This is an excellent summary which comports well with the analysis of other commentators such as Andrei Martyanov, Larry Johnson, Douglas Macgregor, Scott Ritter, et al. What isn’t touched upon as much by any of the commentators I follow is the social and psychological composition of the population itself. The basic description of a divided Ukraine is characterized as Ukrainian nationalism vs. Russian cultural identity, but is this the whole story, or merely a superficial construct designed primarily for western consumption? Granted this division is significant, but there are other elements in play here, first of which is the economic and demographic reality of Ukraine since independence in 1991.
I think it’s useful to do a side by side comparison of Russia vs Ukraine post the breakup. They were the most similar of the former republics, and the most significant in economic terms, which meant they were the first to attract the attention of western financiers and their corporate allies. So for the next ten years we had a similar pattern of former apparatchiks acquiring great fortunes with western banking assistance, to the detriment of the population at large. Then the great divergence occurred with the ascent of VVP and his faction, which having gained political power sat the oligarchs down and read them the riot act. You can keep some of your assets, but some you’ll have to return to the state, and by the way, you’re working for Russia now. Anyone who doesn’t agree is welcome to get on their yacht and leave. So sign here, or there’s the door, and I’d like my pen back please.
That never happened in Ukraine, which to me is the defining difference. The looting simply continued and the cynicism of the population increased, whereas in Russia there was a shift in public perception buttressed by a broad nationalism with historic roots that simply doesn't exist in Ukraine as a whole. Ukrainian nationalism, such as it does exist, has a dark past to which only the western portion of the country feels any affinity. For the remainder of the population it was something they either had no part in, would sooner forget, or had family history of opposing. Note, this division does not occur along strictly ethnic lines but includes ethnic Ukrainians who took the side of the USSR, or at least resisted Ukrainian nationalism as defined by the OUN and Bandera elements.
So what does this mean in the current context? Simply that while the ethnic Russian portion of the population is relatively unified, divisions exist on the ethnic Ukrainian side and are widening as a result of a war which a growing portion of ethnic Ukrainians want no part of, and who see it as a continuation of the looting operation described above. The Nationalists know this, and by attempting to root out that element of their own society are simply increasing that division to the point that some of their own people have now turned against them. So a state of paranoia exists within Ukrainian leadership. No one at the top has any delusions about the Nationalist program they're pushing. It’s simply the operational schema for the continued looting of the nation, made all the more attractive by the fact that they’ve drawn their western sponsors into the fray and can loot them as well.
This is the actual background of the war of attrition, in my opinion. It has an obvious military element, but it also consists of aiding Ukrainian oligarchs in the looting of western financial resources on the theory that at some point, it become a political factor leading to a change of leadership in the West. The oligarchs can be dealt with later, as no amount of money can buy them protection from what’s coming, either from their own people, or from Russia herself.
We’ve all seen the map of the 2010 election which is used to illustrate the division between the two ethnicities, but is that the whole picture? Recall that a key element leading to the Maidan protests was the issue of EU membership. I would argue that the split in the electorate had more to do with that than with any ethnic divisions or loyalty to Russia. Consider a 20-something guy in Ukraine with few economic prospects. EU membership would be very attractive as it holds out the potential of employment in the EU. I would argue that was a motivating factor for many young Ukrainians regardless of ethnicity, and would have created the illusion of greater support for the nationalist faction than actually exists. Basically people voted their self-interest, and at the time the EU seemed the best option. Never mind the fact that the eastern industrial sector of Ukraine was an integral part of the USSR, and as such had well developed markets in Russia, whereas they had virtually no markets in the west outside of agricultural products, and no realistic chance of ever competing with Western corporations. That kind of argument takes a back seat when the individual's priority is escape from perpetual poverty. To sum it up, that vote was economically determined and likely had little to do with pro or anti Russian sentiment. It was simply voting for a potential way out of a dire circumstance. Delusional in my opinion, but young people often are.
So that’s my summary of the social and psychological backdrop to the conflict. In short, Ukrainian youth of both ethnic extractions were lured by a false promise held out by an entrenched political elite with no intention of enacting the type of reforms which would have admitted them to the EU. How could they, when they were the very source of the corruption the EU decried? Even if the process had moved ahead, it would have taken much longer than would benefit any young person looking for an immediate way out. So instead of a job in the EU, you’re dragooned into a war you want no part of, and from which you’re unlikely to return. Not exactly the outcome you anticipated, so how much commitment can you expect from that cohort, who now make up the bulk of what’s left of the UAF? This to me is the defining aspect of the war at this point. The hard core element have mostly been killed and the remainder are looking for a way to surrender without being shot by their nationalist minders, a sad replay of soviet era military ‘discipline.’ I suppose the end game depends on how much of the UAF leadership are professional soldiers not implicated in the coup or subsequent horrors, who see the best way to end this is to remove the Ukrainian government and negotiate terms of surrender. How likely this is I can’t say as I’m not familiar with the UAF command structure and their loyalties.
Is that a good summary? I welcome comments and criticism as my analysis is strictly from the outside. Although I have friends on both sides of the conflict, none of them have any enthusiasm for what’s happening, they are just simple guys who feel the same as I do, that a massive tragedy has occurred that never should have happened.
More to the point, the President and the Prime Minister are not Slavic Ukrainians. They don’t care how many Ukrainians they waste away because the Ukrainians are not their people. The people who they answer to are a totally different ethnic group: their fellow brethren -- primarily, Blinken, Nuland, and Sullivan (don't let that last name fool you) and billionaires like Igor Kolomoisky.
Same here in the UK (Sunak), Scotland (whatever the First minister ethnical Pakistani name is) and Ireland (Taoiseach=PM Varadkar is indian). Obviously they are not interested in the local people.
Funding Both Sides: How Jewish Money Controls British Politics . . .
“During the previous Labour government, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were ardent Zionists because they accepted the justice of Israel’s cause, not because Labour’s chief fund-raisers were first the Jew Michael Levy and then the Jew Jonathan Mendelsohn (both are now members of the House of Lords). And during the current Conservative government, David Cameron, Theresa May and Boris Johnson have been ardent Zionists because they too accept the justice of Israel’s cause, not because the Conservatives’ chief fund-raisers have been first the Jew Sir Mick Davis and then the Jew Sir Ehud Sheleg.”
The Ukraine conflict is actually a DOUBLE PROXY war. There's the obvious proxy of Ukraine fighting the Russians for NATO/EU/US/EMPIRE. Then there is the uber proxy of NATO/EU/US/EMPIRE fronting for the neocons/neoliberals, the psychopaths actually calling the shots, i.e., the elephant in the room whose true identity cannot be spoken .
This diabolical war is a fulcrum point and hinge of fate that history turns upon; insomuch, it's a major defeat for neo liberal Globalism that could lead to the economic collapse of the West, something akin to the 89-91 collapse of communism, but this time with russia and the BRICS resurgent
❝. . . the entire establishment in the Western world is attacking Russia in unison. The propaganda machine is in full swing in an effort to make the whole world hate Putin and take Ukraine’s side in the war. The same propaganda machine that wants nothing more than you as a White person to stop having children and instead focus on your career, race-mix or become homosexual. What this establishment wants you to think is often a very good indicator of what you should absolutely not think, and by this measure, Russia appears to be the side to support 100%.
From a global geopolitical perspective, if we theorize from the unlikely idea that this conflict will lead to a third world war, then all pro-Zionist liberal monster-nations like Great Britain, France, Germany, the United States and, of course, Israel itself would side with Ukraine, while more traditional and sovereign anti-Zionist forces would likely stand behind Russia. Mark my words when I say that the Nordic Resistance Movement will NEVER stand on the same side as Israel or the Zionist entity that the USA represents today – whatever the issue or conflict may be!
If we look at the situation from a revolutionary point of view, it is also natural to support Russia. By challenging the USA and the Western world, one acts against the status quo – the present situation that must be destroyed in order for any true changes to take place, and for us National Socialists to be able to make real progress. The more the current ruling powers are challenged, and the harder the world economy is combated, the greater the chance for widespread disruption, which is a necessity for the Nordic revolution to become fact. Please note that I do not mean the coming changes will necessarily be better for us; however, in the dramatic situation in which we find ourselves, we must see hope in every potential radical change that arises within the global environment.❞
It’s quite brilliant that particular family that financed kings in wars and pushing this war had never been punished. But I guess if we all die they will too. Apparently are extremely inbred and ugly lol
“Oh how fond they are of the book of Esther, which is so beautifully attuned to their bloodthirsty, vengeful, murderous yearning and hope.” — Martin Luther
“I fear the Jewish bankers with their craftiness and torturous tricks will entirely control the exuberant riches of America and use it to systematically corrupt modern civilization. The Jews will not hesitate to plunge the whole of Christendom into wars and chaos so that the earth should become their inheritance.” ― Otto Von Bismark
Sodom Hussein Obama's mentor Zbigniew Brzezinski (Mika’s father, next to Nasty Pelousy in the link below) was the monster in the Carter administration who armed and financed the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan to fight against the Soviets... after the Mujahedeen were armed with sophisticated weapons, the Soviets left, the result was the USA got 911, and women now can walk 3 paces behind the donkey, the Mujahedeen evolved into the Taliban, who evolved into Al-Qaeda, who evolved into ISIS/ISIL/Daesh... Brezinski, for all practical purposes, can be called the ‘Grandfather of ISIS’... https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/sodom-hussein-obama
.
Jews Albright and Clark (pictured in the link below) had NATO bomb Serbia so the IMF Jews could make loans for rebuilding and get control of Serbian iridium assets… while Saudi non-profit NGOs kept the KLA terrorists well fed and well-armed… Just like ISIS in Syria… their Zionist bedfellows on Wall Street want Ukraine for GMO grain crops . . . Monsanto (now Bayer), Genentech, ADM, etc., are all buying land with the help of the Jews at the IMF by giving the Ukrainian “Dill” idiots debt relief . . . https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/sodom-hussein-obama
.
Jewish U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D), great grandson of Jacob Schiff (who funded Bolshevism, Leon Trotsky, and the October Revolution from Wall Street) is following in his great grandfather’s footsteps by illegally trafficking weapons with Igor Pasternak (seated behind John Kerry in the link below), funding foreign conflicts abroad... and trying to get Syria for the oil pipelines by blaming the Russians for another false flag... https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/schiffty-schitty-kike-adam-schiffs-collusion-with-oligarch-ukrainian-arms-dealer-exposed
Yes he is, but it has been scrubbed now from his Early Life entry in Wikipedia.
I think the Early Life section is being ghosted for a certain demographic because it has become too easy to source their lineage. Exceptionalism works both ways if you catch my drift.
PROTOCOLS OF THE MEETINGS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION . . . Protocols of Zion: Protocol II – Economic Wars
❝The administrators, whom we shall choose from among the public, with strict regard to their capacities for servile obedience, will not be persons trained in the arts of government, and will therefore easily become pawns in our game in the hands of men of learning and genius who will be their advisers, specialists bred and reared from early childhood to rule the affairs of the whole world.❞
Ebear: Perhaps have a look at "The Tragedy of Ukraine," by Nicolai Petro. Glenn Diesen and Alexander Mercouris interviewed him back in January. He takes up the ethnic history of Ukraine that you sketched in your comment. If memory serves, John Mearsheimer also addressed the composite nature of Ukraine in a post-Maidan lecture around 2015, when he presciently spoke of a primrose path to national destruction. With post-independence electoral maps spanning decades he demonstrated how deeply divided the country was. Petro goes much further back, with similar conclusions.
About your penultimate paragraph: Your description of Ukrainian youth may be correct. It would help to see data, since it may be misleading to assess the youth appeal of the EU based on NGO-funded protests in Kyiv/Kiev. But good data can be hard to come by. We do not have reliable casualty figures for the war or even a noncontroversial number for how many Ukrainians have fled and what the country's population is today. It may also be that nationalists remain in the ascendant, not least because losses among cadres may be offset by ethnic cleansing via conscription, which seems to have been state policy since the war began. And while a military rout could precipitate a coup against the Zelensky government, the harder part might be to free Ukraine from Western masters who may be unwilling to shrug and walk away from their grand Eastern European project. Parlous times.
As a final note on the theme of your post, lately there seems to be a grassroots movement among families and friends of missing combatants. Cookies will not make them go away. That may be a demographic that bears watching.
"Consider a 20-something guy in Ukraine with few economic prospects. EU membership would be very attractive as it holds out the potential of employment in the EU. I would argue that was a motivating factor for many young Ukrainians regardless of ethnicity, and would have created the illusion of greater support for the nationalist faction than actually exists."
It's no secret that this was the original motivating factor behind Maidan - the protesters were hoping to be able to emigrate to someplace that offered better prospects and EU association (conflated with membership) was the surest way to do that.
