'A Fierce battle between a Jew and a Catholic in the White House over Ukraine'
From the Veteran's Today Journal
The ideological divide between Blinken the Jew and Milley the Catholic was significant.
by Jonas E. Alexis, Veterans Today- Editor
Mark Milley, a retired United States Army general, served as the 20th Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2023.
His academic background is impeccable; he graduated from Princeton University and later earned a degree from Columbia University. In other words, he received exceptional training. However, academic excellence alone does not shield one from intense ideological battles, especially when confronting a persistent and destructive force that seeks to disrupt political stability, particularly in regions like Ukraine.
Antony Blinken is the 71st United States Secretary of State.
He frequently references his family’s tragic experiences during the Holocaust. A graduate of Harvard University and Columbia University, Blinken also possesses an impressive academic background.
The ideological divide between Blinken the Jew and Milley the Catholic was significant.
Milley recognized that the Ukraine war could not continue indefinitely without severe consequences. He believed that President Zelensky needed to pursue peace to prevent Ukraine’s destruction.
Blinken, however, took a different stance. Despite the detrimental impact of the war on both Ukraine and the United States, Blinken advocated for Ukraine’s soldiers to continue their efforts, even in the face of mounting losses.
Milley sought a peaceful resolution to end the conflict, while Blinken supports continued military engagement and continued death to the Ukrainians.
At the heart of this issue lies a deeper ideological conflict. Milley seemed to prioritize a pragmatic approach aimed at preserving lives and stability, while Blinken’s perspective appeared driven by a different set of considerations, which critics argue contributed to prolonged suffering and destruction.
It is reported that Washington has spent nearly $100 billion on Ukraine, while challenges within the United States remain unaddressed.
American cities are struggling, and recent events, such as a fire in Los Angeles that devastated the livelihoods of many, highlight the severity of these issues. Adding to the distress, reports emerged that “hundreds of L.A. landlords hiked rents to capitalize on ‘desperate’ fire evacuees,” exacerbating an already intolerable situation.
This raises a critical question: Can the United States afford to remain involved in protracted conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine?
The burden falls not on the policymakers advocating for these wars but on average Americans, many of whom struggle to access basic needs such as affordable healthcare. It is striking to note that countries like South Korea have more efficient healthcare systems than the United States, which is often touted as the “land of the free.” Two friends of mine who came to the U.S. were shocked by the complexity and high costs of the healthcare system compared to other countries.
The broader question is whether the U.S. can sustain a system that appears to prioritize foreign interventions over domestic well-being.
A reevaluation of priorities is urgently needed to address these imbalances and refocus on the needs of its citizens.