Only two people responded to my last commentary on Putin’s Ukraine/Free World War. One was a woman, who agreed we must make plain to Putin that NATO and the free world are not afraid of him militarily. The other said he does not want to take on Putin in this “Proxy” war.

All other of my readers have so far remained silent. As I wrote, I do not think Ukraine’s war is one may sit on the fence about. Putin is not fighting a simple “Proxy” war with the free world in Ukraine. He is fighting a real military war that he also knows is symbolic.

He knows full well that he is testing NATO and the free world’s deep-down unity, and its ability militarily to confront him and his nuclear bluff.  This is not a ‘proxy’ war that one may sit on the fence about.

His nuclear bluff is only partly bluff – perhaps. Yes, he might in his demented mind actually be mentally fragile enough to make a nuclear error. Which is why an expressed public media statement by NATO and the free world that we understand the true meaning of his real and symbolic attack on Ukraine.

President Biden’s comments in his State of The Union about Ukraine were “intellectual” in nature. They were very cautiously spoken in omitting that America, NATO, and the free world possess the legal and ethical right to acknowledge we indeed hold the potential to deal militarily with Putin.

I maintain that the free world (we) must make plain now to Putin that we are not immediately placing our marines, soldiers, air, and ground war equipment in Ukraine but that we are capable of doing so – and are not cowed by his nuclear threat and his 40-mile convoy.

This war in Ukraine is largely a world rhetorical media affair. Putin has said he is placing “Peace Keeping” troops in certain places. Well, we have the ability – and should say so to him – that the free world has the ability to quickly place a “Peace Keeping” force inside Ukraine.

Should we at this specific moment temporarily stop short of instantly doing so? Of course. But if we create a media statement now that will allow Putin to imagine a NATO and free world military blockade inside Ukraine’s borders to confront his 40-mile convoy of Russian tanks – Mr. Putin, I say, will get the message.

Would we be playing Nuclear Poker with Putin? Yes. What do we think we are playing? Dominoes? Putin has already made this a Nuclear War. He has said so in plain language.  If we do not impeccably, clearly, and concisely make him understand we understand this point, he gains daily in his military and symbolic media strength.

Financial sanctions alone are not enough. Putin can accept those for a short time if he completes his invasion of Ukraine. We must not let him successfully complete his military invasion of Ukraine and kill Zelensky.

Russian oligarchs are speaking out against Putin’s invasion. His own people doing so. Also, some of the few clandestine independent news media left on the far edges of Russia’s Putin-controlled media.

And note an interesting aside to consider for any of you who may appreciate political nuance: American petroleum interests have substantial investments in the oil infrastructure of Russia. This means that they can and could continue to reap profits from Putin’s military adventure.

What is my over-all point? This is a real and symbolic war against the free world. It is unquestionably dangerous.

Most of President Biden’s comments last night dwelt on America’s financial and social needs, on the protection of our still self-obsessed consumer economy. On our still  shallow, short-sighted, luxury-oriented society.

Despite Biden’s fine words outlining how we may presently “repair” America, its infrastructure, and other problems, those issues will certainly remain and persist quite forcefully if we do not right now stand up to Putin’s military war in plain, clear statements in the world’s press. And be prepared to collaboratively follow through.

We need to recognize this war for the extremely serious challenge it is. This is the entire free world against a Hitlerian military bully. It is a battle against military terrorism.

I’d still like to know: what are your thoughts on the subject?

Hal