PROTOCOLS OF THE MEETINGS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION . . . Protocol No. 16 – Brainwashing
❝We must introduce into their education all those principles which have so brilliantly broken up their order. But when we are in power we shall remove every kind of disturbing subject from the course of education and shall make out of the youth obedient children of authority, loving him who rules as the support and hope of peace and quiet.❞
Great summary, I do agree with your socio-economic assessment of the whole Euro-maidan oligarch game as it is playing out. Realistically though I do not see how the UAF leadership can act on its own -- everybody is bought, sold, implicated or could be blackmailed in Kiev, on top of it, US/UK minders have everybody by the balls there. Zelensky will go down to the end (he thinks he has a golden parachute) with most of Kiev's "leadership" . It is a one in a life time opportunity for them to syphon off so much money and blame the West for not delivering enough at the end... Something tells me he'll end up like Sakashvilli though...
It will only end when there is a financial and military implosion where the propaganda can't cover for it...
Russia can accelerate this, but not sure it sees the urgency to do so. The longer game here is to get concessions from Europeans and US on the new European security architecture. In the current economic war of attrition Russia is actually not doing too bad, it is also taking time to reform, retrain, modernize its army against a NATO-led opponent in a "hands on environment"
Worth mentioning too that the drive for a separate Ukrainian identity, as with the Catalunyan identity, was initiated by romantic intellectuals in the late 19th century. Both created dictionaries out of the local demotic, both are border conditions, both had periods of historic power in their past. A recipe for trouble :-(
I was in Spain in 1975 during the final days of Franco. I was a young guy hitchhiking around Europe, which was the thing to do back then. Wound up marrying a Spanish gal, which is another story. I was in the Catalan speaking areas, but didn't notice any discord. The big issue back then was Basque separatism (ETA) and they took it very seriously, including adopting some of the tactics of the IRA. Bombs went off in the railway stations while I was there, and for a while the border was closed. Interior ministry police in armoured vehicles with machine guns were a common sight. One of the measures they were resisting was the banning of the Basque language in schools and publications. Same thing the Ukrainian nationalists are doing today with Russian. I had no idea what I'd walked into actually. My approach back then was to just head out in a direction and see what happened. I don't think I even had a travel guidebook.
Owing to my marriage I speak Spanish. As a test, I took the text you wrote and ran it through Google Translate, into Catalan. Surprisingly I can understand most of it. It's closer to Spanish than Portuguese, which I can also read and even speak a bit. Funny how these slight cultural and linguistic differences get amplified into political movements. Sometimes it's organic if the cultures and languages are very different, as with the Basque people, but where the differences are slight I always suspect a political rather than cultural motive is at work. That said, the Spanish government let the mask slip in the way they handled the Catalan movement. Vestiges of the Franco era are still present in Spain to this day.
The Croats were Roman Catholics, and the RC church has a long history of intolerance of other Religions including other Christian sects - which the Serbs are.
Interesting. I hadn't come across that concept before but it seems to make sense. Dr. Seuss wrote something along the same lines I think, with his North Going Zax and South Going Zax. That might also explain why my wife (current, not the Spanish one) and I get along so well. We have absolutely nothing in common...lol!
The Seuss book that's most directly on the nose about this is "The Butter Battle Book," a highly didactic parable about nuclear war and mutually assured destruction:
"As you know, on this side of the Wall, we are Yooks.
On the far other side of this Wall live the Zooks."
Then my grandfather said, "It's high time you knew
of the terribly horrible thing that Zooks do:
In every Zook house and in every Zook town,
every Zook eats his bread with the butter side down!"
"But we Yooks, as you know, when we breakfast or sup,
Spread our bread," Grandpa said, "with the butter side up!
That's the right honest way!" Grandpa gritted his teeth.
"So you can't trust a Zook who spreads bread underneath!
Every Zook must be watched! He has kinks in his soul!
That's why, as a youth, I made watching my goal,
Watching Zooks for the Zook-Watching Border Patrol!"
Bravo my friend, you sound like a kindred soul as I hitch hiked around much of the western world solo back in the early 1980s with a spirit of wanderlust worthy of the Odyssey ...unfortunately, bad things can happen to hitch hikers
The West think they can drive Russia to an armistice and military stalemate, something like the Korean War but Russia fought this war largely to keep NATO away from its borders so they will never tolerate a rump state of UKraine in NATO . They want a minimum of regime change in KIev with a de-militarised UKraine sworn to neutrality something like Austria after WW2
Good comment. One point you overlooked (though I'm sure you're aware of it) is that many moderates have fled Ukraine, either to Russia or to Western Europe. What's left are fanatics and corrupt war profiteers who pretend to be fanatics as long as that benefits them, plus the poor, the stupid, the elderly, the maimed ex-soldiers.
I did overlook that actually, and it is a major factor. By some accounts Ukraine has lost 25% of its population. How you recover from that is a big question as many of the people who left are likely the more educated part of their population and surveys suggest that as many as 70% will never return.
I have a (west) Ukrainian friend who left just before the Maidan for economic reasons. He was ready to go and fight for Ukraine when Russia invaded but I managed to talk him out of it as he has a wife and three children. He did return briefly a few months ago, along with the family which I felt was a mistake. Fortunately they're in a remote village far from the fighting. He was technically exempt from the draft owing to the three kids, but he still had to register and take the physical. There were no jobs though, so he returned to Canada, and not a moment too soon. About two weeks later they changed the exemptions which made him eligible, so he literal dodged a bullet there.
Another point I didn't raise, which is significant. It took Russia almost 9 years to respond to what was happening. That means that kids 8 or 9 years old who were indoctrinated into the nationalist identity through youth camps and other organizations are of fighting age now, and many still believe the nonsense they were taught. I can't imagine anything more disheartening than seeing your friends killed and finding out much too late that everything you were taught was a lie, a fact which becomes more obvious with each passing day. To me that's the greatest tragedy of this whole affair - the betrayal of idealistic youth by fanatics and opportunists. There is no worse crime than the abuse of children, and that has been a feature of this war from the beginning.
Remarkably, western MSM reported accurately on this aspect. I guess they hadn't yet received their marching orders.
I knew from day one that Russia was provoked into this war by NATO advancement , but it's more than that the frightens the Russians, as it's the neo liberal Globalist agenda that includes the nefarious LGBTQ ideology and lifestyle that's shocking to a conservative and traditional culture
Russia always saw themselves as the ''Third Rome'' and as things turn out they are correct, insomuch, they are the last bastion of Christendom in the West , and it's their historic ''backwardness '' and anachronism that's saving them from the fate of the decadent and degenerate WEst . They are like we were back in the 1980s before liberalism undermined our conservative and traditional values . Moreover, they are just coming out of a 70 year murderous utopian cult and have no desire whatsoever of engaging in a liberal, more feminised version of it with the EU
NATO – an anti-white and anti-family institution . . .
After the apocalypse of 1945, a number of global organizations have been formed with the aim of maintaining and expanding totalitarian liberalism. One of the earliest organizations formed for this purpose was the war alliance "North Atlantic Treaty Organization", or NATO, which can be seen as the military wing of globalism.
In addition to ensuring that Washington always has international support for its military campaigns, NATO as an institution is explicitly anti-white and explicitly dedicated to "racial justice" for racial aliens living in white countries. As early as 1999, NATO authored reports blaming nationalists for a number of modern problems and warning against the influence of nationalism.
In 2023, the war alliance held a summit at its headquarters in Brussels on race where the alliance's leaders pledged to fight "homogeneous attitudes" and to use NATO's "collective intelligence" for the purpose.
In fact, NATO is so dedicated to its anti-white agenda that it openly advocates that institutions must be reshaped to be "inclusive," in other words, restructured to be more anti-white, and consist of fewer white employees and executives.
It's a brilliant summary, you've obviously researched a lot of the actual facts. It's unbelievable for me, to see & hear those Eastern European countries who aren't in the EU, believing it's some kind of paradise. I'd advise the citizens of these countries to speak to Hungarians, Croatians, Bulgarians & many others. The 1st thing they'd be told is how everything at least doubles in price. As a British person who was ecstatic we voted to leave, I can say without any doubt. Do not believe any of the bullshit about Britain's regretting leaving the EU. The only ones that do are the ones that voted to remain. If you were to ask those very same people how worse off they are. You'll be waiting a long time for a reply. The EU is a neo liberal dictatorship, that is designed for mass corruption. Just watch the only rich countries of the EU collapse in the coming years. It was fine carrying the burden of the poorer countries when the going was good for them. Just watch what happens now. For a those trying to say the UK is just as bad, the UK had just gave the EU 30 billion. In an illegal none binding divorce settlement it didn't have to make. Show me any EU country who could give that amount to the UK this week. There's a lot of things that aren't known about the EU purposely kept quiet. It's a failing monster that needs to expand to survive. The big problem is the only countries that can enlarge it are all very poor countries that won't bring anything but debt & extremists to the monster.
Sodom Hussein Obama's mentor Zbigniew Brzezinski (Mika’s father, next to Nasty Pelousy in the link below) was the monster in the Carter administration who armed and financed the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan to fight against the Soviets... after the Mujahedeen were armed with sophisticated weapons, the Soviets left, the result was the USA got 911, and women now can walk 3 paces behind the donkey, the Mujahedeen evolved into the Taliban, who evolved into Al-Qaeda, who evolved into ISIS/ISIL/Daesh... Brezinski, for all practical purposes, can be called the ‘Grandfather of ISIS’... https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/sodom-hussein-obama
.
Jews Albright and Clark (pictured in the link below) had NATO bomb Serbia so the IMF Jews could make loans for rebuilding and get control of Serbian iridium assets… while Saudi non-profit NGOs kept the KLA terrorists well fed and well-armed… Just like ISIS in Syria… their Zionist bedfellows on Wall Street want Ukraine for GMO grain crops . . . Monsanto (now Bayer), Genentech, ADM, etc., are all buying land with the help of the Jews at the IMF by giving the Ukrainian “Dill” idiots debt relief . . . https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/sodom-hussein-obama
.
Jewish U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D), great grandson of Jacob Schiff (who funded Bolshevism, Leon Trotsky, and the October Revolution from Wall Street) is following in his great grandfather’s footsteps by illegally trafficking weapons with Igor Pasternak (seated behind John Kerry in the link below), funding foreign conflicts abroad... and trying to get Syria for the oil pipelines by blaming the Russians for another false flag... https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/schiffty-schitty-kike-adam-schiffs-collusion-with-oligarch-ukrainian-arms-dealer-exposed
I knew all those things as it happens, but the more I've learnt about Soros. The more I know he believes only 1 race should be pure. All of his financing points to this fact also. He's one if the chosen ones the same as Bibi who believe the rest of us are scum. Make no mistake all Christian faiths are held in same light as the Islamic ones. Soros stirs up a lot of conflict along with his disciples. Obama the ass bandit is a proud one. He's one if the worst, he tried all of his dirty tricks by stealth. But what can we expect from someone who has lived a clue all of his life.
❝. . . the entire establishment in the Western world is attacking Russia in unison. The propaganda machine is in full swing in an effort to make the whole world hate Putin and take Ukraine’s side in the war. The same propaganda machine that wants nothing more than you as a White person to stop having children and instead focus on your career, race-mix or become homosexual. What this establishment wants you to think is often a very good indicator of what you should absolutely not think, and by this measure, Russia appears to be the side to support 100%.
From a global geopolitical perspective, if we theorize from the unlikely idea that this conflict will lead to a third world war, then all pro-Zionist liberal monster-nations like Great Britain, France, Germany, the United States and, of course, Israel itself would side with Ukraine, while more traditional and sovereign anti-Zionist forces would likely stand behind Russia. Mark my words when I say that the Nordic Resistance Movement will NEVER stand on the same side as Israel or the Zionist entity that the USA represents today – whatever the issue or conflict may be!
If we look at the situation from a revolutionary point of view, it is also natural to support Russia. By challenging the USA and the Western world, one acts against the status quo – the present situation that must be destroyed in order for any true changes to take place, and for us National Socialists to be able to make real progress. The more the current ruling powers are challenged, and the harder the world economy is combated, the greater the chance for widespread disruption, which is a necessity for the Nordic revolution to become fact. Please note that I do not mean the coming changes will necessarily be better for us; however, in the dramatic situation in which we find ourselves, we must see hope in every potential radical change that arises within the global environment.❞
You have great articles. Not sure why you blocked me on X. I commented on your Sean Penn tweet agreeing he's a blowhard basically. Not sure if there was a misunderstanding.
I already have a substack. Click on where it says: Writes когда сталкиваются миры
That's Russian for "When Worlds Collide" but don't worry, the site is in English. It's a music site that profiles artists of the post-Soviet republics. I don't comment on politics or current events there, just the music. There are plenty of sites where politics and current events are discussed, like the one we're on right now. There aren't many sites that examine different cultures from the viewpoint of their music, so I thought I'd do that. Besides, I don't feel qualified to host a site on politics. I wander around the different sites where those discussions take place and occasionally add comments where it feels appropriate. I'm kind of surprised by the response to this one actually as it's not an especially unique insight. Lots of people have made similar observations, I'm just one of them.
