
Ukraineâs President Volodymyr Zelensky in April. Photo: Flickr.

Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond
From Venezuela and made by Venezuelan Chavistas

Ukraineâs President Volodymyr Zelensky in April. Photo: Flickr.
One of the most glaring plot holes in the official mainstream narrative on Ukraine is the way US officials keep openly boasting that this supposedly unprovoked war which the US is only backing out of the goodness of its heart just so happens to serve US interests tremendously.
By Caitlin Johnstone â Sep 3, 2023
One of the most glaring plot holes in the official mainstream narrative on Ukraine is the way US officials keep openly boasting that this supposedly unprovoked war which the US is only backing out of the goodness of its heart just so happens to serve US interests tremendously.
In a recent article for the Connecticut Post, Senator Richard Blumenthal assured Americans that âweâre getting our moneyâs worth on our Ukraine investment.â
âFor less than 3 percent of our nationâs military budget, weâve enabled Ukraine to degrade Russiaâs military strength by half,â writes Blumenthal. âWeâve united NATO and caused the Chinese to rethink their invasion plans for Taiwan. Weâve helped restore faith and confidence in American leadershipâââmoral and military. All without a single American service woman or man injured or lost, and without any diversion or misappropriation of American aid.â
Sen. Blumenthal: US Getting Its âMoneyâs Worthâ in Ukraine Because Americans Arenât Dying
Fresh from a trip to Kyiv, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) is arguing that the US is getting its âmoneyâs worthâ in Ukraine because Russia is taking losses and no Americans are dying,⊠pic.twitter.com/ayo34BOgUd
— Dave DeCamp (@DecampDave) August 30, 2023
As Antiwarâs Dave DeCamp recently observed, this type of âinvestmentâ talk about Ukraine has been getting more common. Last weekend Senator Mitt Romney called the war âthe best national defense spending I think weâve ever done.â
âWeâre losing no lives in Ukraine, and the Ukrainians are fighting heroically against Russia,â Romney said. âWeâre diminishing and devastating the Russian military for a very small amount of money ⊠a weakened Russia is a good thing.â
Last month Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell argued that Americans should support the US governmentâs proxy warfare in Ukraine because âwe havenât lost a single American in this war,â adding that the spending is helping to employ Americans in the military-industrial complex.
âMost of the money that we spend related to Ukraine is actually spent in the US, replenishing weapons, more modern weapons,â McConnell said. âSo itâs actually employing people here and improving our own military for what may lie ahead.â
McConnell has been talking about how much this war benefits the US since last year. During a speech back in December the ailing swamp monster argued that âthe most basic reasons for continuing to help Ukraine degrade and defeat the Russian invaders are cold, hard, practical American interests.â
âHelping equip our friends in Eastern Europe to win this war is also a direct investment in reducing Vladimir Putinâs future capabilities to menace America, threaten our allies and contest our core interests,â McConnell said.
Continuing our support for Ukraine is morally right, but it is not only that. It is also a direct investment in cold, hard, American interests. pic.twitter.com/zlWoAVz3Kk
— Leader McConnell (@LeaderMcConnell) December 24, 2022
As weâve discussed previously, US empire managers have been talking about how much this war serves US interests ever since it began.
In May of last year Congressman Dan Crenshaw said on Twitter that âinvesting in the destruction of our adversaryâs military, without losing a single American troop, strikes me as a good idea.â
âIt is in Americaâs national security interests for Putinâs Russia to be defeated in Ukraine,â tweeted the perpetually war-horny senator Lindsey Graham.
Last November the imperial war machine-funded think tank Center for European Policy Analysis published an article titled âItâs Costing Peanuts for the US to Defeat Russia,â subtitled âThe cost-benefit analysis of US support for Ukraine is incontrovertible. Itâs producing wins at almost every level.â
âUS spending of 5.6% of its defense budget to destroy nearly half of Russiaâs conventional military capability seems like an absolutely incredible investment,â gushed the articleâs author Timothy Ash. âIf we divide out the US defense budget to the threats it faces, Russia would perhaps be of the order of $100bn-150bn in spend-to-threat. So spending just $40bn a year, erodes a threat value of $100â150bn, a two-to-three time return. Actually the return is likely to be multiples of this given that defense spending, and threat are annual recurring events.â
I'm probably going to be regularly reminding my readers of this paragraph from @IgnatiusPost for the remainder of my writing career. pic.twitter.com/Vahl9S1txR
— Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) August 20, 2023
And of course the mass media have been all aboard the same messaging. A few weeks ago The Washington Postâs David Ignatius wrote an article explaining why westerners shouldnât âfeel gloomyâ about how things are going in Ukraine, writing the following about how much this war is doing to benefit US interests overseas:
âMeanwhile, for the United States and its NATO allies, these 18 months of war have been a strategic windfall, at relatively low cost (other than for the Ukrainians). The Westâs most reckless antagonist has been rocked. NATO has grown much stronger with the additions of Sweden and Finland. Germany has weaned itself from dependence on Russian energy and, in many ways, rediscovered its sense of values. NATO squabbles make headlines, but overall, this has been a triumphal summer for the alliance.â
I suspect Iâll be periodically reminding my readers of that paragraphâââand Ignatiusâ parenthetical âother than for the Ukrainiansâ asideâââfor the remainder of my writing career.
So on one hand the western political/media class have been hammering us in the face with the message that the invasion of Ukraine was âunprovokedâ and that the US and its allies played no antagonistic role in paving the road to this conflict whatsoever, and on the other hand youâve got all these empire managers enthusing about how much this war benefits US interests.
Those two narratives seem a wee bit contradictory, do they not?
A critical thinker can reconcile this contradiction in one of two ways. First, they can believe that the worldâs most powerful and destructive government is just a passive, innocent witness to the violence in Ukraine, and is only benefitting immensely from the war as a complete coincidence. Second, they can believe the US intentionally provoked this war with the understanding that it would benefit from it.
From where Iâm sitting, itâs not difficult to determine which of these is more likely.