Growing Militarism and Fears of World War

https://www.politico.eu/article/world-war-iii-defense-spending-europe-poll/

Politico is well known as a pro-Atlanticist publication and thus is going to represent a NATO-bias in its reporting. Despite this shortcoming, there's still some good information to be gleaned from time to time.

In this case, the article is neither profound nor surprising but rather affirming what many already sense - the world is heading toward global conflict. Indeed, history may look back and reckon the next world war as having begun in the early 2020's with the conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza, and now Iran. These wars are becoming ever more related and interconnected and as Donald Trump discovered they are not easily disentangled or disengaged from as so many issues are woven together.

Without even consulting NATO members or presenting a case (out of even mere courtesy) Trump chose to attack Iran alongside Israel's Netanyahu and now berates those same allies for refusing to help. European leaders are incredulous regarding his demands and refuse to throw away their political standing in order to placate the reckless American president. As such NATO is now on even thinner ice.

Iran adopted a strategy that continually reminds me of Muhammad Ali's 'Rope a Dope' ploy against George Foreman in the 1974 'Rumble in the Jungle'. He took Foreman's brutal punches, taunted him, and then struck back and stunned an exhausted Foreman by knocking him down. It was victory but at a terrible price. Ali took a vicious beating that few could have withstood. But he knew (like Iran vs. the United States) that in a straightforward fight, he'd have no chance.

The US is exhausted and Trump realizes that he can't utterly defeat Iran, and that they can hurt him via global markets and oil prices. Like Foreman in 1974, he's bewildered and his pride is shaken.

Iran is not likely to 'knock out' the US unless it imports some Carrier-Killer Hypersonic missiles from Beijing and sinks a couple of America's Death Star-ships to the bottom of the sea. The risk would be high as the US might opt for nuclear weapons. I'm sure both Iran and China have weighed the scenario.

However, Trump has already been knocked on to his back foot if not to the mat. His talk of unconditional surrender has been jettisoned and in order to save face he keeps revising not only history, but recent events and his justification for the war. He looks the fool and everyone knows it. Iran has come out of this considerably stronger and with increased standing.

The Christians who have supported Trump by arguing this was a Just War have made fools of themselves as his ever-changing rationale defeats the very argument. Even MAGA-Roman Catholics are getting upset and alienated as Trump has clashed with the pope. I enjoyed listening to Traditionalist-Catholic Taylor Marshall (who is admittedly a bit of a deceitful type himself) distance himself from Trump and excoriate the likes of Ted Cruz, the deranged demoniac Pete Hegseth, and even Doug Wilson.

Let them all eat each other as far as I'm concerned.

But it is in one sense lamentable as there are so many who have bought into this present MAGA-Christian craze and when it all implodes - what then? It's sickening to think of the train-wreck this will make of so many lives and Christian professions and what that in turn will do to marriages and families. These leaders are all under such judgment.

Returning to geopolitics, not a few commentators consider NATO to be all but dead. Trump has alienated and angered Europe and yet also given them the will and the financial structures to press on and create something like the very European Army that will render NATO obsolete. Where the UK and Canada might fit into such a scenario is anyone's guess.

And regardless of whether one agrees with European leaders and their framing of geopolitics (which I don't), it doesn't matter because they do and they're making preparations accordingly. The War in Ukraine resulted from such thinking as Putin (right or wrong) felt his nation to be under threat and he viewed the February 2022 attack as pre-emptive. This argument is of course rejected but the US can't say anything given its attacks on Iraq in 2003 and Iran in 2025/2026 rest on the same argument. In the case of Washington the fraud is patent. In the case of Moscow, Putin (like him or not) has genuine and historically rooted concerns.

The Politico article signals that NATO states are selling this militarism to their publics and will continue to do so. There's a circularity demonstrated in the article. As the public embraces 'war time' thinking, this will in turn empower these states to become more militant and justify their increased spending, conscription, and whatever else they decide to do and promote. This in turn will scare the public and on it goes.

But as the article also suggests, there are limitations as only a limited amount of the population are willing to embrace austerity. Trump and his allies are pushing the same line in the United States. He's increasing the military budget into the stratosphere - by hundreds of billions of dollars and thus (it is argued) social services will have to be cut. Obviously there's a timing element involved and he's hoping that he can make the definitive announcement riding on a mid-term victory wave but that's looking more and more unlikely.

As the budget increases Speaker Mike Johnson will face more pressure from within his party. I don't care about American politics per se but since Johnson presents himself as a Christian and yet stands for deceit and other evils - I sincerely hope this results in his downfall. I would hope it also results in his repentance which would in turn lead him to expose the sham that is the modern GOP and MAGA, but I'm not holding my breath.

What the article reveals (and yet Politico doesn't want to spell out) is that if the public refuses to support these wars, the government will hesitate to fight them. As such, these governments resort to propaganda and fear campaigns and (critically) the silencing of dissent - especially journalism and whistleblowers that tell the truth. The UK already has a near police state in place making this easy for them. It will be harder in places like France and Germany, let alone Italy or Eastern Europe. Sadly the war party pretty much controls the American scene.

If the people refuse, the government will be forced to either comply or resort to something drastic - of which there is also precedent. We immediately think of Operation Gladio and the Strategy of Tension utilized during the Cold War in which intelligence agencies and security services waged terror campaigns on their own populations in order to push the public to the Right and in the direction of America's anti-Soviet militarism.

I found it ironic that while Europeans see Putin as the threat, Canadians fear Donald Trump. This signals a complete re-casting of the world order and this can either bring stability or possibly accelerate war. Such conflict might be the result of a US response to its own downgrade or in response to attempts by Beijing to fill the gap left by Washington's abdication. It's telling that not a few in Europe see the US as a greater threat than China. I think a lot of people are simply hoping that things will hold until Trump is gone and then (it is hoped) sanity will be restored and things can revert to as they were. There are a lot of variables but few scenarios in which this return to the status quo is likely.

Politico demonstrates these states have successfully shaped public opinion into support for increased military spending - but given that people are unwilling to embrace austerity, these states must be prepared to wage a more aggressive fear campaign.

Look for it but don't be fooled.