MONOKULTUR

Når den Demokratiske politiske rådgiver James Carville bevarer sin legende status i partiet som han mener at Trumps ageren er et tegn på fremskreden syfilis, står det klart at det politiske landskab i USA er delt mellem MAGA Republikanerne og Systemet CIA. “Why Ukraine Will Win” forklarede Francis Fukuyama i septemberudgaven af Journal of Democracy i 2022 og dermed også beviste, hvor meget hans forestillingsverden byggede på floskel-pumpet blændværk.

“I don’t want Trump to be in the middle of me and Putin. I want Trump to be more on our side. Russia brought this war to us and they’re not right. Ukrainians want to hear the United States having a strong position on our side. We want to be two parties against Russia.” Zelensky

Hvem har bildt ham ind at det var i USAs interesse? Systemet CIA, der i mange år har trukket USA længere og længere ind i evighedskrige, seneste proxykrigen i Ukraine. De har opbygget et stærkt medielandskab til at propagandere for den store demokratiske nødvendighed i lande der ikke magter at være uenige i mindelighed, som Løgstrup kaldte det. Helt ind i den Ortodoxe civilisation, er offensiven trængt, et land for langt.

“Den russiske drøm går i opfyldelse. Det transatlantiske bånd, der har eksisteret siden 1945, er knækket over.” skrev Claus Mathisen, tidligere forsvarsattach i Ukraine. Men hvad er den russiske drøm? Rusland er et gammelt land og dette er deres drøm? Og den største ulykke er ikke at de transatlantiske bånd knækkes (af hvem?), men at den(!) russiske drøm går i opfyldelse. Vores formål er nu at deres drøm ikke opfyldes? Jeg er klar over det underforståede, men dette fokus på Rusland og Ukraine forskruer perspektivet. Europas bånd til USA bliver ikke kappet af USA. Det er Europa, der nu vil kappe båndet til USA det vil kappe båndet til Ukraine.

 Martin Ågerup mente at “Vance startede et skænderi for rullende kamera og Trump var ude at stand til at styre sit temperament og lod sig rive med ind i det. Ingen tegn på genial forhandlingstaktik her.” Symbolsk for debatten skylden for krigen handler det om, hvornår skænderiet startede eller hvornår kimen blev lagt… hvorfor er det først nu jeg ser den parallel? Anyways, stikpillerne afslører også tankegangen. Trumps facon er en væsentlig anstødssten, som det er en del af min forelskelse som når han beklager at Zelinski hænger for meget i “Putin this and Putin that. All negative things”, så selvfølgelig slår man hurtigt ned på den første oplevede fodfejl i en længere forhandling og erklærer Trump for en umulius. Som at lave en kavalkade med mål, som Messi ikke scorer.

“Trump lod en aftale, der var forhandlet på plads, og som han selv mente var i USA’s interesse, falde på gulvet på grund af sit temperament og sin mangel på disciplin. Trump svigtede sit land.” fortsætter Ågerup og slår dermed fast at det er i USAs interesse at sikre en fredsaftale. Det er også i Ruslands siges det, så hvilken grædekone eller grædemand kan i længden stå i vejen for det tog?

Jan E Jørgensen, en af fortalerne for Koranloven, skrev at det var “trist at opleve den amerikanske præsident og vicepræsidents urimelige behandling af Ukraines præsident” og at der “mere end nogensinde før brug for, at Danmark viser sin opbakning til Ukraine og dets tapre præsident Zelenskyj.”  “There is only one possible path: Europe must pay the entire bill in Ukraine and have the Americans sell us weapons for the money.” skrev Rasmus Jarlov og tilføjede optimistisk, “We can do it“. “De danske grædekonemænd er allerede nedsmeltet over det. Synet af klassisk maskulinitet, der sætter grænser for den vimsende dydssignalering, er hårdt for den bange, strategiske nutidsmand med nutidsholdninger. Vi andre forstår, hvilken gave det er til offentligheden.“skrev Eva Selsing og linkede til Mike Benz

This is the most transparent government in the history of human civilization. We just got a direct uninterrupted 8 minute window into the high-level negotiations between the most powerful nation on earth and the crux geopolitical hotzone. Appreciate this, it doesn’t happen often

Richard Hanania var også en af dem, der købte medierne fortælling om at Trump og Vance lavede et baghold, men efter at have set hele optrinnet begræd han “Zelensky was minutes away from being home free, and he would have had the deal and new commitments from the Trump administration.” “She knows who screwed up” skrev David Sacks om billederne af den ukrainske ambassadør i Washington, der ser ud til at bryde sammen over Zelenskys katastrofale fejl. 

