1 Comment

The more I see anti-Lula attacks, the more I imagine that his "utopian" proposal can work.

Why would Russia not be interested in someone who interferes for peace, preserving its interests? There were several attempts to resist US provocations - through Zelensky... Plan B, C, D... culminating in the last alternative - Plan "Z" - the special operation to liberate the territory occupied by terrorists/genocides .

I suggest that Lula's speech, on the occasion of the German Chancellor's visit, be analyzed further. He asks: "What's this war about? One side says it was for this, the other side says it was for that... And nobody really knows why!" When Lula makes this statement (of course he knows it very well), he indirectly suggests that the "truth" about what happened, and what is happening in the Donbas, be revealed and discussed by influential world leaders, so that they can present proposals for peace.

The fact that the TASS Agency published the opinion of a "former diplomat" from the Donbass, about Lula's interest in promoting himself politically, cannot be interpreted so categorically as a refusal by Russia's high echelons to the proposal of the "G20 for peace".

Also, it is a mistake to imagine that the Indian Ambassador's speech is a criticism of Lula's G20. Quite the contrary... when he says that "no one has presented a serious proposal for peace", he suggests that there is such a need, and that world leaders need to assume this responsibility. The best way would be through a meeting of these leaders.

Washington's power is getting weaker by the day, and pressure from a "mighty G20" might work.

Anyone who thinks that Lula, in his third term, is more lenient with the Empire is wrong. His time in prison was important to strengthen him, and he is more than ever prepared to defend his country's interests. And also to fight for more social justice in the world.

Anti Biden speeches please!

Expand full comment