Усама бен Мухаммед бен Авад бен Ладен — основатель и первый эмир международной исламистской террористической организации "Аль-Каида" создан США в Афганистан для борьбы с СССР... И вот что из этого вышло.
В украинском парламенте полно еврейских аппаратчиков. Украина должна забыть о Крыме и НАТО. Власть на Украине в сговоре с олигархами, им никто не противостоит.
Евреи и мусульмане имеют схожие корни и обычаи . . . Женщины всегда были целью джихадистов . . . Изнасилование - главное оружие джихада. Мусульмане увеличили свою численность только за счет изнасилования женщин.
Хиллари Клинтон пыталась украсть выборы в России с некоммерческими организациями, как дома в Америке, но Владимир Путин победил их, поэтому они вызвали все трудности с глупой панк-рок-группой и гомосексуалистами на Олимпиаде в Сочи.
Ожесточённые марксисты ненавидят кавказцев. Еврейские банкиры заполнили Европу мусульманами, а Америку мусором из стран третьего мира. Евреи - нечистые демоны, как турки. Гитлер был прав.
It's going to end with a rump something. The big question for Putin is how to get a situation where the rump can't do a quickie marriage with NATO. Or if that is impossible, then the rump has to be pretty harmless. That's bad news for Ukraine. In twenty years if we are lucky, we'll wonder why we let the Iraq and Afghan War geniuses set this whole thing up with Maidan and a good grifting along they way. At least the big guy got his 10% and 5 million.
> The big question for Putin is how to get a situation where the rump can't do a quickie marriage with NATO.
The easiest way to do this is actually already on the table--whatever is left of Ukraine simply refuses to concede defeat, and continues to claim all lost territory as its own. No country with an ongoing territorial dispute is eligible to join NATO. UA status quo will become not unlike North/South Korea, officially at war but with an indefinite ceasefire.
Additionally, a 'quickie marriage' to NATO is theoretically not possible - admission requires a consensus of all existing members. There is no obligation to vote for acceptance, although the United States and its close allies would certainly apply pressure. But skeptics could fall back on the rules: to be considered for acceptance, a country must
1. Uphold democracy, including respect for diversity. Ukraine's nationalist element would ensure failure on that score alone, as the postwar country will need its Russian-ethnic labour and cannot afford a purification drive;
2. be underway with progress toward a market economy. Take a look at what Ukraine was selling to Europe and its NATO partners before the war, and recall that was under preferential conditions which gave it certain advantages. For those who can't remember, it was almost entirely agricultural products and some raw materials. Ukraine exported almost no finished goods to Europe - in fact, the flow was all the other way.
3. have its military forces firmly under civilian control.
4. be a good neighbour and respect sovereignty outside its borders. Ukraine's borders remain disputed and in flux, as you have alluded;
5. must be working toward compatibility with NATO forces. Ukraine would be glad to do that, but all its equipment is going to have to be gifted to it and soldiers are going to be in kind of short supply no matter how things end up.
As well, unwritten conditions are that the candidate's joining must 'materially strengthen the alliance', and increase security and stability across Europe. Adding Ukraine would demonstrably incur a liability, while Zelensky's precious air of entitlement and inference that the world owes Ukraine tribute because Ukraine is the spear point of European defense will not sit well, considering NATO is bankrupting itself just to keep the guns firing, without any strategic gains to show for all the noise.
I tend to agree with you on this point. The exception seems to be North Macedonia, where Greece blocked its becoming a full member over its use of the name 'Macedonia'.
NATO – an anti-white and anti-family institution . . .
After the apocalypse of 1945, a number of global organizations have been formed with the aim of maintaining and expanding totalitarian liberalism. One of the earliest organizations formed for this purpose was the war alliance "North Atlantic Treaty Organization", or NATO, which can be seen as the military wing of globalism.
In addition to ensuring that Washington always has international support for its military campaigns, NATO as an institution is explicitly anti-white and explicitly dedicated to "racial justice" for racial aliens living in white countries. As early as 1999, NATO authored reports blaming nationalists for a number of modern problems and warning against the influence of nationalism.
In 2023, the war alliance held a summit at its headquarters in Brussels on race where the alliance's leaders pledged to fight "homogeneous attitudes" and to use NATO's "collective intelligence" for the purpose.
In fact, NATO is so dedicated to its anti-white agenda that it openly advocates that institutions must be reshaped to be "inclusive," in other words, restructured to be more anti-white, and consist of fewer white employees and executives.
Nobody is going to fight a war for Biden, he is dumber than Bush . . .
Even with a full-on declaration of war from Congress, if Gavin Jewsome could be cheated in by ZOG, with Globohomo brigades going door-to-door looking to impress American children into military service, they will be met with armed, well-trained opposition.
People are best to make note of where their Congresscritter lives, they are all traitors . . . and they have to register their addresses when they file for their candidacy.
With the country being invaded right now, an open war within U.S. borders is a certainty if a foreign war is declared.
NATO – an anti-white and anti-family institution . . .
After the apocalypse of 1945, a number of global organizations have been formed with the aim of maintaining and expanding totalitarian liberalism. One of the earliest organizations formed for this purpose was the war alliance "North Atlantic Treaty Organization", or NATO, which can be seen as the military wing of globalism.
In addition to ensuring that Washington always has international support for its military campaigns, NATO as an institution is explicitly anti-white and explicitly dedicated to "racial justice" for racial aliens living in white countries. As early as 1999, NATO authored reports blaming nationalists for a number of modern problems and warning against the influence of nationalism.
In 2023, the war alliance held a summit at its headquarters in Brussels on race where the alliance's leaders pledged to fight "homogeneous attitudes" and to use NATO's "collective intelligence" for the purpose.
In fact, NATO is so dedicated to its anti-white agenda that it openly advocates that institutions must be reshaped to be "inclusive," in other words, restructured to be more anti-white, and consist of fewer white employees and executives.
I am someome who has followed the development of this war closely, that said, I have no relevant experience or depth of historical knowledge to refute any of the the contents of the discussion below. The commenters all seem knowledgeable and able to point out the various factors that have led to this war in the first place and to it dragging out as it has.
The Putin/military leadership's minimumalist goals, seems to be conditon one.
As a veteran, with the limitations mentioned above, it has always struck me as strange that the Russian military did not do one thing, that showed serious intent. The shelling of Donetsk goes on to this day. Given Russia's capacity to pump out munitions, I don't understand why the Russian military didn't turn the area between Donetsk City and from where the Uke fascists were firing on civilian targets, into a total wasteland, in which all that could happen with further bombardment, is make the rubble bounce and mine the area so densely, a rat couldn't make its way though it.
Then move onto other strategic objectives.
Maybe what I said above reflects ignorance on my part, but the US Neo-Cons have no problem with "making the rubble bounce", which is about all the US's direct invasion of Afghanistan seems like it could accomplish, in military terms. The US's proxy war had already succeeded in destroying what there was of Afghan civil society. The US had some identifeable goals: A beach head in the underbelly of the Asian continent and the riches gained from looting Afghanistan's natural resources. Some other goals of the US, it might be pointed out, were not so much strategic, as opportunist. The Afghan War was an excuse to funnel trillions into the Pentagon's wealth transfer to the US's oligarchs apparatus. Allow the opium trade, which had been largley shut down by the Taliban, to flourish.
There is a long history of US/Western involvement in wars in which drugs are a significant element, though, perhaps, as a lucrative and useful (In crippling and creating underclasses where the drugs are ultimately dumped and profits for the int'l banks involved in laundering the drug trades money) side benefit.
I think the point made below about failing to respond to "Red Lines" for 2 decades is correct. A number of informed commentators, that all of us have listened too and have reason to respect, have pointed out, that the US Neo-Cons have become convinced that Russia is weak and its leadership indecisive. Russia is still characterized as a "gas station masquerading as a country". Neo-Con scribblers have advocated using tactical nuclear weapons against Russia. I suppose to some extent, the perceived need by US war hawks for using tactical nuclear weapons against Russia, is a back handed acknowledgement that Russia is more than a "gas station".
Some among the Neo-Con loonies speculate that Russia will not respond to the use of nuclear weapons, by unleashing a full on nuclear exchange. "Tactical" nukes are just one more Red Line that can be ignored.
Other Neo-Cons are not only nihilist enough to chance a nuclear war, they express fantasies about the US coming out on top of a nuclear exchange.
John Mearsheimer has repeatedly said, he thought a nuclear exchange was most likely to be started by a Russia that was loosing and was being backed into a corner by the US and its sycophants in "The Garden". Mearsheimer asserts it is a good thing that Russia is not on a path to complete defeat, as that reduces the likelihood of the use of nukes in this war. I think it is more likely that the US will resort to nuclear weapons, as its goal of re-assuming the mantle of World Hegemon continues to recede.
I remember sitting in a college level history class in the 70's, arguing with people that the US is willing to use nuclear weapons in a first strike. The answer as to whether or not the Shining City on a Hill will resort to the use nuclear weapons has been answered, twice.
A tip of the hat, and a thanks for the useful comments to Big Serge and to the people who have commented on his article.
And...we haven't mentioned China in all of these exchanges.
Russia really does not want this war. Russia does not want to make war on their brethren. Russians also see the West as the Magical Land Where Institutions Basically Work (regardless whether there is any truth in this) and does not want to admit that it will never be admitted to that blessed land or that the rulers of that land hate Russia and fear it. Hence the Minsk-2 sham, even after it was obvious that Minsk was a sham.
Unfortunately, this also causes the Russian leadership to basically continue to hide their head in the sand rather than admit unpleasant facts. This began with the start of the war and continues to this day. This lack of resolve has gotten a lot of good people killed.
This is also why Ukraine fights. They also want to be part of the Golden Billion, and if hating their brothers and their grandparents is the price that the West charges for admission, then they will pay that.
Sodom Hussein Obama's mentor Zbigniew Brzezinski (Mika’s father, next to Nasty Pelousy in the link below) was the monster in the Carter administration who armed and financed the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan to fight against the Soviets... after the Mujahedeen were armed with sophisticated weapons, the Soviets left, the result was the USA got 911, and women now can walk 3 paces behind the donkey, the Mujahedeen evolved into the Taliban, who evolved into Al-Qaeda, who evolved into ISIS/ISIL/Daesh... Brezinski, for all practical purposes, can be called the ‘Grandfather of ISIS’... https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/sodom-hussein-obama
.
Jews Albright and Clark (pictured in the link below) had NATO bomb Serbia so the IMF Jews could make loans for rebuilding and get control of Serbian iridium assets… while Saudi non-profit NGOs kept the KLA terrorists well fed and well-armed… Just like ISIS in Syria… their Zionist bedfellows on Wall Street want Ukraine for GMO grain crops . . . Monsanto (now Bayer), Genentech, ADM, etc., are all buying land with the help of the Jews at the IMF by giving the Ukrainian “Dill” idiots debt relief . . . https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/sodom-hussein-obama
.
Jewish U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D), great grandson of Jacob Schiff (who funded Bolshevism, Leon Trotsky, and the October Revolution from Wall Street) is following in his great grandfather’s footsteps by illegally trafficking weapons with Igor Pasternak (seated behind John Kerry in the link below), funding foreign conflicts abroad... and trying to get Syria for the oil pipelines by blaming the Russians for another false flag... https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/schiffty-schitty-kike-adam-schiffs-collusion-with-oligarch-ukrainian-arms-dealer-exposed
Largely in agreement with the cat here, but I have a few particular points which may help illuminate.
1) Russia has, largely perforce, turned Ukrainian defensive concentrations within easy artillery range of Donestk, into moonscapes. Check out pictures of Avdiivka for instance, which also answers the question of why they haven't taken and held it yet - taken and held what?
2) Russia's still largely fighting on soil it claims to be Russian, and against people it claims to be brothers. Western Ukrainians largely aren't on the front lines, but rather Eastern Ukrainians dragooned into fighting other Russian-speakers by the Kiev government. This is why there are common stories of Russian/Ukrainian personnel accidentally falling in to fight on the wrong side before realizing that oops, they're firing on their brothers-in-arms!
3) A much broader point, but shock and awe, strategic bombing, etc. just plain don't work, from the point of view of waging a war to win a lasting and thrifty peace. Bouncing rubble's not good for anything when the war's over except the provision of grudges.
I would have to do a lot of reading of what may be available in the accessible media, about the 2nd Chechnya’s War, to have full confidence, or not, in my reaction to your comment.
What I recall, was that the Chechnyans were egged on by the Bush the Lesser regime. The Chechnyan's experience in that war is one shared by people as diverse as the Montagnard's of the mountainous region of Viet Nam, the Miskitos of Nicaragua's Atlantic Coast and the Kurds.
For example, when the former European and US direct colonial rule was abandoned in favor of neocolonialism (imperialism), the colonial powers drew up the new state borders, malice aforethought, so as to guarantee that there were unfulfilled nationalist aspirations. Aspirations that could always be exploited in the future, to frustrate the development of the post colonial states.
