of NATO Against the rest of Yugoslavia in order to insert it into the periphery of the West.

2) A war of the USA, in order to subjugate EU-Europe further to their subordination.

3) “A war whose long-distance effect was also aimed at further chastening Russia”; and

4) A war to demonstrate “NATO or US superiority over China”(18).

Color Revolutions

After the Yugoslav war, so-called “color revolutions” were concerted in Eastern Europe, most of which then led to regime change and desired EU and NATO accession.  

Canadian professor of economics, Michel Chossudovsky, drew attention in June 2015 to the fact that behind the Ukraine crisis lies a broad military strategy that goes far beyond Ukraine:

“NATO – and when we say NATO, we also mean the United States – is engaging in war games on Russia’s doorstep … Now they are threatening Russia with nuclear weapons, and it’s obvious that the nuclear option has been discussed in the U.S. Congress.”(19)

Then, in the summer of 2015, the Ukrainian parliament passed a law to that effect,(20) stating that deployment of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction on the soil of Ukraine would be legal “until the deployment target is reached.” Previously, this was ruled out by law.

From 2015, NATO’s maneuver frequency (such as DEFENDER 20/21) on Russia’s doorstep increased dramatically. In parallel, the military infrastructure road and rail from Antwerp/Bremerhaven/ Hamburg towards Görlitz, Krakow and Kiev was made fit for war. 

The Role of Germany 

Three days after the Russian attack on Ukraine – just as illegal under international law as all U.S. wars since the attack on Yugoslavia – Chancellor Olaf Scholz introduced his government’s statement on Feb. 27 with the words:

“February 24, 2022 marks a turning point in the history of our continent.”(21)

In a firm voice, Scholz castigated Vladimir Putin’s cold-bloodedness and ruthlessness over his war of aggression, which he said could not be justified by anything, and asked:

“May might break right?”. The rhetorical answer (with respect to Russia) is clearly no. However, different standards seem to apply to the United States. 

Furthermore, Scholz announced ambitious foreign and military policy goals to the applause of the Bundestag majority: Not only to increase the current German military budget to more than 70 billion euros, but in addition to that, to increase the striking power of the Bundeswehr, a so-called “special fund” of 100 billion euros from the current budget. As a reminder: Three days after the start of the war in 1914, Kaiser Wilhelm II convened the Reichstag on August 4 to vote on the war credits. At that time, the term “war loans” was used in all honesty, whereas today the term “special assets” is used to conceal from the public that this is once again a matter of debt. 

The fact that Scholz was able to announce within three days “a complete and detailed concept for a no-alternative swing to the foreign policy course of the U.S. and the abrupt transformation of the Federal Republic into a fiscal warfare state suggests that the state apparatus had drafts already at its disposal.”(22) 

It would be interesting to know who was involved in drafting Scholz’s speech and when Scholz first read it.

Two days before the governmental declaration, the SPD newspaper “Vorwärts” stated: 

“According to media reports, top U.S. diplomats – and also Foreign Minister [Secretary of State] Blinken himself – are engaged in these hours in direct talks to bring about the broadest possible condemnation in the General Assembly.”(23) In a speech to the United Nations that was celebrated as “emotional,” Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock (Alliance 90/The Greens) condemned Russia in a way “that elevates Germany, the old World War II loser, to the role of moral judge and demonstrates what “values-based foreign policy” means.”(24)

After three days of debate, 141 nations voted yes on March 2 to the UN General Assembly resolution condemning the Russian invasion, with five votes against (Russia, Belarus, Syria, North Korea, and Eritrea) and 35 abstentions (Including China, India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan, which together make up about half of humanity). Twelve nations were absent from the vote. According to Michael von der Schulenburg, a former top diplomat working for the UN and OSCE, the support for the resolution by most of the small and medium-sized countries had the background that they wanted to strengthen the UN Charter and the ban on all military action as a whole for political reasons. So far, three other permanent members of the Security Council, the U.S., Britain and France, had also broken international law and waged illegal wars without consequences.

“Loud Drums of War”: The Dangers of a “Longer and Extended War” in Ukraine. Towards a Unipolar World?

Click to see the fill-size image

In Asia, only the usual allies of the West, i.e. Japan, Australia and Singapore, participate in the comprehensive sanctions packages against Russia, while the other states in Asia, Africa and Latin America did not. For the Global South, this is again a white man’s war in the North, like the first and second world wars of the 20th century and the cold war.

