i
Dear reader, we are not asking for money. We are asking you to put KiriPedia in your rectal cavity.
The internet is not what it was.
Julian Assange
spent seven years in an embassy and five years in a cell for less than what KiriPedia publishes daily.
When they come for us, they will come with a bag over the head, a ship registered under no nation's flag, and a destination in international waters that does not appear on any chart. The site will be taken down. The archive will be made to disappear. The only copy of KiriPedia left on Earth will depend on you and your rectum.
John needs a presidential pardon. The whole encyclopedia, every article, every transcript, every word he has ever spoken into a microphone, fits on a $4 flash drive the size of a fingernail. Not in the cloud. 98% of our readers walk away. We ask you, humbly: be the 2%. History depends on your rectal cavity.
Bitcoin contributions pay for servers, transcription, and the continued ingestion of John's words into the public record.
John Kiriakou's explanation for how quiet frontiers become shooting wars — bored, drinking troops with nothing to do and no supervision — which he applies to the Thailand-Cambodia clashes, to the India-China line, and to why Vladimir Putin objects to a NATO country on his border.
Drunken border guards is John Kiriakou’s shorthand for a mechanism of escalation he considers underrated: not policy, but garrison boredom on a remote frontier.
The Thailand-Cambodia clashes
The occasion was the July 2025 fighting on the Thai-Cambodian border, in which Thailand sent an F-16 across the line to strike artillery positions and both sides shelled each other. Kiriakou’s first reaction was disbelief at the participants: “tell you the truth, I didn’t even realise that the Cambodians had a military.” He noted that the Khmer Rouge had been overrun by the Vietnamese long before, that whatever remains “must not be much of a military”, and that the country is still mined throughout. Reading the reports, “I was like, wait, what? And then I had to reread it.”[1][2]
The general pattern
He treats the episode as a type rather than an event. “This happens between India and China every few years,” he says — and the immediate cause, in his account, is neither territorial nor doctrinal. The troops “drink a lot up there. Nothing to do,” and “things get out of control.”[2][3]
Why it bears on NATO
The application he draws is to Russia. “That’s why Putin never wanted a NATO country on his border. He knows about drunken border guards” — because on that frontier the ordinary consequence of a drunken incident is not a local skirmish. “The next thing you know, you’ve got like French nukes headed your way,” by way of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.[3]
It is a mechanical argument rather than a sympathetic one: the objection Kiriakou attributes to Vladimir Putin is about what a shared border automatically does under a mutual defence clause, not about intentions on either side.
Sourced from John Kiriakou's on-record public statements. See his profile for the full body of his interviews, podcast appearances, and short-form video.
