Does the West want war with Russia? -Zero Hedge

Nope, no bias here. Zero Hedge/Peak Prosperity.

Does the west want war with Russia? According to an article posted on Zero Hedge, it's possible. The article proposes that the west has rushed to judgment for the MH-17 disaster, and the rhetoric is so fiery that it can be compared to the lead up to the 2nd Gulf War. Unlike almost any article, they ask "what is America's and the EU's stake in Ukraine"? The author points out that diplomacy prevailed even in the darkest days of the Soviet Union, with disasters far more deadly then the current war in Ukraine. And the author asks if it is even possible to return to diplomacy after all the propaganda. 

My Comment:

Zero Hedge isn't the most reliable source and I don't know much about the site that originally created the article, Peak Prosperity, but it does raise some concerns I have myself. Before I get into anything else though I will say that this article probably goes too far into the Pro-Putin camp. He isn't the insane dictator that the west is making him out to be but he isn't a victim either. And I think it is much more likely that the pro-Russian Rebels were the ones to shoot down the MH-17, even though I agree that the media has jumped the gun. 

As for everything else though, I think he is right. Our handling of Russia since the end of the cold war has been terrible. After the fall of Communism, America had a golden opportunity to turn Russia from an enemy into a friend, but the expansion of NATO ruined that. In a perfect world Russia would have been in NATO, but for whatever reason we decided to expand a treaty organization designed to combat a threat that no longer existed. 

And even though I don't approve of the way both Bush's and Clinton handled Russia, at least they talked to Russia. Remember the 2008 war in Georgia? Sure, Bush made some noise and made some threats, but in the end nothing came of it because he knew that it just wasn't worth it. Obama doesn't seem to feel the same way about Ukraine. Sure they probably shot down MH-17, but we have worked with the Russians through worse. Much worse. Stalin was evil incarnate and we still avoided war with him. I personally think it comes down to the utter hatred the two men, Obama and Putin have for each other. 

Nothing about Obama's Ukraine policy made any sense. We helped to overthrow a democratically elected government to install ultra-nationalists, who in any other context would be the bad guys. When those nationalists decided to persecute a minority by banning their language, something that would have been denounced if it had happened anywhere else, we still supported them. When Russia annexed Crimea, after another democratic election, an election with problems of course but still an accurate measure of what the people wanted, we protested, sanctioned and threatened. Now I am not saying that the Russians or the pro-Russian rebels are innocent. They have a ton of blood on their hands as well. But we can't accuse them of being bullies when we are doing the same thing. 

My question is why? What do we gain from undermining Russia? Doesn't America have enough enemies as it is? How does this end in anything other then a 2nd Cold War, or even worse World War III? So does the west want war with Russia, either in a literal sense or in a 2nd Cold war sense? It doesn't really matter. I've always said there isn't a difference between malice and stupidity when the stakes are this high, and by accident or design we are risking war with a nuclear power over nothing. Yes, MH-17 was a tragedy. Yes, the war in Ukraine was a horrible mistake for all parties involved. It is NOT worth going to war over. Even if it wasn't a morally questionable conflict, it would not make sense to pick a fight with a power that can destroy us, themselves and everything. Let's try diplomacy. If it's not too late.