Other commentators have pointed out that the US, if it can not directly impose its will, will resort to creating chaos. Examples of this might be, the US's backing of the groups of thugs it supported in Angola and Nicaragua. The central government was frustrated in delivering services to people, especially in the rural areas. The US and Apartheid backed thugs could render health clinics and schools, unusable, with nothing so much more than a hand grenade or two. This is to say nothing of assassinating health care workers and other service professionals.
The Kurdish leadership seems incapable of learning this lesson and neither has the regime in Turkey.
The Kurds were a respected minority in Syria. But due to nationalist sentiments, Kurds within the boundaries of Syria, continue to be manipulated by Washington.
As far as I know, the Kurds in Iraq have carved out a largely autonomous province in Iraq. This, with US blessing. That may well be a source of inspiration for the strident nationalists who aspire to cobble together a Kurdistan State, out of the Kurdish areas of Türkiye, Syria and Iraq.
This aspiration has impeded a settlement in Syria. The Kurdish leadership refuses to accept the reality that the US will abandoned them like a soiled napkin.
Thus, the US is free to stir up chaos in other areas of Kurdish presence.
All of this is to say, that what I have read in the past, is that the Chechnyans have learned that Washington is not their friend and the arrangement with Moscow is working in everyone's favor.
And probably other cultural differences that mattered. I could see an argument that Chechnyan culture has more respect for the 'firm hand' approach, though I won't make it because I don't know it from the inside so I'd be talking from my rear.
No prescription on what will work and what won't is absolute.
Nobody is going to fight a war for Biden, he is dumber than Bush . . .
Even with a full-on declaration of war from Congress, if Gavin Jewsome could be cheated in by ZOG, with Globohomo brigades going door-to-door looking to impress American children into military service, they will be met with armed, well-trained opposition.
People are best to make note of where their Congresscritter lives, they are all traitors . . . and they have to register their addresses when they file for their candidacy.
With the country being invaded right now, an open war within U.S. borders is a certainty if a foreign war is declared.
It's not easy to bomb a large area into wasteland. The US coundln't do it successfully in Vietnam and Korea, why do you think Russia can do it in Donbass? Don't you think Israel would have bombed long ago Southern Lebanon into a wasteland if they could? Bringing strategic bombers or additional artillery and rockets won't change much the battlefield on the ground, as soldiers will jump out of trenches after the raid and quickly shovel into new positions, and it's easy to replace trenches and rotate soldiers. You don't need to study in a military academy, it's just common sense and some maths, saturation with bombs will not do much if the enemy's infantry is dug underground, and they are. Watch some war videos of how trenches are being attacked, if the above does not make sense.
I was thinking of a No Man's Land area, of enough depth, to hold artillery at bay.
I will have to take up your suggestion of study.
A few things readilly come to mind, short of doing that study. The first is the accuracy that is now capable with all kinds of munitions. A 250 pound bomb exploding within a radious of a few yards, or less, of one's trench position, is likely a rather unpleasant experience.
Weighing in favor of your comment, is the analysis I have seen of how largely ineffective cluster munitions are, as a threat to dug in troops.
I remember reading stories of the NAZI's chaining workers to their machines, so they would not be able to leave their work stations, when the Allied bombs were falling around their factories.
However, I do know that the saturation bombing of eastern Cambodia, a rural area, is estimated by the US Air Force to have murdered 500,00 rural Camodian residents. This led to a flight of the rural population into the cities
It is true that the immense "strategic" bombing of Germany and Japan in WW2 had hardly any impact on their war effort. I heard that German factory workers used to joke that the safest place during an allied raid was inside the target buildings, as the "precision" bombing often missed its targets by literally miles.
This war is just math. Russia has a 10:1 advantage in artillery and ammunition; air superiority; and twice the number of available (better trained) troops; well prepared fortifications and minefields; and surveillance and intelligence assets to know exactly where Ukrainian forces are at any given moment.
Why would anyone think an offensive would have any chance of strategic success under these circumstances? It's literally insane. It's basically the George Armstrong Custer theory of offense -- i.e., just recklessly attack a vastly superior force and see what happens.
The really interesting question is **why** the US (who apparently demanded and planned the offensive) is so stupid militarily? Potential explanations: (a) They really are just that stupid due to a retarded decision making process based on groupthink, believing their own propaganda, and perhaps deliberately politicized intelligence assessments; or (b) They somehow cynically calculated that a counter-productive doomed offensive would somehow play better politically than just a grinding attritional defense.
My personal view - having forced myself to consume much western MSM BS - is that they believed their own BS. They thought the defences were a sign of weakness and Ivan would flee when the first Leopard came into view. NATO employed psychologists apparently to give this message to assault troops. Maybe those poor schmucks are now suffering from cognitive dissonence - the ones still able to think. It is hard to believe but there we go.
The alternative [as you allude to] is that the NATO masters were prepared to risk everything on a pair of sixes- cause they would lose anyway and who gives any thought to hundreds of thousands of UAF casualties anyway? Alas I can believe that too, but would prefer not to. I think this was a case of institutional delusion.
You're right. It's the old 'racial characteristics' canard all over again. The Japanese couldn't possibly have a good fighter plane; the Russians couldn't possibly have an industrial or the morale to hold a defensive position.
There is a strong racist under-current IMHO under-pinning much of the western assessments of Russia and its military, reminiscent of pre-Barbarossa Germany.
"Barbaric and primitive Russia" is an old fairy-tale, which people in the West use to justify the war against Russia. When they lose this war they use it again to sedate themselves -- surely the Russia could only win because of endless barbaric meatwaves. This narrative survives the generation that lost the war. Then the following generation inherits it and uses it to justify a new war. Alas, this story repeats itself once or twice every century.
❝. . . the entire establishment in the Western world is attacking Russia in unison. The propaganda machine is in full swing in an effort to make the whole world hate Putin and take Ukraine’s side in the war. The same propaganda machine that wants nothing more than you as a White person to stop having children and instead focus on your career, race-mix or become homosexual. What this establishment wants you to think is often a very good indicator of what you should absolutely not think, and by this measure, Russia appears to be the side to support 100%.
From a global geopolitical perspective, if we theorize from the unlikely idea that this conflict will lead to a third world war, then all pro-Zionist liberal monster-nations like Great Britain, France, Germany, the United States and, of course, Israel itself would side with Ukraine, while more traditional and sovereign anti-Zionist forces would likely stand behind Russia. Mark my words when I say that the Nordic Resistance Movement will NEVER stand on the same side as Israel or the Zionist entity that the USA represents today – whatever the issue or conflict may be!
If we look at the situation from a revolutionary point of view, it is also natural to support Russia. By challenging the USA and the Western world, one acts against the status quo – the present situation that must be destroyed in order for any true changes to take place, and for us National Socialists to be able to make real progress. The more the current ruling powers are challenged, and the harder the world economy is combated, the greater the chance for widespread disruption, which is a necessity for the Nordic revolution to become fact. Please note that I do not mean the coming changes will necessarily be better for us; however, in the dramatic situation in which we find ourselves, we must see hope in every potential radical change that arises within the global environment.❞
The Japanese certainly couldn't fly or fight in the air, even if they had decent planes. being short, bandy-legged, short-sighted, etc. And probably "too primitive" to operate machinery.
I have always believed that war is God's way of educating racists that there is no such thing as an "inferior human". Although it does tend to kill a lot of them first.
I remember reading a CNN article in the early weeks of the counteroffensive quoting some US officials who literally said that the Russians were fighting better than they expected, so I think you’re right that these people actually believed their own propaganda. That’s an incredibly worrying sign about the larger delusions of the US foreign policy establishment.
There are certainly many ground-level analysts and commentators who spew, and likely even believed these propaganda lines. But the leadership of the west are unsurprisingly not retarded; They have known this outcome was feasible for decades, and have pursued it. They have a very singular goal and have done a pretty good job of seeking the best possible paths to it, without suffering from the delusions that they inflict upon their own masses.
For the rootless cosmopolitans that are the western elites, they are entirely okay with an outcome where Ukraine is left with barely any male population and is reduced to a rump state. I imagine that the intersection of ideals and realistic goals had them wanting to end up in a position where Odessa remained in their hands, but Ukraine was depopulated, Russia's ties with the west were severed, and their fist could be tightened around their vassals under the excuse of war.
So far they're at 3/4 of these goals. Losing Odessa is likely, but not a crippling matter. Far more important are the others: Ukraine has already lost a massive portion of its male population, which suits their ultimate goal of wiping out the European peoples wholesale. Russia has lost its pipeline to Germany and, despite the economic backlash that Europe will suffer, has lost much influence over them, and this may complicate matters for them abroad. And with that loss of influence, the US has managed to exhaust the armories of their allies, and leave them ever more dependent on the US itself.
An oft-forgotten fact about propaganda is that it ends up fooling its purveyors as well as those on the receiving end. How come we ordinary schlubs can see the truth about this and these "experts" can't?
It's similar to Afghanistan (and Vietnam, for that matter.) They define winning differently than we do, as they don't look at it from the PoV of a nation that cares about people and territory. They look at it from the PoV of globalist oligarchs who see an opportunity to expand their markets and their control over units of production and consumption (what some would refer to as "people.")
When you say "lose", think about what you mean. Now think about what that means to those who are really calling the shots. It means nothing to them if the entire nation of UKR goes up in flames, or even a few Euro cities get nuked. Sounds like a great way to artificially stimulate demand for decontamination contracts!
For example many say they lost in Afghanistan, but what did they lose? They converted trillions of worthless taxpayer dollars into valuable military contracts and political kickbacks, and the CIA took out about $1Trillion in opium. Sure thousands of our troops died, maybe a million afghanis, and the internal cohesion of the US as well as its international standing suffered. But that isn't a cost for them, only for us.
As long as they control most of the West, they can't lose, only win or tie.
But the resources are not in the west... even the 0s and 1s need electricity, servers, cooling water, and some biofeed and shelter for the sheeple plugged into the matrix...
This is true, but how many of the people making these decisions understand the real basics of industrial production? I'll give you a hint: the number, at least in the US, can probably be counted on one hand and with digits left over.
True. But also, there's a lot of ruin in a nation - and finally, predicting behaviour isn't a question of reality, but of perception and motive. People are very capable of being very badly wrong and acting on that misapprehension to their ruination.
They don't care about nations, they are above them. When 1 nation fails, they move on to the next like a cloud of locusts. They've been doing this for centuries, perhaps millennia.
In 100 years I wouldn't be surprised to see them ruling from China, with the ruined wastelands of Europe and North America acting as a 3rd world supply of resources and cheap labor.
Those resources are still controlled by the West. Any nation that decides it isn't going to transfer those resources as the West commands will suddenly find the West to have declared it in need of more Democracy. Any leader that tries to do so will be removed by any means, including accusations of being a narco-terrorist, rapist, etc. etc. Just ask Evo Morales.
How is that working now for France in Niger, or Gabon? There is blood in the water so to speak, and all these countries are itching for a better deal... Plus, China can offer better deals. Look at Indonesia that wants to do value added and refined nickel, etc., at home. Canadians are livid and with the US want to sue Indonesia at WTO. China has no problem in building enrichment and refining plants in Indonesia. Slowly but surely, it seems is the Global South tha will be doing colour revolutions on the Wes's puppets...
c) the West will use Ukrainians as cannon fodder for as long as possible before sending in Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, etc., whether officially or as "volunteers".
Thank god I'm not the only one wearing a tin hat :D
Maybe that was the plan all along: destroy Ukraine, blame Russia, incentivize a Polish takeover and now you have: NATO surrounding Belorussia and Moldova/Transnistria and bordering Russia in the South. NATO's eastern border is locked, the alliance borders Russian across the entire Eurasia apart from Belorussia, no American lives were lost; and now we can look into Taiwan...
The U.S. military are that stupid because the 4 stars are politicians, and they dance to that tune.
And to reflect on a previous comment re the 2024 election, I'm still getting the feeling that there will not be one. The Biden administration cannot afford to let Trump win; therefore some excuse will be fabricated.
Trump is a showman with an entourage of Q believers. So it doesn't matter who the clown in charge is - the US is going down and will likely take a fair swathe of its vassals with it.
❝. . . the entire establishment in the Western world is attacking Russia in unison. The propaganda machine is in full swing in an effort to make the whole world hate Putin and take Ukraine’s side in the war. The same propaganda machine that wants nothing more than you as a White person to stop having children and instead focus on your career, race-mix or become homosexual. What this establishment wants you to think is often a very good indicator of what you should absolutely not think, and by this measure, Russia appears to be the side to support 100%.
From a global geopolitical perspective, if we theorize from the unlikely idea that this conflict will lead to a third world war, then all pro-Zionist liberal monster-nations like Great Britain, France, Germany, the United States and, of course, Israel itself would side with Ukraine, while more traditional and sovereign anti-Zionist forces would likely stand behind Russia. Mark my words when I say that the Nordic Resistance Movement will NEVER stand on the same side as Israel or the Zionist entity that the USA represents today – whatever the issue or conflict may be!