Q: How did Zelensky react after press left? Was he surprised?

Waltz: No. His team was. His ambassador, and adviser were practically in tears, wanting this to move forward. But Zelensky was still argumentative.

I said “Mr. President, time is not on your side here, on the battlefield, and in terms of the world situation. And most importantly, USAID, and the taxpayers’ tolerance, is not unlimited”.

Lex Friedman, der interviewede Zelensky, skriver om sin oplevelse

The amount of disrespect President Zelenskyy showed to Donald Trump and the American people today was insane. This was a mistake. I have tremendous respect for President Zelenskyy for the heroic actions he took in the early days of the war. But diplomacy at this stage obviously required showing respect to world leaders, even more so during tense difficult peace negotiations. I did everything I could to help in my small way to build bridges. This was the opposite of that. It was a big step backwards. All of this breaks my heart. I pray for peace

Selv Danmarks Radio måtte via en ekspert erkende at Zelensky lavede en brøler på vegne af hans land, et synspunkt som også den geopolitiske anlytiker Mikkel Rosenvold delte i Ekstra Bladet. X-profilen Autism Capital skriver “The microphone captured Zelenskyy calling JD Vance “Suka,” Russian for “Bitch,” during their argument” Senere på aftenen var Zelensky på Fox News, hvor han to gange talte udenom på spørgsmålet om han havde tænkt sig at undskylde for sin optræden. Men “Watching the full interview now, Zelensky does apologize, Zelensky: “This is very very important and we are thankful and sorry for this.”” skrev X-profilen Defiant L’s.

“[F]aktum er jo at Trump helt klart committede til NATO og roste Ukraines indsats, før Zelensky fik kørt det hele af sporet.” skrev Lars Seier Christensen på Facebook

Trumps plan for forhandling er 1. At sikre at USA ikke blot til evig tid skal smide penge ned i en lang krig, 2. At forhandle en fredsaftale på plads, og først derefter 3. Forhandle sikkerhedsgarantier på plads – det siger sig selv at 2) bliver vanskeligere såfremt man starter med 3).

Det skabte mange voldsomme reaktioner fra folk relateret til fodboldklubben FCK, skrev Berlingske Tidende, som tidligere træner Ståle Solbakken der mente at det var uværdigt og at Ukraine er “ved at blive et offer for Lars Seier og hans rige venner, der kun har øjne for dem selv”. Han var langt fra den eneste eller den sjoveste, “Hvis Lars og hans følgere ikke kan se, at Trump er en selvoptaget, magtliderlig, løgnagtig, hævngerrig og opportunistisk person med en retorik, der hører hjemme langt fra anstændig politisk debat, så må jeg bare sige farvel” sagde Don Ø(!)

Det er ikke mærkeligt at unge mennesker taber sutten i den stemning. “Enhver der støtter Trump bare en lille smule er fjende af Europa og en trussel mod vores sikkerhed!” skrev Benjamin Haxha, spidskandidat for til kommunevalget i ’25, og forsvarsordfører for venstres ungdom og kom med følgende trussel “Det håber jeg du har indset @MrMesserschmidt !” Grædemandens kompenserende maskulinitet, fører til Facebookgruppen “Boykot varer fra USA” – og det er en Facebookgruppe, der vil boykotte varer fra USA. En gruppe på Facebook!

Scott Bessent fortalte Laura Ingraham, at han havde haft et voldsomt skænderi med Zelenski og prøvet at overbevise ham om, at den første del af aftalen, om mineralerne, skulle sende et signal til Rusland om, at USA og Ukraine stod så meget på samme side, at de skulle opgive at så lus i skindpelsen. Zelenski ville først skrive under i München hvor han lovede Marc Rubio og JD Vance at skrive under, hvis det kunne blive i Det Hvide Hus.

