The Current “Situation” in Western Europe
The following can be often misconstrued. We, in the infrastructure and quality assurance realm are interested in many things, one of them being “tail risks”. Essentially we are “looking at uncertainty, certainty and what to do when there is systemic risk / what not to do when a truck is headed your way.” (@nntaleb)
We of course here at Agile Quality International cannot take sides. Our side is that which improves people’s lives, adds quality to infrastructure and feeds our families. A loss of infrastructure and cessation of energy flows does not contribute to the above; therefore, a state of peace and free transfer of goods appears in mutual interest. Which parties would want any alternative and to what purpose we leave to debate. The following is from a contributor and anonymous at this time. We allow those that speak freely to do so. Cheers!
Betraying Previous Agreements . . . and Recent Ones
War (What is it Good For)
This may impact your mobility as well as those of many millions, because according to the freedom loving Ukranian President, who just banned 11 political parties; if Vladimir Putin doesn’t cooperate, it will be the Russian President’s fault the world is plunged into WW III.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is aware that his nation could start World War III. He seems to embrace that, but do Americans? He also banned all political parties in his alleged democracy but his own.
During a Sunday interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, Zelensky warned of the possibility of a third world war happening if negotiations fail to end Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
“I’m ready for negotiations with him. I was ready for the last two years, and I think that without negotiations we cannot end this war … If these attempts fail, that would mean that this is a third world war.” — Pres. Zelenskyy, via translator, to CNN’s @FareedZakaria
The Old Agreement
NATO violated promises it made to Russia. The date February 9, 1990 will be forever remembered among historians as a ‘day of infamy’ as far as NATO-Russia relations are concerned. That was the date when U.S. Secretary of State James Baker famously assured Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, during glasnost-era talks on German unification that the Western military bloc would not advance “one inch eastward” towards Russia’s borders.
The level of deception contained in that empty pledge is easily discernible today as NATO membership has exploded since the Cold War times to 30 member states. In 2004, the former Soviet states of Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia joined NATO at the 2004 Istanbul summit; Albania and Croatia became members in 2009, while North Macedonia joined in 2020.
Not many people can rattle off the main thrust of The Minsk Agreement. Fewer still can name three points of the agreement. Here in 2022, while the world may be plunged into thermo-nuclear war we will highlight some points that one may find interesting.
1. An immediate and comprehensive ceasefire in individual areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine and its strict implementation starting at 0000 (Kyiv time) February 15, 2015.
4. On the first day after the withdrawal, to begin a dialogue on the procedures for holding local elections in accordance with Ukrainian law and the Law of Ukraine “On a temporary order of local government in individual areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions,” as well as on the future regime of these areas, according to this Act.
Immediately, no later than 30 days from the date of signing of this document, to adopt a resolution of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine with the specification of a territory subject to the special regime in accordance with the Law of Ukraine “On temporary order of local government in some regions of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions” based on the line set in a Minsk memorandum of September 19, 2014
10. The withdrawal of all foreign armed forces, military equipment, as well as mercenaries from the territory of Ukraine under the supervision of the OSCE. Disarmament of all illegal groups.
The above was agreed to, the problem is that the Ukranian leadership, under orders from The Central Intelligence Agency, would not even comply with the first point. So then, how in the world is the world media pointing the finger at Russia? It is very easy, they have absolute disdain for their audience, and there is no penalty for a constant stream of lies over the television screen and airwaves. In fact, if you read a manual on psychological warfare, our media here in America is simply following the playbook. Fortunately, we can all access this playbook and read it ourselves. The best antidote may be from a work published in 1956 by Joost Merloo M.D. titled “The Rape of the Mind explores the Psychology of Thought Control, Menticide, and Brainwashing”
So yes, this may be relevant to all of us. Let us speak of this recent turmoil in Ukraine. If the Central Intelligence Agency was readying combat troops within Russia as early as 2014 according to Aspen Institute’s Zach Dorfman’s research in an article published 16 March 2022, why did Russia wait until 2022 to take any action to thwart NATO and allied nations subversive actions (from the Russian perspective) in Ukraine? When according to the Russian MOD, while dark biology experiments targeting the native Russians and Ukrainian were being conducted, why didn’t Russia intervene earlier?
We often hear outrage from the international media regarding recent events, but where was the media during the past eight years? Was the media in your nation reporting about the Ukranian atrocities against a minority group which identifies differently than the majority of its peoples? Did your media highlight those injustices? What about one’s nation funding bio-weapons labs inside a country bordering Russia, did your media report this? Here is an excerpt from April 14th 2021 when people’s deputies from “Opposition Platform — For Life” Viktor Medvedchuk and Renat Kuzmin wrote requests to four leaders of Ukraine: President Zelensky, Prime Minister Shmygal, Head of the SBU Bakanov, and Minister of Healthcare Stepanov.