If we look at the situation from a revolutionary point of view, it is also natural to support Russia. By challenging the USA and the Western world, one acts against the status quo – the present situation that must be destroyed in order for any true changes to take place, and for us National Socialists to be able to make real progress. The more the current ruling powers are challenged, and the harder the world economy is combated, the greater the chance for widespread disruption, which is a necessity for the Nordic revolution to become fact. Please note that I do not mean the coming changes will necessarily be better for us; however, in the dramatic situation in which we find ourselves, we must see hope in every potential radical change that arises within the global environment.❞
“The choice that we faced in Ukraine — and I'm using the past tense there intentionally — was whether Russia exercised a veto over NATO involvement in Ukraine on the negotiating table or on the battlefield,” said George Beebe, a former director of Russia analysis at the CIA and special adviser on Russia to former Vice President Dick Cheney. “And we elected to make sure that the veto was exercised on the battlefield, hoping that either Putin would stay his hand or that the military operation would fail.”
❝. . . the entire establishment in the Western world is attacking Russia in unison. The propaganda machine is in full swing in an effort to make the whole world hate Putin and take Ukraine’s side in the war. The same propaganda machine that wants nothing more than you as a White person to stop having children and instead focus on your career, race-mix or become homosexual. What this establishment wants you to think is often a very good indicator of what you should absolutely not think, and by this measure, Russia appears to be the side to support 100%.
From a global geopolitical perspective, if we theorize from the unlikely idea that this conflict will lead to a third world war, then all pro-Zionist liberal monster-nations like Great Britain, France, Germany, the United States and, of course, Israel itself would side with Ukraine, while more traditional and sovereign anti-Zionist forces would likely stand behind Russia. Mark my words when I say that the Nordic Resistance Movement will NEVER stand on the same side as Israel or the Zionist entity that the USA represents today – whatever the issue or conflict may be!
If we look at the situation from a revolutionary point of view, it is also natural to support Russia. By challenging the USA and the Western world, one acts against the status quo – the present situation that must be destroyed in order for any true changes to take place, and for us National Socialists to be able to make real progress. The more the current ruling powers are challenged, and the harder the world economy is combated, the greater the chance for widespread disruption, which is a necessity for the Nordic revolution to become fact. Please note that I do not mean the coming changes will necessarily be better for us; however, in the dramatic situation in which we find ourselves, we must see hope in every potential radical change that arises within the global environment.❞
Nobody is going to fight a war for Biden, he is dumber than Bush . . .
Even with a full-on declaration of war from Congress, if Gavin Jewsome could be cheated in by ZOG, with Globohomo brigades going door-to-door looking to impress American children into military service, they will be met with armed, well-trained opposition.
People are best to make note of where their Congresscritter lives, they are all traitors . . . and they have to register their addresses when they file for their candidacy.
With the country being invaded right now, an open war within U.S. borders is a certainty if a foreign war is declared.
Wonderful writing and analysis. Rare and beyond compare.
Humility might not come easy to me. Big Serge just knocked it out of the park, to coin the American phrase. I find it rare, beyond compare, to obtain this incredibly insightful and detailed analysis available for all the world to see, even though all the world is not much given to thoughtful, detailed analysis.
One of things people seem to slide right over, this is not a war between Russia and Ukraine. It is a war between Russia and the NATO states. Where Serge rightly points out Ukraine cannot fight a war of attrition, what could also be noted is that it's likely NATO cannot fight a war of attrition. NATO does, however, have additional resources that Ukraine does not have and that are not yet engaged, clearly nuclear and biological - and possibly, perhaps fantastically, depending on what Lahaina tells us, directed energy weapons.
It's a war between Russia and the NATO states and Ukraine is only the name of a particular field army.
Of course this is a war between Russian and NATO. Once NATO runs out of Ukrainians to catch bullets, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Romanians, etc. will be sent in.
The question is whether Russia is prepared to admit this and act accordingly. Everything I have seen shows that Russian really does not want this war and simply hopes it will go away. It will not.
Ukrainians like to say much the same about themselves, BTW, even if they fudge over some of the more unsavory WWII aspects of their current national heroes.
Are you suggesting that the Russian military has not wargamed this out?
I consider that a safe assumption.
Please give me a break.
I'm sure many Ukrainians suffered in WW2.
What does that have to do with it?
The Ukrainain people have no say in what is going on - allegedly they voted for Zelensky 90% because he promised peace with Russia - he was bought by the US and he lied.
He betrayed his country and sold out to the US and Nato.
It seems that the Ukrainians live under a totalitarian, bullying and brutal regime.
Why do you assume that the Russian military has wargamed this out and not NATO, for instance?
And you are the one who brought sufferings during WWII as evidence of some kind of toughness or capability. Not I.
We all know the circumstances of Zelenskii's election. However, Hermann Goering's words on getting the common people to support a war that in no wise benefits them ring true.
Several top US/NATO military leaders have said that in every wargame pitting NATO against Russian Federation, US has lost. I do not have the links, but I am sure you can find the papers and videos if you look. One general said that even after trying to handicap the 'Russian' team and give advantages to the 'NATO' team, the Russians still win.
I suspect that the non-political military leaders would have given very different advice about entering into this proxy war than the politically appointed military leaders who support it.
You're making alot of moral claims that don't really describe much else, or have much to do with the realities on the ground or what might be an outcome of the war.
There are no stupid sides here, and a war from 80 years ago has zero bearing on that truth; Both NATO military and leadership have wargamed things out, just as the Russians have. The question is merely who has gone to greater depths and who is ultimately achieving their strategic objectives here.
It is objectively inarguable that Russia is achieving its military goals here in quite a rational fashion. Despite early setbacks and failings, they have managed to settle into the positional grind with efficacy and displayed the skill needed to ensure a victory of value greater than was expected.
Yet, on a political scale, this is not quite so, as NATO has managed to achieve many of their own strategic aims and goals. The west was the one who provoked this war, don't forget, and their leadership did not delude themselves as their braindead foot soldiers do into thinking it was something they would win.
I agree with much of what you say except with "there are no stupid sides here, and a war from 80 years ago has zero bearing on that truth," which I find to be an astounding statement, especially with the inexplicable [to me, at least] self-assurance with which it seems to be stated.
"NATO has managed to achieve many of their own strategic aims and goals" is another statement that is obscure [how about listing the successes [if any?] and also all the blatant failures as well], and seems to be plucked from the propagandistic rantings of a Washington Post editorial.
Actually, top Russian political leaders have repeatedly stated the war is with NATO.
Their continually expanding mobilization, of military and military production reflects their clear recognition that this is not simply a war with Ukraine, and their need to hold military resources ready to repel a possible broader NATO attack.
People now frequently ignore the fact that it was a 2 front war by NATO: Ukraine and economic. Russia has now so comprehensively won the economic war that it is waved away, yet it was potentially the bigger threat to Russia. The US/EU expected it to destroy the Russian economy and defeat Russia in a few months, if not weeks.
Russia needed to deploy national resources in a way that first dissipated the threat of the economic war (an outcome which depended not just on Russian society but on the reaction of key other countries, particularly China and India, and so was not wholly predictable at the outset).
Every day which passes sees Russia increase its military and economic capabilities relative to the totality of NATO. That allows it to achieve its Ukraine objectives with less total loss of Russians while positioning it to more quickly defeat a wider NATO attack should that come.
Given the success Russia has achieved on both the economic and military fronts in this war with NATO, while NATO economies are imploding and NATO is failing in its war efforts, and US/NATO is losing global support and influence in favor of Russia and BRICS, I find it amazing that so many commentators imagine they understand how Russia should fight its battles better than does Russia's leadership.
I'd argue they act tepidly as though they were, but not with the goals they should have if they really thought they were.
That's kind of a recurring theme with post-60s opposition to Neolibs though. They all seem to be in a stupor where they don't actually act as if they really think their lives are on the line. If NATO won, Russians would cease to exist altogether. Not as a nation, as an ethnic group.
❝. . . the entire establishment in the Western world is attacking Russia in unison. The propaganda machine is in full swing in an effort to make the whole world hate Putin and take Ukraine’s side in the war. The same propaganda machine that wants nothing more than you as a White person to stop having children and instead focus on your career, race-mix or become homosexual. What this establishment wants you to think is often a very good indicator of what you should absolutely not think, and by this measure, Russia appears to be the side to support 100%.
From a global geopolitical perspective, if we theorize from the unlikely idea that this conflict will lead to a third world war, then all pro-Zionist liberal monster-nations like Great Britain, France, Germany, the United States and, of course, Israel itself would side with Ukraine, while more traditional and sovereign anti-Zionist forces would likely stand behind Russia. Mark my words when I say that the Nordic Resistance Movement will NEVER stand on the same side as Israel or the Zionist entity that the USA represents today – whatever the issue or conflict may be!
If we look at the situation from a revolutionary point of view, it is also natural to support Russia. By challenging the USA and the Western world, one acts against the status quo – the present situation that must be destroyed in order for any true changes to take place, and for us National Socialists to be able to make real progress. The more the current ruling powers are challenged, and the harder the world economy is combated, the greater the chance for widespread disruption, which is a necessity for the Nordic revolution to become fact. Please note that I do not mean the coming changes will necessarily be better for us; however, in the dramatic situation in which we find ourselves, we must see hope in every potential radical change that arises within the global environment.❞
It seems to me Russia knows this and is mobilizing precisely with that in mind and they can do it whereas the West cannot - not unless the aliens in the spaceships gave them some wonderweapon (hence Lahaina). The end of this war will not be when Ukraine collapses, but MAYBE when NATO pulls back. Seems to me it's the West that doesn't realize who is fighting who and that's why I posted this comment. Gimme a break, the West is not at war? Really? They are in la-la-land. The Russians probably don't want a continental war, but they cannot settle for anything that will amount to an ongoing war. They might not force a "surrender"; they would likely allow a much more diplomatic "realignment" or something.
After that, the wrath of the elites will be turned even more intensely on "their" people and "their" democracies, etc... The Russians know as well that in that situation, anything could happen, so oddly, they have to fight this war while allowing the West to maintain some semblance of order.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a strike on a decision-making center in DC that might take out my so called representaives. They are the ones the Russians are really at war with.
I have seen no evidence of such mobilization. And nothing that suggests that the West will not keep on doubling down, especially as Russia has not responded to red line after red line being crossed with impunity.
The decisionmakers in Washington see this, not as reasonableness or humanity, but as contemptible weakness.
And don't kid yourself that anything in the West will change. As long as the police and army will still shoot when ordered, the rulers can sleep soundly in their beds. Nothing indicates that the security forces are anywhere near the breaking point, and should any political forces that seek to challenge the consensus arise, they will be dealt with. Witness the upcoming ban on the AfD in Germany.
Volitionally yes, the west and US will double down, over and over and over. But that doesn't mean they can double down and arm and fit another Ukrainian army, and then another. They already think they provided a mountain of steel to Ukraine to begin with and there isn't another mountain to speak of, while Russia has a full mountain range to speak of. Never mind the strategic depth that China's productive capacity can ultimately provide.
And the west cannot just shoot and beat and imprison their populatin into submission and march the rest in goose steps on the eastern steppes. Soon enough their police units will turn against them.
The ban on AfD is only talked about but I really want to see the current government disenfranchaising 20+ % of their population...
I dunno, the US committed an act of war against Germany when they blew up NS and the response of the German public has been to hide their head in the sand.
Let me know when we start seeing large scale civil disobedience in Europe. Even the French protests were not enough to do anything, and faded out quickly.
Militarily, Ukraine is fucked and has little hope of recovery. Unless everyone is wrong and the F-16s are the first real gamechangers out of dozens, it's over - And it's probably been known to be a hopeless fight since the 10s.
But the idea that the west will collapse or that this is beyond their plans is delusional. The west quite literally has been shooting, beating, and imprisoning their population with total impunity since 2020. Their police aren't even their own citizens these days, but are quite often foreigners with blood libels and ethnic grudges AGAINST the western populations. They've disenfranchised the whole of their own native populations with success.
There is going to be no popular uprising or collapse from a lack of support in the west. There never was. The destruction of Ukraine's fighting age male population and the resulting dysgenic change is entirely in alignment with their ideals and goals.
What may not be, and what may one day kill them, will be the demographic collapse of their own core states. But, we will not fully realize this for decades to come, and much will have changed by that point.
I don't think that the European population is as tame as the US/Canada population. Look at the French for instance and their Yellow Vests, or the protests concerning retirement age. And lately the German Chancellor is booed at evry public apparition. Also, a lot of other europeans have protested, but it doesn't appear in MSM. The tree that fell in the forest that nobody heard. This means that it didnt happen?
Also worth mentioning that the necessity of censorship and repression of dissent is now normalized. I heard a human, a goodthink liberal and wannabe journalist (long story) explain to me that censorship is necessary to protect Muh Precious Freedom Of The Press.
