Last Friday, Tyler Durden offered these intriguing insights at Zero Hedge:
If anyone is wondering what is the one, sole driving force behind Joe Biden’s foreign policy, here is the answer: It’s always been about the oil, stupid.
What’s grabbed Durden’s attention is the drone strikes by Ukraine on oil refineries deep inside Russia. Durden declared:
[snip] the handlers of the senile president have been terrified of any false move that sharply reduces the supply of oil or its byproducts in the global market, sending commodity prices — and inflation — surging, and crushing Biden’s re-election chances.
More interestingly, Durden claims:
Now granted, Ukraine can do far worse and sink Russian oil tankers, but Kiev understands that this would spark outrage at the White House as it would instantly send oil prices surging, although once Trump is in the White House, Ukraine will have no such concerns as we pointed out earlier this week. [Italics added.]
On the face of it, spikes in oil and gas costs in the U.S. would spell doom for Biden’s reelection. A faltering economy might drive Democrats to cheat on a heretofore unprecedented scale. A Trump landslide would be that large. But election rigging might not be the biggest worry. An engineered “black swan” event might be the greater danger. Desperate people act in desperate ways.
Joe Biden’s handlers’ unremitting hostility to expanding domestic conventional energy production has damaged the nation in many ways. The U.S. is more — not less — reliant on foreign oil and gas production. That includes Russian production. Higher energy costs are slamming working-class and middle-class Americans — that’s most everybody. Credit-card debt continues to rise. Corporate media bleating about downticks in inflation seem a ruse. Anyone who fills his tank, grocery shops, and pays utility bills knows that costs are stubbornly high.
boondoggle, the deliberately misnamed “Inflation Reduction Act.” It was typical D.C. pork barrel politics. Recipients of the largesse are expected to kick back some of those dollars to Democrats and whoever else helped.
The U.S. is energy vulnerable. That threatens national security. It poses risks that are nearly as dire as is our wide opened southern border. Biden’s handlers own risking the nation in those ways.
The Biden administration’s proxy war with the Russians in Ukraine is pushing the U.S. into folly. Greater direct U.S. involvement for whatever reason could spark a European-wide or global war. It opens the U.S. economy to hammer blows if Russian oil and gas production is crippled. The strategic myopia of the U.S. political, foreign policy, and security establishments can’t be overstated.
By inhibiting energy exploration and production at home, Biden’s handlers have granted Putin greater leverage over global energy supplies. This wasn’t the case when Trump was president. Though Ukrainian attacks on Russian oil and gas facilities present threats to the U.S. economy, so does Putin’s ability to manipulate energy markets if he chose. Putin was handed a gun to hold to the nation’s head.
Might Putin decide to pull the trigger? Here’s a scenario for consideration. Perhaps Putin calculates that the Biden administration poses a bigger threat to Russia than Trump would. He reduces oil and gas output. Ukrainian drone attacks on Russian facilities are claimed as the reason. Even if attacks have ceased, what stops Putin from concocting false-flag events? Cutting energy production would come at sizeable costs to Russia in the short term but could pay off strategically in the longer run.
On the other hand, Putin could decide that a corrupt Joe Biden, along with lackluster players Antony Blinken, Lloyd Austin, and Jake Sullivan, are easier foes than Trump. Russia’s energy output remains steady. Zelenskyy stands down attacks. The U.S. energy market experiences no disruptions prior to the elections.
Of course, Putin cutting energy output before the elections would finally validate Democrats’ and the corporate media’s longstanding claims of Russian meddling in American elections, particularly to Trump’s advantage.
Yet, what does the truth matter, anyway? Trump has been lied about by Democrats and corporate media since he announced for the presidency in 2015. It’s as likely that more lies will be manufactured regardless what Putin does or doesn’t do. If lying advances Democrats’ interests, expect it.
If power — its acquisition and retention — is what the D.C. establishment and the Left live for, and if their worst foe, Donald Trump, is poised to assume the presidency, then are economic and international crises off the table? Trump has vowed to clean out a very corrupt Washington. If Trump is good to his word, reforms will be sweeping. Truckloads of power players will be shopping resumés. If you’ve built your career, wealth, and reputation in Washington, and you believe everything you’ve worked for is in jeopardy, to what lengths are you prepared to go?
Rounding back to the Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries, it’s hard to believe reports that Zelenskyy would strike at Russian infrastructure without U.S. say-so, even if it’s tacit. Zelenskyy won’t want to upset his patron. A $60 billion aid supplemental to Ukraine is hung up in Congress. Would Zelenskyy risk Biden’s reelection?
Victoria Nuland recently stepped down as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs at the Department of State. She’s a notorious neocon and recognized as a driving force and architect in the proxy war with Russia. Speaking at a Center for Strategic & International Studies’ (CSIS) event, Nuland had this to say about Ukrainian tactics:
“With this money [the supplemental funding], Ukraine will be able to accelerate the asymmetric warfare that has been most effective on the battlefield. As I said in Kiev three weeks ago, this supplemental funding will ensure Putin faces some nasty surprises on the battlefield this year.” [italics added.]
“Battlefield” can assuredly be broadly interpreted. Russian refineries may well fall within the definition.
Even if the hypotheticals offered and any others aren’t being gamed in D.C. — which is hard to believe — in other words, if there’s no intentions at the moment, Nuland is signaling that the proxy war that the U.S. appears to be losing to Russia is about to take new and ominous turns. Asymmetry and “nasty surprises” can go both ways, too. A black swan event may not have to be invented but happen as defined: unexpectedly as the result of factors and consequences unanticipated or poorly deliberated. What, then, would be the impact on this year’s presidential contest?
J. Robert Smith can be found at Gab, @JRobertSmith. He blogs occasionally at Flyover. He’s returned to X. His handle there is @JRobertSmith1.
Comments are closed.