Bird-Man to Russia: Stab Your Best Friend in the Back, It’ll Be Fine
Saker tells Kremlin to make itself not-agreement-capable
Think about it. In a situation where Moscow is already bogged down in an unpopular coerced vaccine and QR pass war at home, and is a party to a legitimate war scare on the Russian-Ukrainian border owing to NATO encroaching on its red lines Saker proposes that Russia…stabs its best and closest anti-NATO friend in the back. Because what could be better than a three-front war?
When you’re already stuck in two extremely difficult conundrums, well that’s just the time to get creative and…start a regime-change blitz against people who are on your side.
The situation just isn’t complicated enough for Russia, it’s time to play with fire…inside the house of your best and closest neighbor, friend, and kin who just happens to also be besieged by NATO right now.
Makes perfect sense, folks. How can you not see the great wisdom, the sheer brilliance of this VeRy sErIoUs Florida analyst?
Bird-Man presents no plan on how the Kremlin is supposed to accomplish this. It is not for him to burden his mind with the question of implementation. His job is merely to issue regime-change fatwas against Slav anti-NATO leaders from his Florida home and then it is for the folks in the Kremlin to click their heels and figure out how to implement his commandments.
But why doesn’t the Ayatollah list a single thing Russia or anyone else can do to make “Lukashenko must go” happen? Given how difficult such undertakings are I’m sure the Kremlin would appreciate a few pointers. Is it because actually listing the nasty things that go into a regime change might alienate any non-psychos reading?
He also has absolutely nothing to say about the possible pitfalls of such an undertaking and how to avoid them.
And why would he? When have regime changes ever gone wrong? Who has ever heard of such a thing?
The idea a Moscow stab in the back could end up destroying relations between the White and the Great Rusians for decades or centuries. Or that it could result in chaos and instability that NATO, Poland, Tsikhanouskaya’s neocons in Lithuania and its sleeper backers in Belarus could take advantage of — that’s just ridiculous. Who has ever heard of a regime change ever not going according to the regime-changers’ most optimistic expectations?
Okay, there is that one time a CPSU regime change in Prague made anti-Russians of the most pan-Slavist nation in the world, or the time its regime change in Kabul was followed by a decade of war. But aside from that? Aside from that, and the disastrous consequences of the regime change against Diem, Saddam, Gaddafi, Yanukovich, and countless others, what examples are there? Come on, when has a regime change ever come with unforeseen consequences and with third parties swooping in to complicate the picture?
And what of Russia’s other partners? How exactly are the Chinese, the Syrians, the Iranians, the Venezuelans, the Vietnamese, the Nicaraguans, and the Armenians supposed to react to a Russia that regularly treats with Erdogan and even the West but surprises its closest CSTO ally with a regime change? Where exactly is Russia’s international credibility supposed to be found when it starts to mimic NATO and color revolution leaders who are pro-Moscow just not pro-Moscow enough for Bird-Man?
But does the Florida Ayatollah even care about all these possible and even likely pitfalls?
Is Bird-Man really so dumb that he doesn’t know that regime changes frequently result in disaster for everyone involved? Has he become a sniveling idiot?
Or is it the case that he simply doesn’t care?
Nothing I’ve laid out here is nuclear physics. It’s all elementary stuff that anyone who has ever tuned into news is already aware of. So why isn’t Bird-Man? Is it because it’s not in his interest to be?
How Saker gets away with not having to devote a single word to possible risks of targeting Lukashenko is by explaining that whatever happens “getting rid” of Lukashenko is a necessary and first step to getting to a certain final outcome he wants: “this process has to begin by getting rid of him”.
When that is your outlook — when your outlook is that any situation other than X is intolerable and that the only way to get to X is through Y, then it doesn’t really matter what unforeseen horrors Y might trigger.
Chaos, death, NATO incursion, hatred among brothers, three-sided civil war…none of that matters anymore.
So Belarusians hold on to your pants. A Florida Ayatollah is all of a sudden super eager to color his Eastern Europe coloring book a certain way so you’re in for a wild ride…
….except you’re not because nobody in Moscow is as demented as the lamentable Bird-Man.
But to be exact, the Regime-Change Ayatollah is so incredibly vague about his “Lukashenko must go” directive that it isn’t even clear on whom exactly it falls to fulfill it. But since he justifies it as saying that Lukashenko must be replaced “with a person the Kremlin can trust” we have to assume he means the Kremlin ought to do it. Or does he mean that Belarusians must topple Lukashenko but better make sure to raise “a person the Kremlin can trust” in his stead? Wouldn’t that be a hoot? To command the Belarusians to topple their President, then command them to fill the spot with someone that Putin, Medvedev, and Mishustin “can trust”, or else they have to do it all over again. Life is fun when Eastern Europe is your coloring book!
In the next installment, we’ll tackle the Ayatollah’s curious claim that Y is the only possible way to get to X, and then we’ll take a look at his arguments for why X has become so urgent.