I'm not convinced Russia hasn't responded with her own escalations. For example, critical single-points-of-failure in the industrial chain of US arms manufacture have been mysteriously blowing up lately. That said, the problem is still one of communication, as the people on the NATO side are self-absorbed enough that nothing short of hypersonic delivery to Brussels and D.C. would register.
I am not kidding. "I am not convinced X" is not the same as "I am convinced the opposite of X." What I'm convinced of is that there is a whole lot going on that's not immediately obvious to casual interest, so that over-certain declarations are often wrong.
What virtually every commentator on the war - with the possible exception of Scott Ritter - fails to point out is that Ukraine is out of men. And no, you can't just throw three million civilians into the front with AK's and hope for the best.
As my Substack posts have shown - using very conservative figures - Ukraine is losing at least 60-100,000 men per month. Ukraine can't possibly keep that up for more than another 1-3 months before it runs completely out of men. And long before that, as Big Serge notes, their combat and operational effectiveness will cease. We're already seeing that now with the Ukrainians barely able to launch small unit attacks with minimal armor - which means combat effectiveness is on the wane - and the complete failure of the "counter-offensive" - which it isn't - demonstrates that Ukraine has lost all operational effectiveness.
Another Less-Than-Short Ukrainian Interlude...
Wherein I explain how I calculate Ukrainian losses and estimate the remaining length of the war...
Please can you articulate, possibly in details, the estimate of 60K/100K monthly ukraine loss? I assume it's KIA + wounded. I agree with this line of thought, but these numbers seem really too high. Please write about the MUTAL loss ratio, so we can have a picture of the Russian losses too. Grazie.
I'm working on roughly UAF 800 to 1000 losses per day - possibly up to half KIA or wounded so badly they cannot recover. Current losses are about 800 per the Russian MOD, and have been both less and higher in the past. That would give total losses in the 500,000 to 600,000 range. That implies (per previous posts) that the teeth elements have been worked through twice in the fighting (personnel turnover 200%) - with more in units heavily engaged. In my view this calculation fits better. However it is really just educated guesswork.
"In the case of the Kharkov offensive, Ukraine identified a sector of the Russian front that had been hollowed out and was defended only by a thin screening force. They were able to stage a force and achieve a measure of strategic surprise, due to the thick forests and general paucity of Russian ISR in the area."
IIRC, there was no surprise. Even bloggers on the internet saw the Kharkov offensive coming. However, the Russian leadership refused to do anything about it, even as the scale and scope became abundantly obvious. The Ukrainians took huge casualties, but nobody in Kiev, much less Washington cared then or cares now.
Russia faces a similar problem now, in that it needs to have the stomach to devote the men and resources needed to actually win. Kharkov could easily have been saved with a few thousand more men.
The problem is that Russia cannot really promise the average frustrated citizen much as a result of victory. Whether Russia wins or loses, it matters little to a person in Ekaterinburg whether Kharkov is Russian or Ukrainian.
Ukraine can promise its victims that if they win, the West, The Golden Billion, will finally have to let them join the club.
The other problem that Russia faces is that, short of a nuclear strike, there is nothing Russia can do that so much as mildly inconveniences the decisionmakers in Washington. So the West has every incentive to keep on doubling down.
"Whether 10,000 Russian females fall down from exhaustion while digging an antitank ditch interests me only insofar as the anti-tank ditch for Germany is finished." sums up the mentality in Washington and Kiev just fine.
The question is what Russia proposes to do about it.
I think tactically as well as strategically the Russian leadership is very concerned with saving as many Russian lives as possible, actual material resources be damned. So on the short and long termthis will always be the calculus. Now on the frontline, Ivan might become more and more willing and steeled in confronting his sold out cousins...
Embedded in this superb article is this hilariously understated moment of truth regarding Ukraine's recent efforts; "A frontal attack against a prepared defense without the element of surprise is generally considered a poor choice".
Speaking of bats, what comes to mind is a quote from an article which an FBI guy stated the following about the Russians. “Here in the US the national pastime is baseball. In Russia, the national pastime is chess. How the heck are we going to compete with people like that?”
In the ranking of who's winning - yes, Russia is winning. Against Ukraine. But not against its primary adversary. Every Russian soldier killed is an irretrievable loss, and the other guy is taking nil casualties. Nobody in the west gave a shit about Ukraine in 2021, and in 2023 they still don't. They just found a tiger willing to fight the bear on their behalf. I remain convinced that they will eventually realize they have the tiger by the tail, but that's another conversation
Well, the number of KIAs from NATO-countries is hardly trivial -according to the Russians foreign volunteers/ mercenaries casualties have surpassed 5000 KIAs. Even though that includes foreigners from non-NATO-countries this could easily end up cost more KIAs from NATO-countries that 20 years of bellicose adventuring in the Middle East did.
While I do believe in the ‘demographics are destiny’ maxim, it’s hard to argue that the USSR didn’t come out of WWII stronger than when it went in despite 26+ million losses.
Once the Ukrainian army is thoroughly destroyed, out of ammo, out of men, and out of favor in the West, the Russians can put Ukraine out of its misery in any number of ways. Time seems to be on Russia's side on all these issues. (Especially, while Ukraine is actively destroying itself with stupid offensive operations.)
Plus, the political issues are key. The want the whole thing to collapse at a time when the US or Nato are unlikely to do anything stupid to try to last-minute save face with something like occupying West Ukraine.
It seems to me the best time would be right after the US presidential election, because then there is no need for the neocons to try something crazy to avoid a humiliation that throws the election to Trump. (Although a counterargument would be that a sudden escalation **during** the election would be so unpopular that that would be the best time to launch the "final offensive")
I’m sure that Big Serge has a ring side seat at the Russian military discussions and he is hip to their plans for their offensive, but he’s been told not to share it with anyone. Sheesh.
There probably won't be such a thing. Ukraine/NATO supposedly also has good ISR and they still have some arty and maybe even some loitering munitions from NATO so they'd attrit Russians. Considering that Russians have been *very* casualty-shy, they'll probably just nip at Ukrainians, advancing at a steady rate of 10m/day max and waiting for the Ukrainian state to collapse (in a coup, hopefully as the alterinative is 20 warlords lording over 20 fiefs and fighting each other for the next 30 years and Russia probably doesn't have the resources to handle that level of shitfuckery - and neither does NATO).
I agree, and yet Medvedev speaks of the war lasting additional years or decades, and the West can also ramp up industrial production, and recruit more soldiers. I don’t see what the Russian end-game is here, a decade of trench warfare or a cold peace that re-ignites when their enemies are stronger doesn’t make sense...
We really are lucky to have an honest and skilled analyst such as Big Serge to dispel the, frankly, disgusting and mendacious cheerleading of the Western media. Candidly, I lack the acumen of Serge but I cannot but wonder what is gained by hurling elements of Ukraine's rebuilt military into an abyss rather than husbanding it as a defensive force. In any event, it's becoming ever more clear that the nitwits in the Biden cabal and their puppet Boris Johnson were not acting in the interest of the Ukrainian people when they decided to scuttle the peace talks.
It looks like the time has come, when most of the existing fleets of military hardware need upgrades across the board to face varieties of smart munitions that are now fielded at scale. Hard to predict what kind of innovations will result.
The question of UA manpower remains, but too much misinformation to know where it's at. Estimates of 250k hard losses per year now seem to be on the low side. But several years of fighting still possible if that is the number. Neither Kiev nor Washington likely to shed tears for the men who die for their privilege.
Moscow seems resigned to several years of this slog going on. Everything I've seen suggests to me they're simply trying to keep losses to a manageable rate, which might be in the 100k / year ballpark, but if pressed hard, the capability is there in Russia to go quite a bit higher.
In broader strategy, US is stuck for the time being by its obsession with "maintaining credibility". Kind-of the domino theory reasoning. Meanwhile PRC, the big dog, must like the situation just fine. EU and Euro currency knocked out from first-class status, US stuck on the fool's errand taking on Russia.
Expecting an inconclusive end to this campaign, followed by some modest RF counter action in the fall/winter, that will likely disappoint most of us; rinse/repeat for next year.
1) “The single most coherent core of theoretical writings on operational art is still found among the Soviet writers.” - the link here is broken.
2) "this is a bit like sending a boxer out to fight with a broken arm, and then critiquing his technique. The problem is not his technique - the problem is that he’s injured and materially weaker than his opponent" - I really loved this analogy!
3) "Kiev will either need to admit defeat and acknowledge Russian control over the annexed areas, or it will continue to fight obstinately until it is a failed state with nothing left in the tank."
Personally, I think that, as we stand now, Ukraine will never admit defeat, at least not with Zelensky and his junta in power. Hence, they will keep fighting to the last Ukrainian or until Russians march into Kiev!
It is commonsensical that in an attrition war Ukraine loses. But this is only superficially a war with Ukraine. Ukraine is a proxy for NATO, which is a proxy for the U.S. That is why you hear gleeful comments from U.S. public figures like Lindsey Graham and Mitt Romney. For them the war is a dream come true. It costs the U.S. next to nothing to bleed Russia. It is Afghanistan 2.0. Ukrainian losses simply do not matter. If Ukraine runs out of Ukrainians for this excellent adventure, other Eastern Europeans can take their place. It is chilling because the people behind this war do not see it as a defeat. They see it as a strategic masterstroke. However they are not only malign but wrong. In time NATO and the U.S. may well come out the attritional losers, their "victory" in Ukraine a strategic disaster to impress even a Pyrrhus.
"It costs the U.S. next to nothing to bleed Russia."
I would argue the opposite. It is costing them dearly. It may not seem so at this point but consider recent events:
Six new members added to BRICS, notably Iran and Saudi Arabia, with another 30 odd waiting in line. Combined with Russia, that accounts for 54% of world oil production, which effectively makes BRICS the new OPEC. Saudi Arabia has already started pricing some of their oil in Yuan, and is resisting calls to 'manage' the oil price in the US's favour. I expect a shift in their western investment portfolios will follow, with much of it going to Russia and China to anchor their new commitment.
Arms. The US MIC depends on foreign sales for a significant portion of revenue. Unfortunately, their products have not stood up to their Russian counterparts, so going forward, who are the new BRICS members and other non-aligned nations going to buy from? There are several advantages to buying from Russia. Fewer strings attached, lower cost, and most importantly, the ability to deter US/NATO military interference. Even if you wanted to buy western arms, how long is the wait for delivery, considering that production cannot keep up with current demand, and that rebuilding US/NATO arsenals will be given priority? Russia meanwhile, has geared up to full wartime production, and once the Ukraine conflict ends will be in a position to provide most of their systems on demand.
Sanctions. They have the same effect as tariffs but without the negative political consequences because they can be blamed on external factors, not policy. The net result for a nation with an educated population and abundant internal resources is to increase domestic production and employment, which means less reliance on outside sources, and a greater share of export markets for high end products that don't depend on foreign inputs. Made in Russia means exactly that, right down to the fasteners and other components, thus no risk of supply chain breaks as we've seen recently. As an example, down the road, Russia is going to be supplying commercial aviation, heavy equipment, machine tools and nuclear technology to the ever expanding BRICS, cutting more and more into the market share of US and EU nations.
Those are just a few examples of why I think the US has shot itself in the foot with this operation. Frankly, as an investor I'd be looking for a way to buy the Russian market right now because very few investors have figure this out. It's like the China story back in 1989. If you bought that ahead of the crowd, you're sitting in clover today.
Ebear: I was paraphrasing the good Mssrs. Graham and Romney and their ilk. I hold the opposite view. Hence the remark about Pyrrhus. Camels and straws likewise come to mind. That said, we don't necessarily know which will be the last, and meantime, "Events, dear boy, events." Things happen. What seemed inevitable is indefinitely postponed; what seemed all but impossible is taken for granted. So, on the question of certainty …
Feral: Remember what Scott Fitzgerald wrote: They will smash up things and creatures and then retreat back into their money and their vast carelessness and let other people clean up the mess they had made. And they will sleep just fine. So I am cynical about personal consequences. But the geopolitical consequences are likely—not certain, but likely—to be substantial, and not necessarily to the liking of the self-lickers in Washington. Luckily they will find others to blame. It is what they do best.
This is one of the strangest copes to ever exist, and one of the least fruitful. Given some the US's recent and crushing geopolitical successes in the middle east and far east with Vietnam, Iran, and the Saudis, one would think that the idea of BRICS as a genuine threat to the west had already been discarded, but I suppose some people always lag behind recent news.
BRICS is not a military, nor even a proper economic alliance. It's too decentralized and misaligned in its interests, while lacking any truly coherent and far-reaching power like China to force its member states to keep in line the way the US does with its vassals in NATO. As a consequence, it lacks for both initiative and for direction.
Even in regards to exports, BRICS has already suffered greatly with Iran essentially noting the collapse of the Su-35 export deals it had made with Russia; The idea that there would be any new and genuine incentives to export from Russia, beyond convenience and lack of alternatives, is as delusional as the claims of Ukraine winning the war.
