Douglas Macgregor: NATO IS DEAD – Empire of Lies Just COLLAPSED

Ugh, more propaganda from that fat-faced, bellowing blowhard. Tell us again the Russian invasion of Ukraine would be over in two weeks, Dougie.

"Before the invasion of Ukraine, there was not much of a threat against Ukraine from Russia"... except, of course, the fact that Ukraine gave up the #3 nuclear arsenal in exchange for promises from the US of protection should Russia ever invade... which Obama and Biden both ignored, of course.

Yeah, not one indicator of a threat AT ALL!!!

SMH

Isn’t this the guy that kept telling us every time the mud froze that Ukraine was doomed? Or was it every time the ground thawed? I think it was both…

And russia has given sovereignty guarantees as well, so much for their word

No description or summary given—just a title. No text to read.

A 39 minute video of people no one knows.

Cruddy Free Republic posters do this.

Ganeemead: “Trust me—I'm worth wasting 39 minutes of your life over”

Here is a AI summary of the video so I can save 39 mins of your life.

The speaker presents the view that the Western narrative surrounding the war in Ukraine is collapsing and that political leaders in the United States and Europe can no longer maintain public support for what he considers a failed strategy. He argues that Ukraine’s military situation has deteriorated to the point of near-disintegration, with rising surrender rates, collapsing morale, and internal political tensions that may threaten the Zelensky government. According to him, this unraveling exposes what he calls an “empire of lies” constructed by Western elites to justify the war.

He believes that ongoing Western discussions about deterrence, peace plans, or long-term strategy are detached from battlefield realities. In his view, the conflict is already effectively ending in Russia’s favor, making many proposed diplomatic or military solutions irrelevant. He asserts that the war could have been avoided through an Austrian-style neutrality arrangement for Ukraine, which he describes as the most rational early solution.

The speaker claims that European governments—especially in Germany, the UK, and France—are escalating hostile rhetoric toward Russia, not because they expect or desire a real war, but because they are trying to justify their own political survival. He argues that European publics show no willingness to fight Russia, citing the absence of volunteerism. He predicts that this disconnect between leaders and voters will result in major political change across Europe as the war’s outcome becomes undeniable.

He further suggests that European states are increasingly more likely to deport Ukrainian men back to Ukraine than to mobilize for war with Russia. He speculates that Ukrainian diaspora populations could include individuals who may attempt retributive violence in Europe, which he believes would accelerate deportation pressures. The eventual post-war future of Ukraine, he argues, may involve substantial territorial losses or fragmentation, possibly along lines proposed by Russian officials.

Regarding NATO and the European Union, the speaker asserts that both institutions are entering a period of irreversible decline. He contends that NATO no longer represents a unified strategic vision and that differing regional interests within Europe will lead to the emergence of smaller, regional security blocs. He emphasizes that Americans do not live in Europe and that Europeans must ultimately assume responsibility for their own security. He references Charles de Gaulle and Dwight Eisenhower to argue that the U.S. should not permanently lead European defense policy. He sees the EU as similarly unstable due to internal economic and cultural strains.

Turning to the United States, the speaker draws a sharp distinction between ordinary Americans and what he describes as a wealthy, globally-oriented elite class. Most Americans, he says, have limited knowledge of or interest in NATO and largely question the purpose of U.S. troop deployments in Europe. He portrays the political system in Washington as dominated by financial interests, informal advisors, and donor-driven policy rather than national strategic considerations. He criticizes both parties for failing to prioritize domestic economic well-being and for pursuing foreign interventions that offer little benefit to Americans.

The speaker concludes that the war in Ukraine reveals the end of the post-Cold-War unipolar order. He argues that NATO’s inability to achieve its goals in Ukraine signifies a broader decline of U.S. global dominance. As economic pressures rise, he expects mounting domestic backlash against foreign commitments and greater internal instability within the United States. Overall, he describes the West as being on the verge of major political and institutional transformation, driven by the disintegration of what he repeatedly calls the “empire of lies” that has sustained Western foreign policy since the end of the Cold War.