France Sets NATO on the Path to World War 3 While America Debated TikTok
What We Can Expect to Transpire in the Coming Months
Well, here we go. On Thursday, French President Macron addressed his nation in a roundtable type forum about Ukraine and announced France would back Kyiv against Russia. The gravity of this can’t be understated. Yet, at least in the US, I’d bet 99% of the population had no idea the address even took place. Worse, I do not think most Americans would even be able to comprehend what just occurred even if they had watched it. Looking back on his pronouncement in the future, it may very well turn out to be seen as nothing short of one of the most pivotal decision points in modern human history. Macron, in just a short half hour address, unilaterally set the world on a collision course for World War 3. It’s true that at this exact moment, it doesn’t create a crisis, but it did initiate a chain of events that when followed to their logical end, pits NATO and Russian forces in a head-to-head war.
What Macron announced can be distilled down to two soundbites. France will not allow Ukraine to lose and, France will intervene and do whatever is necessary to make sure Russia will not win, which could include deploying troops into Ukraine. A lot of people are trying to walk back and moderate his statements by clarifying that he didn’t say, “he was sending troops to Ukraine.” Well, if that makes them sleep better at night, they can believe that, but the reality is France has had troops in Ukraine all along. Macron’s announcement wasn’t to test the waters or ask permission. All he was doing was telling the public what had already been decided and what was already occurring. At no time was he asking for the input of French citizens. The normalcy bias saying this can’t happen needs to be eliminated. It is happening and it is going to become overt in the very near future.
For those that think this is just an “option” or something that Macron won’t actually need to exercise, you are wrong. Again, the normalcy bias may make you feel better, but denying reality won’t exempt you from the consequences. The reality is Ukraine is failing fast. No matter how much money gets thrown at Ukraine it can’t buy the two things it needs most, men and munitions. Despite the recent propaganda about nations buying artillery rounds for Ukraine, the industrial capacity to make them doesn’t exist. NATO is already cranking out as many rounds as it possibly can, and it is far from enough. Russian munitions factories are out producing all of NATO by margins up to 7:1 and in some cases more. At best, we are talking a couple years before industry is able to set up manufacturing plants capable of offsetting the deficit. Those in the know, know that will be far too late. As for manpower, Ukraine is abducting men off the streets and dragging them into blacked out A-Team vans that are patrolling the streets. They are even conscripting convicts and prison inmates now and sending them to the front. When a nation gets to this point, it’s over. Well, it’s over unless there is suddenly a fresh pool of 800,000,000 people to draw from. NATO’s manpower is the reservoir Ukraine must tap into and soon if Kyiv is going to be prevented from collapsing. Remember, Macron sold his policy as something almost theoretical…as a contingency. This was deceptive because he is acutely aware of how badly things are going for Ukraine and some convenient leaked French documents acknowledged as much. Thus, even though Macron presented the “option” of sending in troops, he already knows this will be a necessity. The only question is what pretext they will use and when.
