Is Ukraine the Clintons’ Falklands War?

Few remember Margaret Thatcher, the Hillary of the 1980s, the British prime minister who never once thought about anybody but her family and friends. Loyal woman of few principles. In 1982, the Guardian reported, Margaret Thatcher needed a gamble: a fast war highly mediated to regain the trust of her family and friends (the British society is composed of the following casting system: the royal family, the rich, their family and friends and the others).

Margaret Thatcher pocked on the Falklands islands, inhabited by some old guy and his wife, and because no one knew where the Islands were located, her gamble paid off. The royal navy was victorious, and papers all over the world wrote:

The prime minister’s decision to go to war in 1982, with her government on the brink of collapse, changed everything. Margaret became a successful decider.

Now, enter right stage Hillary. Hillary, through her Bill’s foundation is concocting global connections for her run for the US presidency. One of those big fish captured in Bill’s net is the Ukraine mafia boss — excuse my French, I meant magnate — Victor Pinchuk. Mr. Pinchuk, according to the NY Times, wants ties to the EU because his investments are in the West, not with Putin. Mr. Pinchuk is behind the new Ukraine unrests. Therefore, the Clintons are behind the Ukraine unrest. If that unrest is successful, Hillary has a big ace in her cards to wave at John Kerry, her most meaningful opponent in the 2016 elections, as of now. But, Ukraine is not the Falklands Islands. And Russia, or Putin’s Russia is not Argentine.

Interesting gamble Ms. Hillary. Let’s see its outcome. By the way, the Ukrainian faction you support had the most concentration camps in a country filled with them. They were freely created by the people of West Ukraine, in a misguided attempt to prove their sincere love for the West.