In an appeal with reference to Serbian and Bulgarian media, it is reported that the US has more than 400 bacteriological laboratories around the world, including at least 15 in Ukraine.
There are exclusively American ones, and they are financed at the expense of the US Department of Defence. The laboratories are located in Odessa, Vinnytsia, Uzhgorod, Lvov (three), Kiev (three), Kherson, Ternopol, and near Crimea and Lugansk.
People’s deputies note that the functioning of American biolaboratories in Ukraine started during the presidency of Viktor Yushchenko and the premiership of Yuliya Tymoshenko — August 29th, 2005.
At that time, cooperation agreements were signed between the US Department of Defence and the Ministry of Healthcare of Ukraine for the prevention of proliferation technologies (growth of body tissue by cell division), pathogens, and expertise that can be used for the development of biological weapons.
“In fact, the work in the laboratories is carried out under the program of biological experiments. The budget is $2.1 billion and is funded by the US Defence Threat Reduction Agency. The Scientific and Technical Center in Ukraine, an international organisation funded by the American authorities and whose staff have diplomatic immunity, has also become involved in this activity. This organisation is engaged in financing projects for the creation of weapons of mass destruction,” wrote Medvedchuk and Kuzmin.
Further, the people’s deputies point out that after the launch of biolaboratories in Ukraine there were outbreaks of infectious diseases.
“So, in Ternopol in 2009 there was a virus that caused hemorrhagic pneumonia. Its victims were 450 Ukrainians. In 2011, there was an outbreak of cholera in Ukraine — 33 people died. Three years later, cholera was diagnosed already 800 citizens, another year later more than 100 cases of cholera were recorded in Nikolaev.”
People’s deputies also gave such examples. In January 2016, 20 soldiers died from an influenza-like virus in Kharkov, and more than 200 were hospitalised. Two months later, 364 deaths were recorded in Ukraine. “The reason is swine flu of the same strain of influenza that led to the global pandemic in 2009,” say Medvedchuk and Kuzmin.
They further point out that in 2017 in Nikolaev there was an outbreak of hepatitis A. In the summer of the same year there were similar hotbeds of infection in Zaporozhye and Odessa, and in the autumn — in Kharkov.
“In 2010–2012 [i.e., already under Yanukovych — ed] the Ukrainian government initiated checks to see if the laboratories comply with all safety measures. As a result, a number of gross disorders were identified that could lead to the leakage of strains of dangerous infections. The fact of extract ventilation facing the premises of a kindergarten was even recorded,” it is said in the appeal of Medvedchuk and Kuzmin.
Then people’s deputies write that in 2013 President Viktor Yanukovych abandoned such cooperation with the United States. But already in 2014 Petro Poroshenko continued it. “It is likely that Yanukovych lost power with the active participation of the US government precisely because of his refusal to cooperate with the Pentagon,” suggest the deputies from “Opposition Platform — For Life”.
The Current Charlie Foxtrot
So that is all I am going to say at this point. If this information causes distress feel free to reach out and email our team, but honestly if you are alive all of the above should cause concern. Certainly needless death of Ukrainians and Russians is of concern. Certainly the prospect of nuclear war is of concern.
The tail risks involved in the above information are numerous, but I’ll leave you with this:
“President Kennedy had great respect for the Ambassador’s country and the courage of its people. Perhaps his country might feel it necessary to take retaliatory actions; but before that was over,” the attorney general made clear, “there would be not only dead Americans but dead Russians as well.”
A peaceful solution between both countries was the only option to avoid nuclear conflict.
Kennedy offers to remove American missiles in Turkey in exchange for the removal of Russian missiles in Cuba. However, the Turkish missiles would be removed six months later to avoid the appearance of a quid pro quo, and, Robert Kennedy stressed, “We had to have a commitment by tomorrow…”
Before leaving Kennedy’s office, Dobrynin tells the young attorney general, “You’re a good man; your brother is a good man. I assure you there are other good men. Let us hope the will of good men is enough to counter the terrible strength of this thing that was put in motion.”
It’s unclear if those words were actually spoken by Dobrynin, but his purpose was clear: Russia and America had to step back, and calmly look for an alternative to war.
The crisis before us is no less critical, one that requires stepping back and calmly looking for an alternative to the bitterness and distrust which could easily lead to an escalation of the war in Congress.
(ref: It’s Ethics Stupid.com https://ethicsstupid.com/accountability/the-will-of-good-men/)