I think this question on pretext and timing has also already been decided. Just in the last few weeks, France has signed two important agreements. One was with Ukraine on defense cooperation and the other was a security agreement with Moldova. Timing is everything and this was no coincidence. France has been working with NATO and Moldova quietly to cook up a scheme. Right now, if I had to make an assessment, I’d say that France will pre-deploy troops to Romania. They already acknowledge this and claim that these troops could be used to prevent Russia from seizing Odessa. This leads us to believe it is a relatively benign move. The French would basically be an emergency quick reaction force, but otherwise have no other role since Russia doesn’t appear anywhere close to being able to seize Odessa. Again, I’d assess this as a half-truth if not an outright deception. Remember that seemingly innocuous agreement with Moldova? Why forward deploy to Romania? Poland is also suitable, and France also suggested that it would move troops into Ukraine on the border with Belarus to relieve Ukrainian soldiers so they could be used on the front against Russia. Of the two scenarios, the latter would be much more likely, timely, and useful. So again, I ask, why Romania? If my sources are correct, despite the cover stories, France is expecting Moldova to trigger a situation in Transnistria that will be used as a pretext for France to enter Moldova to “help” put down the security threat. Of course, this is really just an excuse to attack Russia without actually attacking Russia. You see, Transnistria is considered a defacto Russian enclave despite the fact Moldova still lays claim to it. This gray zone is what NATO intends to exploit. When France comes to “help” Moldova, it will really just be a land grab to retrieve Transnistria. In the process, they’ll make a play to grab an absolutely massive Russian weapons depot in Transnistria that could supply all the munitions Ukraine needs for a year. That’s the angle. Russia isn’t stupid and has no intention of allowing Transnistria to be taken back by Moldova or allowing the weapons depot to fall into NATO hands. The problem is if they do anything to stop it, they risk “attacking a NATO member,” which would be engineered to trigger Article 5. Yes, I realize that technically it may not qualify because France would be acting independently and not attacked at home, but I have little doubt this will make a difference. It was just a couple weeks ago that Odessa was hit by a Russian missile strike while Zelensky and his Greek counterpart were there. Apparently, the strike hit very close to their motorcade, so they claimed this was an assassination attempt and spun it as Russia trying to target the leader of a NATO nation (Greece). As such, they argued this should trigger Article 5. No one was buying the propaganda, but should they have wanted to sell it, it would not have mattered that the conditions didn’t technically meet the Article 5 standard. I’m confident that in the case of Moldova, it will be enough to have French and/or Romanian troops “attacked by Russia,” irrespective of where or what they were doing. So, using this pretext, NATO can justify some form of intervention while blaming Russia as the aggressor once again, without ever having to first step foot into Ukraine,
The wild card in this scenario is Russia. Only Russia knows what it will do in the event a move is made on Transnistria. It’s totally possible that Russia would sacrifice that pawn to prevent providing NATO any pretext to escalate or enter the war. However, I believe that in the event Russia does nothing, then Ukraine is already prepared to enter “Moldova” to also support it against “terrorists” from Transnistria. Of course, Ukraine would go straight for the ammo depot knowing that someone is going to shoot back. Even if no one did, they’d lie and say they did. You know what comes next…you guessed it. Somehow, in the confusion, a Russian missile or drone will hit French troops supporting Moldova and that will be their “attack on NATO.” Then NATO will use this excuse to flood into Western Ukraine to create a buffer zone. That’s the plan at least. As they say, no plan survives first contact, but this is the template they’ll most likely run with. Either way, NATO is going to have to make a move soon and Macron’s address was just the first reveal to the public. The plan is already in motion.
This brings us back to Macron initiating a chain of events that puts NATO and Russia on a collision course. The war will continue to get worse for Ukraine so NATO will have to enter. If not, the war ends in 2024 and Europe sinks to a humiliated 2nd Tier power that will have to make very painful concessions to Russia as the newly reemerged superpower for the now multi-polar world. This also means the US loses its preeminent world role. I don’t see egos or wallets accepting this without sending us to fight and die first so war it will be. Naturally, NATO is going to try and do this in a controlled way so that they don’t get everyone nuked, but as you see, the stakes just keep getting higher. Once NATO commits, even if in a limited fashion, it only increases the threat to Russia and ratchets up the stakes. The problem is even if NATO troops are in country, they won’t stop Russia defeating Ukraine unless they directly enter the fight. Russia will continue the war and continue beating the Ukrainians, so NATO will undoubtedly get sucked into a more direct combat role. At this point, neither side will be able to disengage and back down and Russia will likely transition from the Special Military Operation status to a full scale declared war to meet the greater challenge. This will come with direct attacks against NATO targets in Ukraine.
This brings us to the brink of World War 3. The final barrier is the war escalating beyond Ukraine’s borders. If NATO pursues the course it now seems to have set, this will occur. NATO cannot beat Russia by fighting a limited conflict within the confines of Ukraine. Ukraine would become a tomb for NATO. As such, NATO will be forced to bring forces to bear from outside of Ukraine and begin to strike Russia directly. At this point, the world has crossed the final line, and the kinetic phase of World War 3 will begin. Russia will not allow NATO jets to launch from European airfields and strike deep into Russia. Russia does not have the conventional force structure to counter this. Russian doctrine explicitly relies on the use of nuclear weapons to defend itself against admittedly unwinnable odds. If NATO doesn’t back down, this ends with nuclear weapons being exchanged and as Russian President Putin commented, it will be a war no one wins.