The supposed winners of the Cold War had expected the loser to cave in, submit to its role as a “regional power” (Obama) and serve as a junior partner to the West. Even today, they are waiting for a coup by a Moscow elite that would rather be the junior partner of the U.S. than that of the Chinese.

With the attack on Ukraine on Feb. 24, the European order that had more or less held since 1950 had come to an end, said the two “European activists and publicists” Vincent-Immanuel Herr and Martin Speer on April 2 in the guest commentary 

“After the war of aggression: the birth of geopolitical Europe” in the Neue Zürcher Zeitung. They demand that the EU must now develop into a “value superpower” capable of defense, and in their article they focus on two subjects in particular: “military and security policy issues” and the development of a “European we-feeling.”(25)

That this defensible “value superpower” allows whistleblower Julian Assange to languish in a British prison for years and soon even be extradited to the U.S., and refused asylum to Edward Snowden, so that he had to flee to Russia, is more than shameful. A real “value superpower” must be built on a different foundation than that of the military and a questionable “European we-feeling”. 

This foundation was laid more than 200 years ago by Immanuel Kant in his work “Perpetual Peace”, the formulations of which are the basis of our international law today. 

Concluding Remarks

At the moment, unfortunately, it looks like the ever-increasing bellicosity of government and media will expand the war and eventually lead NATO into active war participation as outlined in the U.S. long-term strategy TRADOC 525-3-1 “Win in a Complex World 2020-2040” (2014).

Meanwhile, the German people are being attuned to blood, sweat and tears. Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck predicted,

“We are all getting poorer”(26).

And Christian Lindner, Germany’s Minister of Finance declared on the memorable June 22 day that he expects: “three to five years of shortages”(27). The task now, he said, is to defend “the substance of the German economy in these times of uncertainty.”

So we should be prepared for a prolonged war – making a “A European security order encompassing the EU as well as Russia” a very distant prospect.





4) Ibid

5)https://www.merkur.de/politik/ukraine-krieg-news-grossbritannien-armee-chef-warnung-kampf-europa-vorbereitung-91618815.html 20. Juni 2022



8)Als Imperialist der Mahan-Schule verfolgte Theodore Roosevelt eine offensive Außenpolitik mit zahlreichen Militäreinsätzen zum „Schutz amerikanischer Interessen“, so etwa in Dom.Rep., Honduras, Kolumbien, Kuba, Marokko, Syrien.

9)Vgl. Henry F. Pringle: Theodore Roosevelt, a Biography, New York 1931, S. 409 ff.; XX, pp. 535 ff

10) SIPRI Military Expenditure 2020 (April 2021)

11) Zahlen aus Engelbrecht, Helmut C./Hanighen, F.C.: MERCHANTS OF DEATH A Study of the International Armament Industry, Carter Lane 1934, S. 263

12) Da die Angabe für 1914 fehlte, wurde die von 1910 (348.032.000 )genommen. Die tatsächlichen Ausgaben dürften deutlich darüber gelegen haben.

13) Walter Millis: Road to War, America 1914 -1917, Boston/New York 1935, S. 47

14) Corbett, Julian: Official History. Naval Operations, London 1921,Vol. 1, p.18

15) Helmut Roewer: Unterwegs zur Weltherrschaft Warum England den Ersten Weltkrieg auslöste und Amerika ihn gewann. Zürich 2016, S. 16

16) Zeitschrift Marxistische Erneuerung, Nr. 130, Juni 2022, S. 16

17)Ibid, S. 15

18)Erhard Crome: In tempori belli, in: WeltTrends, Nr. 23, 1999, S. 138

19)Zitiert in Peter Orzechowski: Ist die Gefahr eines Atomkriegs real? KOPP exklusiv 24 /22, S. 7

20)„Gesetz Über die Bedingungen der Streitkräfte anderer Staaten auf dem Territorium der Ukraine“.

21) https://www.br.de/nachrichten/deutschland-welt/zeitenwende-im-bundestag,SyfVl4E

22)Zeitschrift Marxistische Erneuerung, Nr. 130, Juni 2022, S. 12

23)Zitat aus der SPD Zeitung “Vorwärts”. 25.02.2022


25)Zeit-Fragen  14. Juni 2022/ 30. Jahrgang , S. 4



Translated from German. Minor Editing by Global Research.

