WorldNetDaily columnist Scott Lively has long been a puppet for Vladimir Putin, most recently trying to justify Russia’s brutal, unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. That continued in his Dec. 9 column, which began by declaring that Tulsi Gabbard “has correctly assessed the world situation regarding Russia,” then serving up more pro-Russia propaganda and insisting that the fall of Syrian dictator Assad was a set-up to hurt Russia:
My main intention is to explain why I believe the Syria takedown is a U.S./NATO-orchestrated maneuver using NATO member Turkey. I view this as an attempt to put Russia on its back foot as negotiations over Ukraine move from backroom diplomatic prep-talks into open bargaining in the public view.
The Syria blitz was obviously long-planned, and helps explain Ukraine’s “head-scratcher” Kursk incursion into Russia for little discernible military advantage. Why did NATO have Ukraine divert some its best troops to strategically meaningless Kursk when the Ukrainian defense was collapsing all along the Donbas front?
Yes, in negotiations it’s common to trade like for like (e.g., prisoner exchanges) to further a sense of equity in the final deal, but when the proposed like for like trade is too imbalanced it can have the opposite effect. Such would be the case in Russia’s eyes regarding the trade of Kursk for any part of the Donbas.
But what if the trade was not Kursk for Donbas, but the Tartus Russian naval base in Syria for the port city of Odessa? Stay with me while I put the pieces together.
It’s now obvious to me in retrospect that NATO wanted to pin down all of Russia’s reserves so they could not be sent to help Assad. But what aspect of the fall of Syria strengthens NATO in the Ukraine negotiations?
It is the fact that Russia’s only naval base in the Middle East is in Syria.
Lively went on to praise Putin’s alleged management of the war he started:
Now, expecting Russia to give up any part of the four oblasts on the Donbas line is simply a non-starter for Russia. Putin has made this clear, and he has the clear military advantage now in Ukraine – having proven he can keep rolling up slow and steady gains indefinitely despite NATOs best efforts – as Ukraine weakens proportionally. I don’t think he wants any other part of Ukraine for anything but a buffer zone – certainly not Kyiv which would be nothing but a headache to manage under occupation.
Frankly, the “Russian expansionism” boogeyman is pure baseless fear-mongering – except for Odessa.
Once NATO had crossed Russia’s red line on incorporating Ukraine and refused to back down, invading Ukraine became a defensive military necessity for Russia on par with the Cuban Missile Crisis for America. My WND column of March 21, 2022, explained this in reference to our Monroe Doctrine.
In its Special Military Operation, Crimea was the most critical territory for Russia to reclaim – the strategic equivalent of Hawaii to the U.S. Next, liberating the four ethnically Russian and Russian-speaking Oblasts (Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia) from literal Ukrainian neo-Nazis who had killed 14,000 civilians in Lugansk and Donestsk since the Obama/Clinton/Soros coup in 2014, was both a moral obligation and a strategic imperative in the face of NATO intentions to base nukes there within reach of Moscow. These objectives were fully consistent with international law and America’s own military history, in my view.
Again, Lively completely ignores the fact that NATO is a defensive alliance that is no threat to Russia … unless Putin’s goal is war and expansionism.
Lively used his Jan. 13 column to justify his creepy support for Russia and Putin because they hate gay people as much as he does:
NATO’s utter failure to impose “Western Liberal Democracy” (i.e., the LGBT agenda) on Russia through military defeat and Balkanization means – above every other consideration – the world’s alignment to LGBTism must be quickly scuttled (at least temporarily) to prevent the rapid expansion of Russian cultural influence in the community of nations.
For more than 20 years, I’ve been quite public in my support of Russia because I recognize the Russian Federation as the world’s best hope for rolling back the global LGBT agenda. That agenda has been the point of the leftist spear for nation-by-nation cultural regime change toward its ultimate goal of imposing a leftist-controlled global government on us all. I was awakened to the true nature of the LGBT threat as a baby Christian during the Reagan Revolution, and, after several years watching the agenda wreak havoc on America despite the best efforts of the church (and my own), I became an independent missionary to the global pro-family movement in the hope that the cancer we now call DEI could be forced into remission globally with a positive rebound effect eventually here at home.
[…]The main purpose for this article, however, is to applaud Russia’s victory in preventing NATO from using Ukraine as a weapon to defeat, subjugate and plunder the Russian Federation – and to highlight some of the geopolitical consequences of that victory both good and bad.
First, because Russia will NOT be forced to bow the knee to LGBTism (again, the core strategy for weakening resistance to globalism), the elites are forced to reverse course on the “Obama Doctrine” of aggressively shoving the “gay” agenda down the throats of every nation through sheer hegemonic coercion. Instead, they must rapidly scramble to prevent Russia from massively winning the hearts and minds of normalcy-craving populations globally – as was beginning to happen locally in Eastern Europe in 2013 immediately after the Russian propaganda ban took effect. The U.S. nipped that in the bud with the 2014 Obama/Soros coup in Ukraine – the true start of the Ukraine war – but now that their war strategy has failed, the elites must quickly pivot, dump their most fervent DEI pushers everywhere (e.g., Justin Trudeau), and replace them with more conservative-looking leaders (e.g., pro-NATO Giorgia Meloni).
LIvely then decalred: “Already the ascendancy of Russian values in the minds of Europeans has forced the NATO puppet-masters to “cancel” a pro-Russian conservative election victory in Romania and to threaten the same in Germany should the Alternatives for Germany (AfG) party come to power as seems likely.” In fact, documents show that there was voting manipulation through social media platforms, illegal campaign financing on TikTok, cyber-attacks orchestrated by external forces and suspected Russian interference. Lively parenthetically added:
(Incidentally, regarding the absurd accusation that an AfG win is equivalent to a return to Nazism, at my last big conference in Riga at Alexey’s church a few years ago, yours truly shared the stage with AfG Member of Parliament Herdt Waldemar, Israeli Knesset Member Yehuda Glick and a prominent Messianic Jewish church leader from Israel for two days of pro-Israel speeches and panel discussions.)
Lively’s poor research skills surfaced again as he got the guy’s name wrong — it’s Waldemar Herdt.