I hope this lays out what is looking increasingly likely to be the path to the outbreak of a major war. Macron’s words were meant to be slow reveal. He’s sheepishly pretending this is all just “being considered,” but he knows the decisions and plans have already been made and put into motion. I do pray there are off ramps built in to allow all sides and honorable exit, but the probability of that is decreasing rapidly. If nothing else, perhaps the Establishment will be content that they achieved their goal of creating enough fear that they’ll not have to worry about the allocation of defense spending for another couple decades. As it stands, they have demonized Russia enough to continue to line their pockets with our money well into the future to “rebuild” NATO. In fact, this may very well be what they intend, but the problem is Russia has a vote and Russia’s vote is going to create conditions their egos cannot accept. The best-case scenario at this point would be that NATO tells Zelensky it is over and he must give up lands east of the Dnieper River. Ukraine would not be totally destroyed, NATO and the West would be embarrassed, but still able to function as they always have, and Russia could claim a limited victory. Unfortunately, that is now the least likely after Macron’s speech declaring Ukraine cannot be allowed to lose and Putin cannot be allowed to win. Russia will fight to the bitter end to maintain control of Crimea and won’t tolerate Odessa and the Black Sea coast as a NATO naval hub. I also think the potential for war is being maintained to contain another man, Donald Trump. Trump lives rent free in the minds of the European elite that is for sure. The fact Macron even brought Trump up in his speech is a tip off that they are fearful he’ll disrupt their plans and end the war. That tells me two things. They intend to expand the war and they are planning to use it to ensure he is not re-elected. If the Biden Regime nears November and still has not managed to take out Trump, there is a growing potential he will lose. During the 2020 Election, they used a bioweapon to create chaos, undermine Trump, and seize power so what is stopping them in 2024 from using a major war to create another domestic crisis? No matter how I turn this puzzle, one side is going to be faced with a defeat that imparts unacceptable conditions forcing a bigger war. For the West, the stakes are losing control of the world. Their entire monetary system, wealth, and power are predicated on the ability to bully anyone anywhere. If Russia successfully beats the whole of NATO, Europe will have no credibility exactly as Macron stated. The Establishment cannot accept this so long as they have us peasants to go fight and die to protect their power and wealth. For this reason, NATO is being forced deeper and deeper into this fight with stakes that exponentially increase. On the other end of the spectrum, Russia knows a defeat now is a total defeat and there can be no negotiated settlement. Russia must win this war outright. If Russia was to seek a negotiated peace deal, NATO would insist that Russia give up core strategic territory and allow NATO to walk right to its border and cut off its access to Crimea. This is an existential threat and as such, it is not an option. Further, if Russia was defeated conventionally on the battlefield, it would mean the disillusion of Russia, the imprisonment and execution of its leaders to include Putin, and a breakup of its nation into smaller districts controlled by the West. None of these options permit Russia to securely exist and at best, only postpone another bigger fight. For these reasons, Russia must win or everyone loses.
My hope tonight is to sensitize you to the very real and serious threat that is now posed to all of us. While we debated in the US how the government could find new sneaky ways to censor speech and online content using TikTok as a scapegoat, the world crossed the next major hurdle toward nuclear annihilation. By exposing the path Macron directed the West to follow, I hope it awakens the public. If this letter is shared, liked, and linked by my readers to their networks, we may be able to generate enough attention that NATO is forced to step back. The only way NATO gets away with this is if they can keep people ignorant and make it look as though the coming events are random and unplanned. Never forget that your voice, amplified by the thousands, is extremely powerful. If there ever was a time to use it, it would be now. We are nearing the point of no return and if thermonuclear extinction doesn’t motivate you, you have lost the will to live. Even microorganisms will fight to survive. If apathy has reached the point where people simply just assume someone else must do everything, perhaps, we deserve to catch a first strike. Prepare accordingly. We probably have the spring before things escalate fast.
Till next time,
D.t.Y.