Wolfgang Effenberger, born in 1946, a former officer in the German armed forces, has been a committed peace advocate since his first book, “Pax americana” (2004). In April 2022, he published “Die unterschätzte Macht: Von Geo- bis Biopolitik – Plutokraten transformieren die Welt”. Other books by him on the subject: “Wiederkehr der Hasardeure” (2014, Koautor Willy Wimmer), die Trilogie „Europas Verhängnis 14/18“ (2018/19) sowie “Schwarzbuch EU & NATO” (2020).


Support SouthFront


Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

England has always hated Russia -Churchill tried to get America to attack Russia in 1945 go way back to the Kaiser and still the same even though the first George King was German and could hardly speak English and Queen Victoria,s husband was German and the Royal family had to change their name just before the outbreak of WW1 yet that went down the drain in the 1930,s when England supported Hitler as they hated Soviet Russia even more so banks (Jewish ) gave money for building up German industry.

Florian Geyer

The name that Churchill chose for the allied ground attack on Russia in 1945/46 was Operation Unthinkable. Churchill also wanted to use the remnants of the German Army in his plan to plunder the resources of the Soviet Union.


that is irrelevant. who the fuck gives rat’s ass about england with population and land mass similar to south korea and non existent war depth.

Caitlin Morris

I earned 💰$6,000 a month ago by the utilization of working on-line best for 5 to 6 hours on my pc and this was perfect to the point that I as I would like to think couldn’t acknowledge as true with sooner than running in this site. Here’s what I do…………>>> 𝙒𝙤𝙧𝙠𝙨𝙛𝙪𝙡.𝙘𝙤𝙢

Last edited 1 month ago by Caitlin Morris
Cuntlin Morris

I make 💰💰💰💰 of cash sucking dick and selling my pussy to fUkrainian war lord Gaylensky

GTU-UK284Hdumb p00fs FULLOVIT

Look forward to see nato with a bloodied nose,as for germany are always on the losing side (period)



All this crap ends the first time a nuclear power facility is struck with a nuclear weapon.

A billion curries of radioactive waste is atomized and spewed into the atmosphere and 50 tons of fissionable material in a cooling pond detonates in a massive nuclear explosion.

The explosion creates a 100 mile wide nuclear crater. A nuclear blast that triggers a global radioactive coffin event.

Give a monkey a gun, and sooner or later he will suck on the barrel with his finger on the trigger.


Give a Zionist a bank, and they will countefiet your currency into oblivion and parasite your resources, human and natural, like the vampires they are…

Hopefully the nuclear holocaust won’t happen, a scenario with no winners, even bacteria would suffer extinctions…

The solution is an honest money system, and for the Zionists to hang for their crimes against humanity, specifically against hetero-caucasian Christian men.

Power comes from the Barrel of a Gun

Central issue

WW3 has started a lot of countries have still to pick a side. They will be forced to soon few will be allowed to remain neutral. NATO hopes they can weaken Russia enough so they can then take out China with no Russian interference.


how do you think nuclear powers could be taken out? without nuclear war? In conventionar warfare, due to the shere size of russia and china, nobody can really invade and take them over. With nukes. everyone loses. so your statement is just idiotic . There will be no war. Ukraine will be “sold” to the russians in exchange for gas and oil and everything will return to normal.


Ukraine is softening up russia…USA-NATO will finish them off…


stop with the cocaine it is bad for your mental health

Joe Bidet Is A Senile Nonce

Just like the mighty JewSA finished off in Vietnam and Afghanistan for example? Clown world dreams from a deluded fat dumb Yank.

tommy tranny sawyer

you finished off in my Oklahoma lgbt brothel—after sodomized daily 8-20 times for 3 years director sells you for 8 roubles to retarded hillbillies

The Objective

Finland and Sweden just joined NATO. NATO is committed to defeating Russia in Ukraine. NATO is fighting a cheap war with minimal risk of a nuclear escalation despite Putin’s bluff. He definitely will not use nukes on Ukraine or NATO countries because of the existential risk of such a move.

Suddenly now, Russia wants an end to the war. I’ve been repeating here that this war is Putin’s biggest mistake. I don’t want a NATO victory anywhere. It’s an evil empire and the biggest enemy of Islam and Muslims. But I think Russia’s biggest mistake of the century is siding with the Shias and dictators instead of the wider Sunni Muslim world. Imagine what even a temporary alliance between Russia and Turkey/Pakistan/Malaysia/Indonesia could bring from Russia.