Likewise, sanctions will have devastating short term repercussions on the internal economies of Europe. This is not a disadvantage to the US, but a boon; Their vassal states grow ever more dependent, while the ability for Russia to influence them and create genuine competition has been all but annihilated. While BRICS own competing economic interests will always keep it unsteady, the US has used the inevitable recession to consolidate its own interest groups and keep them under its greasy thumb.
You could be right, but I would argue that it's far too early to make any long range predictions. I take the fact that the BRICS association exists at all as strong evidence of a growing desire to break free of US influence, especially now that the military means to do so are available, which is a fairly new development.
You've made some sweeping statements here, but you're a bit light on supporting facts. For example:
"The idea that there would be any new and genuine incentives to export from Russia, beyond convenience and lack of alternatives, is as delusional as the claims of Ukraine winning the war."
Care to explain why you think that? Russian arms have proven themselves on the battlefield, and anyone wishing to avoid the fate of Iraq or Libya (or Yugoslavia) is looking very closely at purchasing Russian AD systems, plus anti-ship missiles if they're a coastal nation like China. Russia is already a major arms exporter and is poised to not only take market share from the US and EU, but in doing so enable smaller nations to resist the kind of military domination the US has taken for granted since the end of WWII. To me that's a significant new development.
Sanctions, far from weakening Russia, have pushed it to seek internal replacements, which has the effect of broadening their industrial base. For example, they no longer need Pratt & Whitney jet engines for their commercial aviation sector, and the replacement engines they're producing will soon be an export item, as will the finished aircraft, thus taking a significant bite out of Boeing and Airbus. Again, these sort of things take time to develop, but the die is already cast IMO.
Sanctions only work effectively against smaller nations that are import dependent. In the case of Russia they act more like tariffs, strengthening the internal sector without the political disadvantages of tariffs. This can occur because Russia has virtually all the resources it needs, and what it can't produce at present can be imported from China, such as the rare earth minerals needed for advanced electronics systems. The US and NATO have no such ready source and are at risk of being sanctioned themselves in that regard.
The devil as always is in the details but I would point to one overriding advantage that Russia possesses which is cultural unity and a strong sense of national identity. The same is true for China. Neither country has the kind of internal social divisions that are tearing the US and EU apart. No angry racial minorities, no flood of illegal immigrants with no commitment to national identity, no divisive ideologies such as Critical Race Theory, or "gender fluidity." Those problems are specific to the USA and EU and exist almost nowhere else.
The "Great Game" as played by Britain and inherited by the USA post WWII was premised on the idea of keeping Russia and Germany apart. What it didn't take into account was a rising China, ironically facilitated by American corporate greed which undermined the US industrial base. Germany has been weakened (again) but China has now taken its place, and with far more industrial capacity and a much larger educated workforce than Germany could ever hope to produce. So that equation no longer holds true, in fact the quote attributed to Lenin, that the capitalists will sell you the rope to hang them with seems to finally be coming true.
I think it's actually an ideal time to make long range prediction regarding BRICS, considering we have now two decades of additional information on the people who originally made proclamations regarding BRICS, and over a decade's worth of time to see how it has played out since becoming a more formalized association. Plenty of time to see where the lines are being drawn and what it can actually accomplish as a unit.
As far as a desire to break free of US influence, that's something everyone has. Every country wishes to be sovereign, every politician wishes to call the shots, every man wishes to be King. What truly matters is the capability for this to become the case, rather than the desire itself. BRICS as an association itself doesn't show much in that capacity, really.
India remains bound to the US through immigration if nothing else, South Africa continues to suffer demographic collapse and looks more and more like Zimbabwe every day. Brazil I don't know enough of to make any sweeping statements, Russia has both lost its influence in the West and proven its military security at the same time. China continues to rise of its own accord, but remains untested and shows no geopolitical savvy the way the US has. Internally this very loose association still proves itself directionless, and that is a problem if it's going to speed up the invariable collapse of the West's hegemony.
The Russians have proven themselves on the battlefield, but only truly to themselves. The information others see is one saturated with propaganda and a lack of clarity, and certainly, have no guarantees of efficacy against NATO's full potential. And much more troublesome than that, is that regardless of capability, Russia has lost some of its global influence in the process of this war, as the US has been able to maneuver well elsewhere; Look at the Saudis, Vietnam, and the Niger situation. Russian Foreign Policy is not proceeding with great effectiveness at the moment. And due to the Su-35 deal with Iran falling through, Russia has made itself seem a bad partner to pair with for obtaining exports - And this is something that will prove difficult to rectify. Matters of export are still as much as a few years away depending on the course of this war as well, and the time this gives the US to act may prove quite troublesome.
In addition, Russia either never had, or recently lost a very important asset with the death of Prigozhin. Though his ancestry left him suspect, they would have been able to use Wagner much more boldly if they could maintain the idea of them having had rogue leadership. Korobochka/Cirnosad accurately surmised that to make progress on the global front, Russia would require an analogue to America's own state-backed terrorist groups. And for now, they may have lost that. Time will tell if they can act with the political coherence, forethought, and speed needed to re-acquire this asset. But if they can't, and I suspect they can't, it will not do them any favors.
As one example, one could imagine that any country seeking Russian imports will have to contend with three complications:
One, that they may be angering the US in doing so. Few countries can effectively counter prolonged CIA campaigns, and smaller, less stable countries have little hope of it. All the guns, jets, AD, and tanks in the world mean nothing if they eventually end up in the hands of foreign-backed revolutionaries, or you end up getting terror campaign'd for the next decade.
Second, that Russia may not deliver. Yet again, the Iranian problem persists here. Iran should have been an important priority for Russia, but they failed to capitalize on that interest. This will probably cost them in its own way, as I alluded to with its issues in global influence, but it serves as another obstacle to buyers; You can buy all the guns, jets, AD, and tanks in the world, but what good are they if they never arrive?
And third, even if these weapons do arrive, they have not proven themselves against NATO's full arsenal. Now, this is something very unimportant on its own; The Soviets exported tons of weapons despite this. And it's likely that they are quite effective nevertheless. But, this is a straw that can easily break the camel's back; You aren't sure the weapons will arrive, you may be the target of espionage if you do buy them, AND they might not even be effective if NATO decided to come knocking? It is not ideal.
Thuslyly, I believe it's likely that only countries who have no better opportunities to seek will pursue exports from Russia. If the US uses the time they have been given with any skill, they can minimize the number of these countries, and hamper those who they cannot minimize.
As for Sanctions, true and not true.
Sanctions did not cause significant economic harm for Russia, nor would they ever have, nor did they 'strengthen' it in any meaningful way either; Russia's own internal policies have neither failed nor succeeded tremendously in the face of it. It is safe to say that they held up, but at the cost of influence: Russia has lost much of its ability to influence Europe economically. This is not a crippling blow, nor even really significant on its own, but it secures something for the US, and once again leaves them with the initiative.
This, however, was an outcome that had become inevitable over 10 years ago. Realistically, this cost wasn't ever avoidable most like.
Cultural unity and national identity aren't very important, despite popular thoughts; They've never been terribly so, as they are downstream of far more integral, important, and above all, tangibly real factors: Ancestry.
What ultimately matters as a result are demographics, and little else. In this regard, Russia and China are finely positioned compared to the West. Although they suffer from abhorrent birth rates, their actual ethnic and racial distributions are largely unchanged, unlike the West's.
And the West *will* be destroyed by its own collapsing demographics. A side factor of this, like as not, is that many countries in South America and all those in Africa will experience cascading issues as a result, since they've been largely dependent on the West to function, even at as low a level as they do.
However, the West's leadership of rootless cosmopolitans both want, and intend this. In truth, having the European people go extinct benefits nobody but them, and perhaps China. This may also pose an issue for Russia in the long-term; If they should become the last of the Europeans, then the Russian people can expect to be treated to the same eventual fate. The rest of the world will hold no sympathies for them.
The primary TL;DR if you don't want to read it all is; Yeah, the West will certainly collapse, likely before any of its competition ever will. But that's entirely due to its own demographic destiny that has been forced upon it by its leadership, and it will remain politically dangerous until then.
I can handle it. I'm a rather wordy fellow myself:) No, you raise some very good points, and I have to admit to a certain bias in my outlook. As a student of Russian language and culture I guess that's to be expected, although I do try to keep it in mind. I'm going with Yogi Berra on this, which is to say "it’s difficult to make predictions, especially about the future." If you'd told me 20 years ago we'd be looking at a situation like today I would have laughed out loud. Now I'm not laughing, or at least not so hard. All any of us can do at this point is keep our eye on the ball, which itself is a challenge as there seems to be an abundance of balls in play on several different playing fields. Interesting times.
Another aspect of what it costs the US to bleed Russia, is the quick weakening of the US and all NATO members by way of emptying their stocks, drying out their budgets, limiting their ability to carry out proper operation preparation, etc. European countries make brazen announcements about how much they're willing to invest in defense, but the truth is that the cost of the Ukraine war makes it impossible for them to know how they can afford their promises about their own defense capabilities, and economic uncertainty makes it even worse.
Let's keep in mind that US elites are now promising a war with China to be coming very soon. Yet, we haven't even reached the point where NATO/US comparative disadvantage in terms of stocks and capability to endure a war will be at its lowest compared to the Russia/China couple. If China decides to light up another hot war once the point of maximum relative weakness has been reached, the US will struggle to sustain the fight for more than a few weeks, and in order to hold its place, it will have to exit Europe at once, leaving all possibilities open to Russia.
In short, NATO is extremely weak right now, and instead of making NATO leaders reasonable, it seems this weakness is only drawing them into a reckless rush forward where they'll make their weakness obvious to everyone, without paying attention to who may be willing to exploit it. It's not only Russia and China, it could soon be Turkey, Iran, and who knows who else.
The whole thing is ridiculous IMO. How do you get enough men and equipment to Europe to fight a conventional war without being sunk by Russian submarines or hit by long range missiles? Same is true for China. Once hostilities begin Russia will supply China with the same capacity to hit your surface ships and nothing can be done to stop that. Even supposing you could get a beachhead in China, what then? How do you defeat and occupy a nation of over 1 billion people with an army of 2 million with another 2 -3 million in reserve, fighting on their own territory, where you can't even read the road signs?
Both of these scenarios are non-factors. A conventional war with Russia or China between the US would result in mutual nuclear annihilation; Nobody is pushing that button, and if they are, all the planning in the world won't matter.
"[The United States' goal in Angola] was not to keep out the Cubans and Soviets but to make their imperial efforts [sic] as costly as possible to prove that, after Vietnam, we were still capable of response, however insane. It is the story that has been told, and in impressive and convincing detail, by John Stockwell, the former chief of the CIA's Angola 'task force.' His book should not be missed. Since strategic thought survives by ignoring experience, it has a highly professional interest in avoiding accounts such as this. By the same token, all who are alarmed about the tendency toward such strategic thinking should strongly welcome Mr. Stockwell's book." —John Kenneth Galbraith
The quote above is from a review of "In Search of Enemies: A CIA Story," published in 1978, 45 years ago. If it seems uncannily familiar, that is because the "strategic thinking" Galbraith alludes never grows old. It is evergreen. Only the players change, and even some of those—Kissinger, Biden—linger on in this Ukrainian iteration. But history isn't slave to this version of eternal return. It changes, and as it does, new possibilities arise and formerly reliable gambits take unexpected turns. So in history as in physics, when speaking of payoffs we need first to establish a frame of reference. Thus from one perspective Ukraine represents a great if enormously cruel success for certain Western interests. It pays off handsomely, for some understanding of "handsome." But results from outside that frame of reference remain to be seen. Wishful thinking may color analyses of why unintended consequences are likely, but it does not negate objective factors that undermine dominance. In a long game they can be decisive. However what makes cynicism attractive is that here and now there is money to be made. That can change, but generally only when it can no longer go on. When that will be no one knows.
Sadly, yes. But remember the Hollywood-ized words of Deep Throat—Mark Felt, not Linda Lovelace, though it is a sentiment she might be in accord with: "The truth is, these are not very bright guys, and things got out of hand."
I do not know. Time will tell. I try to see events in historical, institutional, and evolutionary contexts. Some dynamics cross national boundaries. So does folly. As of now things both are and are not out of hand. Perhaps it is Schrödinger's hand. Has Russian leadership been not very bright? Opinions will differ and, to coin a phrase, the proof will be in the pudding. I incline toward seeing less hubris, delusion, and sheer dominance striving behind Russian words and deeds than from those of the West.
This is an excellent summary which comports well with the analysis of other commentators such as Andrei Martyanov, Larry Johnson, Douglas Macgregor, Scott Ritter, et al. What isn’t touched upon as much by any of the commentators I follow is the social and psychological composition of the population itself. The basic description of a divided Ukraine is characterized as Ukrainian nationalism vs. Russian cultural identity, but is this the whole story, or merely a superficial construct designed primarily for western consumption? Granted this division is significant, but there are other elements in play here, first of which is the economic and demographic reality of Ukraine since independence in 1991.