Philip Melanchthon Wegmann giver et resume, af den gode del af mødet, hvor Zelensky allerede er krigerisk

— Zelensky immediately brought up a US security guarantee; Trump opposes this but dropped it initially.

— Zelensky repeatedly contradicted claims that Europe gave a lot but less than the U.S. Trump moved on.

— Trump expressed sympathy for all parents of the war dead; Zelensky pushed back that the Russians invaded.

— After Trump repeated the U.S. policy of ceasefire first and security questions second, Zelensky gave a rebuttal, saying this framework “will not work.”

“In the history of conflict, has there ever been a case where an alliance already facing defeat saw its strongest member withdraw, only for the remaining partners to win by pursuing the same losing strategy?” spurgte Arnaud Bertrand. Konstantin Kissin mente også at “litigating this stuff in front of the media was really dumb.” efter at været blevet forledt af medierne til at tro at Trump og Vance havde overfaldet Zelensky. På sin blog skrev han bl.a

President Zelensky walked into a room in which people who don’t particularly like him, don’t particularly trust him, and don’t particularly care about his “just and righteous cause” were nevertheless prepared to continue giving him money, weapons and political support in order to make this problem go away. All he had to do was look grateful. When you are attempting to convert other people’s good will into hard currency, that is the bare minimum. And for 40 minutes, Zelensky just about managed.

The rationale for the argument he then instigated with JD Vance is not without merit. As I explained in my last video, Zelensky’s primary concern has to be what are known as “security guarantees” – this is a fancy way of saying that Putin is a proven liar who can’t be trusted to stick to any agreement reached. Therefore, the only way to prevent another invasion is through a permanent presence of European or American troops in between Russia and Ukraine. He kept making this point over and over during the press conference and did so diplomatically enough.

But the way he challenged Vance directly in front of the cameras was catastrophically stupid. Sure, if you hate Trump and Vance and think they’re taking part in a Youtube debate, then Zelensky made a valid point. But this was not a debate. They’re all supposed to be on the same side. And the person who has the most to lose from them not feeling like they’re all on the same side is President Zelensky, or, more importantly, his nation. The arguments about security guarantees should have been made with tact, diplomacy, and in private.

To make things worse, he followed this unfortunate error with another, much bigger one. In Europe, Zelensky is used to winning people over to his cause by claiming that Ukraine is all that stands between them and Vladimir Putin. We can argue about whether such claims are true, but the important thing is that in Europe we are much more receptive to this message for both cultural and pragmatic reasons. We are on the same continent as Russia and NATO’s eastern border is now in contact with Russia. This point of contact would have been significantly extended had Ukraine been overrun.

These arguments don’t wash in America and what’s worse, Americans HATE people painting a negative picture of their society’s future. This is why, I believe, President Trump interrupted Zelensky when he claimed that America won’t be protected from Putin by an ocean and shut him down.

I en ren Oddball stemning beklagede Trump senere, at Zelensky fokuserede på det forkerte “Putin this and Putin that. All negative things”. Jeg er enig, “have a little faith!” Det er ikke helt besynderligt, at det er svært for Zelensky, for som Kissin også bemærker om Zelensky

He saw innocent Ukrainian civilians being slaughtered, tortured and raped. He watched missiles and drones rain down on his towns and cities. He welcomed Ukrainian POWs on their return from Russian prisons and torture camps, only to discover they were emaciated, bruised and broken. He has spoken with Ukrainian parents whose children have been stolen and taken to Russia.

Det er ikke svært at Zelensky, der indtil han blev valgt, var en entertainer og ikke en politiker, psykologik har sat sig i en krigsstemning, for man intet giver fra sig, af frygt for at blive svag i koderne over lokkende alternativer, der i lælngden er en ‘bad deal’. Men realiterne er at “Zelensky’s job is to realise that he stopped being a human being when he became President of a country reliant on foreign aid to survive. He does not have the luxury of righteousness and his country cannot afford to have him lose control of his senses as he did.” Som Trump konstaterede, har Zelensky ingen kort på hånden. Dem greb han, som han fløj tilbage til sine impotente europæiske venner, mange af dem, som ham, uden folkeligt mandat.

“Zelenskyy wasn’t there for peace—just a fantasy deal” sagde Howard Lutnick.