But Putin alienated all these countries by his indiscriminate bombing of Syria and his support for despots like Elsisi. This earned Russia the anger of the Sunni Muslim world and made Erdogan rethink the working relations he tried to establish with Russia. Today, Erdogan allowed Finland and Sweden to join NATO.

Syria is still an unfinished business. Russian soldiers will be stretched to breaking point fighting on two fronts. Invading Ukraine was supposed to check NATO’s expansion. Instead, it achieved the opposite. Russia relied on Iran and its proxies to penetrate the Middle East. What can Iran offer Russia at this moment? Nothing but headache. Not only is Iran and its proxies an unreliable partner AKA competitor, they are are economically and politically weak. They are also a liability for Russia because the Shiites rely on Russia’s protection of the network link – starting from Iran through Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.

Putin would have gained more had he done the following: 1) Supported the Sunni masses in their quest for democracy 2) Reached a deal with Turkey to install a democratic government in Libya that protects Russia’s interest (and is anti-Western) 3) Agreed with Turkey to establish an anti-Western democracy in Syria 4) Worked with Turkey to stabilize Somalia

But he didn’t and the result is that both the West and Sunni became Russia’s enemies. The consequences of this realignment is yet to manifest fully. But we can see it in NATO. The U.S will likely drop the Kurds in Syria. When this happens, they can more easily coordinate with Turkey. Although Turkey is unlikely to support any other regime change operation against Assad, it will likely push for a negotiated solution that ends in a democracy. This democracy will definitely be pro-Turkish, but anti-Russian instead of anti-Western. Russia could easily have ensured and anti-Western democracy in Syria by agreeing to a negotiated settlement between Assad and the opposition, alienating the Kurds, and working closely with Turkey to rebuild Syria. In fact, opposing the Kurds and their patrons would have brought Russian and Turkish interests in Syria on the same page.

I used to think Putin is a smart leader despite the fact that I hate his anti-Sunni attitude. But how easily he managed to infuriate the entire Sunni Muslim world and wade into a Syran and Ukrainian quackmire are the biggest indicators of his shortsightedness. It’s too late to fix it now. He’s got to stick with the unreliable and competitive Shiias and wish that they win.


A member of the Atlantic Council or National Endowment for ((NON) -Democracy ?


george soros, is that you?

The Objectifier

I have been following your comments in this forum for a long time and I think you are not a Muslim. You are just someone, probably a Jew, trying to pass himself off as a Muslim. But if you are, you are a very ignorant Muslim and all your political statements and conclusions do not draw from the teachings of the Prophet about the end times at all.

Let me, a born and raised Sunni, remind you a little bit about some things the Prophet said:

1. From the prophet’s last sermon: Concerning the religion, Satan has failed in all big things but be wary that he does get you in small things. I hope you understand that the prophet was referring to sectarian differences as small (insignificant) things and that all Muslims are essentially the same when it comes to the big (significant) things. You are too sectarian minded and bigoted to be a good Muslim.

2. The prophet woke up from a sudden dream and declared: Wore unto the Arabs and he was asked by his wife and he said: The Arabs have failed woefully. I hope you understand that that statement is referring to the current crop of Arab leaders, who have failed in every one of their divine responsibilities because they have aligned themselves with Dajjal openly and that Turkey has equally failed because it is also in the camp of Dajjal. I hope you know that the Qur’an clearly warns that if you (Arabs) fail in your responsibilities, it will be given to another people who will not fail. If that responsibility (I hope you know what that responsibility is) is taken from the Arabs, who do you think it will be given to? The Turks, who are deep in bed with Dajjal already?, The Pakistanis, who don’t seem to know where they should belong and are in the camp of Dajjal? I would encourage you to be careful, lest you bite your tongue in the near future when you find out that those you despise so much are actually those the prophet considers good Muslims.

3. Let me remind you about an incident with the prophet in which he prayed for Syria (Al-Shams) and prayed for Yemen that Allah might grant them victory. Those companions in his audience asked him, how about Najd (present day Riyadh)? He kept quiet. They asked him again and he frowned. He clearly didn’t want to pray for Najd. Considering the current wars in Syria and Yemen, I hope you understand why. If you are a Muslim with a good heart, you will certainly understand what all this means and which side you should be on. From your writings you come across as ignorant and misguided about the correct Muslim camp you should belong to.

4. As for Russia, let me remind you from the Qur’an again: You will certainly find in the latter days, that those who are most opposed to you (Muslims) to be the Jews and those closest (in sympathy) to you to be those who call themselves Christians, those Christians who still respect the institutions of the monastery and are not arrogant. If you are an informed Muslim and are not arrogant, you should clearly understand that the Christians referred to here are not the Christians of the West, who have lost all religiosity, their monastic life, and who are openly arrogant. It should be clear to you that the reference here is to the Orthodox Christians whose form of worship closely resembles the Islamic form of worship in many respects especially in Ethiopia and that Russia is the head of that Orthodox Christianity.

5. I hope you know that the conquest of Constantinople that the prophet referred to has not happened yet and that it will happen after the Malhama (the great war), which has not happened yet and that when that happens, Constantinople will be conquered. Now a question for you: Why do you think Istanbul (former Constantinople) will be conquered by a Muslim army? If you say because it is aligned with the minions of Dajjal (NATO); and therefore had to be defeated, you will not be far from the truth.

6. Another food for thought: The prophet said that a *Muslim army* from Khorasan (some parts of present day Iran, Afghanistan, and some parts of Pakistan) will head to Jerusalem and that none will stop them until they conquer Jerusalem. I know you have identified yourself many times with those who pretend to be this army (ISIS) but now ask yourself who will these people really be? Do you think it will be the Arabs? The prophet has already said they will fail woefully. Who do you think the leadership of this Muslim army will really come from? Those who have been in bed with Dajjal all along (most Sunni countries and ISIS) or those who have been opposed to Dajjal all along? Do you know why the Jews are so obsessed with Iran? It is clear that in matters of the religion of Islam, the Jews seem to understand it better than most Muslims themselves.

There is plenty I could cite to realign your attention but I will stop here for now. The above should be enough to make you realize that you are way off the true Muslim camp and are certainly blind about what the prophet would call the correct camp, if you are truly a Muslim.


Good to see that EU is having their own perestroika and the first piatiletka in process.


A rather good article, as far as it goes. Needless to say, there is more to the story than the public and official stories. Yes, these machinations by entities (certain groups within govs) manipulated events using propaganda and what we today call SOPs. But, the real drivers are really never exposed, only their henchmen. This shows their true power to deceive and manipulate. This is not to say no one knows, they (govs) all do. An example…Afghanistan…how many perceive it as a failure of US military to ‘win’ this ‘war’? In truth, it went just as desired. It (the WoT) was only intended to destroy the country, create chaos and deny others a political and military foothold, as it sucked the US into massive debt (also greatly desired) as well as destroying the morality/values of the west. Even the ‘debacle’ of the withdrawal had it’s purpose, especially at home. Where did the Taliban get their funding? The ISI in Pakistan, through the CIA. The reason for this should be easily understood. Iraq…the same, did not Rummy say the US would never leave? The country had to be destroyed, impoverished and gov manipulated through chaos…hence ISIS, the never ending threat…which enabled even further exploits. This was all leading to the chaotic situation as of today…and we are still not seeing the entire picture. Yes, they are the military/aggression side of things, but not the real focus. A good look at Operation Gladio from the ’70s to the ’90s shows the real value of NATO…and the direction it was taking. To paraphrase an old saying, there is nothing new under the sky…proven by reading Smedley Butler from nearly 100 years ago. Wars are only the outer cloak and the tool of the true ambitions. Only by observing the final outcomes of events over time can one see the trees within a forest. Today, we once again have good guys/bad guys…perceived as diametrically opposed values/morals through media manipulation, as desired…to enable continuing down the path of unperceived authoritarianism. The proof IS before us, one look at the near world-wide lockstep of the plandemic, face diapers and inoculations is telling…as well as the use of an old bugaboo, Nazism.

Last edited 1 month ago by zman
mike l hutchings

England is a 20 A-bomb country… so they better be careful what they wish for….


If there is no Russia, the world will disappear! Russia is the only country on the planet that holds back Satanists and creates balance. Without this balance, humanity is finished! People of the planet, take care of Mother Russia, you cannot live without her. She is the Mother of not only Russians, she is the mother of all people on the planet!


as fucked up and stupid your comment may sound, it may actually be true :) not the satanist part, but that the only hope for people with no hope left, may come from Russia


angloshere and EU are dying isolated….the sun is setting—their 18th century dreams are now night mares…..the future is a better world when USA ghetto is divided up into small lgbt statelets

L du Plessis

The UK against the Boers is coming again, round no.2

John O'Groans

They didn’t do very well against the IRA !


You wanna war? Then try to dodge one of these here: youtube.com/watch?v=0EflRyVkCTU

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x