I think it’s useful to do a side by side comparison of Russia vs Ukraine post the breakup. They were the most similar of the former republics, and the most significant in economic terms, which meant they were the first to attract the attention of western financiers and their corporate allies. So for the next ten years we had a similar pattern of former apparatchiks acquiring great fortunes with western banking assistance, to the detriment of the population at large. Then the great divergence occurred with the ascent of VVP and his faction, which having gained political power sat the oligarchs down and read them the riot act. You can keep some of your assets, but some you’ll have to return to the state, and by the way, you’re working for Russia now. Anyone who doesn’t agree is welcome to get on their yacht and leave. So sign here, or there’s the door, and I’d like my pen back please.
That never happened in Ukraine, which to me is the defining difference. The looting simply continued and the cynicism of the population increased, whereas in Russia there was a shift in public perception buttressed by a broad nationalism with historic roots that simply doesn't exist in Ukraine as a whole. Ukrainian nationalism, such as it does exist, has a dark past to which only the western portion of the country feels any affinity. For the remainder of the population it was something they either had no part in, would sooner forget, or had family history of opposing. Note, this division does not occur along strictly ethnic lines but includes ethnic Ukrainians who took the side of the USSR, or at least resisted Ukrainian nationalism as defined by the OUN and Bandera elements.
So what does this mean in the current context? Simply that while the ethnic Russian portion of the population is relatively unified, divisions exist on the ethnic Ukrainian side and are widening as a result of a war which a growing portion of ethnic Ukrainians want no part of, and who see it as a continuation of the looting operation described above. The Nationalists know this, and by attempting to root out that element of their own society are simply increasing that division to the point that some of their own people have now turned against them. So a state of paranoia exists within Ukrainian leadership. No one at the top has any delusions about the Nationalist program they're pushing. It’s simply the operational schema for the continued looting of the nation, made all the more attractive by the fact that they’ve drawn their western sponsors into the fray and can loot them as well.
This is the actual background of the war of attrition, in my opinion. It has an obvious military element, but it also consists of aiding Ukrainian oligarchs in the looting of western financial resources on the theory that at some point, it become a political factor leading to a change of leadership in the West. The oligarchs can be dealt with later, as no amount of money can buy them protection from what’s coming, either from their own people, or from Russia herself.
We’ve all seen the map of the 2010 election which is used to illustrate the division between the two ethnicities, but is that the whole picture? Recall that a key element leading to the Maidan protests was the issue of EU membership. I would argue that the split in the electorate had more to do with that than with any ethnic divisions or loyalty to Russia. Consider a 20-something guy in Ukraine with few economic prospects. EU membership would be very attractive as it holds out the potential of employment in the EU. I would argue that was a motivating factor for many young Ukrainians regardless of ethnicity, and would have created the illusion of greater support for the nationalist faction than actually exists. Basically people voted their self-interest, and at the time the EU seemed the best option. Never mind the fact that the eastern industrial sector of Ukraine was an integral part of the USSR, and as such had well developed markets in Russia, whereas they had virtually no markets in the west outside of agricultural products, and no realistic chance of ever competing with Western corporations. That kind of argument takes a back seat when the individual's priority is escape from perpetual poverty. To sum it up, that vote was economically determined and likely had little to do with pro or anti Russian sentiment. It was simply voting for a potential way out of a dire circumstance. Delusional in my opinion, but young people often are.
So that’s my summary of the social and psychological backdrop to the conflict. In short, Ukrainian youth of both ethnic extractions were lured by a false promise held out by an entrenched political elite with no intention of enacting the type of reforms which would have admitted them to the EU. How could they, when they were the very source of the corruption the EU decried? Even if the process had moved ahead, it would have taken much longer than would benefit any young person looking for an immediate way out. So instead of a job in the EU, you’re dragooned into a war you want no part of, and from which you’re unlikely to return. Not exactly the outcome you anticipated, so how much commitment can you expect from that cohort, who now make up the bulk of what’s left of the UAF? This to me is the defining aspect of the war at this point. The hard core element have mostly been killed and the remainder are looking for a way to surrender without being shot by their nationalist minders, a sad replay of soviet era military ‘discipline.’ I suppose the end game depends on how much of the UAF leadership are professional soldiers not implicated in the coup or subsequent horrors, who see the best way to end this is to remove the Ukrainian government and negotiate terms of surrender. How likely this is I can’t say as I’m not familiar with the UAF command structure and their loyalties.
Is that a good summary? I welcome comments and criticism as my analysis is strictly from the outside. Although I have friends on both sides of the conflict, none of them have any enthusiasm for what’s happening, they are just simple guys who feel the same as I do, that a massive tragedy has occurred that never should have happened.
More to the point, the President and the Prime Minister are not Slavic Ukrainians. They don’t care how many Ukrainians they waste away because the Ukrainians are not their people. The people who they answer to are a totally different ethnic group: their fellow brethren -- primarily, Blinken, Nuland, and Sullivan (don't let that last name fool you) and billionaires like Igor Kolomoisky.
Same here in the UK (Sunak), Scotland (whatever the First minister ethnical Pakistani name is) and Ireland (Taoiseach=PM Varadkar is indian). Obviously they are not interested in the local people.
Funding Both Sides: How Jewish Money Controls British Politics . . .
“During the previous Labour government, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were ardent Zionists because they accepted the justice of Israel’s cause, not because Labour’s chief fund-raisers were first the Jew Michael Levy and then the Jew Jonathan Mendelsohn (both are now members of the House of Lords). And during the current Conservative government, David Cameron, Theresa May and Boris Johnson have been ardent Zionists because they too accept the justice of Israel’s cause, not because the Conservatives’ chief fund-raisers have been first the Jew Sir Mick Davis and then the Jew Sir Ehud Sheleg.”
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2021/10/04/funding-both-sides-how-jewish-money-controls-british-politics/
The Ukraine conflict is actually a DOUBLE PROXY war. There's the obvious proxy of Ukraine fighting the Russians for NATO/EU/US/EMPIRE. Then there is the uber proxy of NATO/EU/US/EMPIRE fronting for the neocons/neoliberals, the psychopaths actually calling the shots, i.e., the elephant in the room whose true identity cannot be spoken .
This diabolical war is a fulcrum point and hinge of fate that history turns upon; insomuch, it's a major defeat for neo liberal Globalism that could lead to the economic collapse of the West, something akin to the 89-91 collapse of communism, but this time with russia and the BRICS resurgent
Yep. Francis Fukuyama is unavailable for comment.
❝. . . the entire establishment in the Western world is attacking Russia in unison. The propaganda machine is in full swing in an effort to make the whole world hate Putin and take Ukraine’s side in the war. The same propaganda machine that wants nothing more than you as a White person to stop having children and instead focus on your career, race-mix or become homosexual. What this establishment wants you to think is often a very good indicator of what you should absolutely not think, and by this measure, Russia appears to be the side to support 100%.
From a global geopolitical perspective, if we theorize from the unlikely idea that this conflict will lead to a third world war, then all pro-Zionist liberal monster-nations like Great Britain, France, Germany, the United States and, of course, Israel itself would side with Ukraine, while more traditional and sovereign anti-Zionist forces would likely stand behind Russia. Mark my words when I say that the Nordic Resistance Movement will NEVER stand on the same side as Israel or the Zionist entity that the USA represents today – whatever the issue or conflict may be!
If we look at the situation from a revolutionary point of view, it is also natural to support Russia. By challenging the USA and the Western world, one acts against the status quo – the present situation that must be destroyed in order for any true changes to take place, and for us National Socialists to be able to make real progress. The more the current ruling powers are challenged, and the harder the world economy is combated, the greater the chance for widespread disruption, which is a necessity for the Nordic revolution to become fact. Please note that I do not mean the coming changes will necessarily be better for us; however, in the dramatic situation in which we find ourselves, we must see hope in every potential radical change that arises within the global environment.❞
https://nordicresistancemovement.org/which-side-are-we-on-in-the-ukraine-war/
It’s quite brilliant that particular family that financed kings in wars and pushing this war had never been punished. But I guess if we all die they will too. Apparently are extremely inbred and ugly lol
“Oh how fond they are of the book of Esther, which is so beautifully attuned to their bloodthirsty, vengeful, murderous yearning and hope.” — Martin Luther
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/oh-how-fond-they-are-of-the-book
.
“In Washington right next to the Holocaust Museum is the Federal Reserve where they print the money. Is that an accident?” ― Louis Farrakhan
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/zelensky-biden-satanism-war-greed
.
“I fear the Jewish bankers with their craftiness and torturous tricks will entirely control the exuberant riches of America and use it to systematically corrupt modern civilization. The Jews will not hesitate to plunge the whole of Christendom into wars and chaos so that the earth should become their inheritance.” ― Otto Von Bismark
https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/135302021/in-the-shadow-of-war-ukraine-as-the-great-reset-laboratory-of-the-global-tech-elite
Sodom Hussein Obama's mentor Zbigniew Brzezinski (Mika’s father, next to Nasty Pelousy in the link below) was the monster in the Carter administration who armed and financed the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan to fight against the Soviets... after the Mujahedeen were armed with sophisticated weapons, the Soviets left, the result was the USA got 911, and women now can walk 3 paces behind the donkey, the Mujahedeen evolved into the Taliban, who evolved into Al-Qaeda, who evolved into ISIS/ISIL/Daesh... Brezinski, for all practical purposes, can be called the ‘Grandfather of ISIS’... https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/sodom-hussein-obama
.
Jews Albright and Clark (pictured in the link below) had NATO bomb Serbia so the IMF Jews could make loans for rebuilding and get control of Serbian iridium assets… while Saudi non-profit NGOs kept the KLA terrorists well fed and well-armed… Just like ISIS in Syria… their Zionist bedfellows on Wall Street want Ukraine for GMO grain crops . . . Monsanto (now Bayer), Genentech, ADM, etc., are all buying land with the help of the Jews at the IMF by giving the Ukrainian “Dill” idiots debt relief . . . https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/sodom-hussein-obama
.
Jewish U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D), great grandson of Jacob Schiff (who funded Bolshevism, Leon Trotsky, and the October Revolution from Wall Street) is following in his great grandfather’s footsteps by illegally trafficking weapons with Igor Pasternak (seated behind John Kerry in the link below), funding foreign conflicts abroad... and trying to get Syria for the oil pipelines by blaming the Russians for another false flag... https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/schiffty-schitty-kike-adam-schiffs-collusion-with-oligarch-ukrainian-arms-dealer-exposed
Is Sullivan a member of 'the tribe'?
Yes he is, but it has been scrubbed now from his Early Life entry in Wikipedia.
I think the Early Life section is being ghosted for a certain demographic because it has become too easy to source their lineage. Exceptionalism works both ways if you catch my drift.
PROTOCOLS OF THE MEETINGS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION . . . Protocols of Zion: Protocol II – Economic Wars
❝The administrators, whom we shall choose from among the public, with strict regard to their capacities for servile obedience, will not be persons trained in the arts of government, and will therefore easily become pawns in our game in the hands of men of learning and genius who will be their advisers, specialists bred and reared from early childhood to rule the affairs of the whole world.❞
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/protocols-of-zion-protocol-ii-economic
Nice touch with "I’d like my pen back please"! :) Needed to watch that video again.
Oleg Deripaska downvoted this comment..
"Is that a good summary?" Better than merely good. Cheers.
Very impressive and instructive. Thank you.
Ebear: Perhaps have a look at "The Tragedy of Ukraine," by Nicolai Petro. Glenn Diesen and Alexander Mercouris interviewed him back in January. He takes up the ethnic history of Ukraine that you sketched in your comment. If memory serves, John Mearsheimer also addressed the composite nature of Ukraine in a post-Maidan lecture around 2015, when he presciently spoke of a primrose path to national destruction. With post-independence electoral maps spanning decades he demonstrated how deeply divided the country was. Petro goes much further back, with similar conclusions.
About your penultimate paragraph: Your description of Ukrainian youth may be correct. It would help to see data, since it may be misleading to assess the youth appeal of the EU based on NGO-funded protests in Kyiv/Kiev. But good data can be hard to come by. We do not have reliable casualty figures for the war or even a noncontroversial number for how many Ukrainians have fled and what the country's population is today. It may also be that nationalists remain in the ascendant, not least because losses among cadres may be offset by ethnic cleansing via conscription, which seems to have been state policy since the war began. And while a military rout could precipitate a coup against the Zelensky government, the harder part might be to free Ukraine from Western masters who may be unwilling to shrug and walk away from their grand Eastern European project. Parlous times.
As a final note on the theme of your post, lately there seems to be a grassroots movement among families and friends of missing combatants. Cookies will not make them go away. That may be a demographic that bears watching.
Volodymyr Zelensky is an Israeli operative . . . Ukraine’s Azov Regiment Visits Israel: ‘Mariupol is our Masada’ . . . https://nationalvanguard.org/2022/12/ukraines-azov-regiment-visits-israel-mariupol-is-our-masada/
.
Why Do the Ukrainians Allow Their Country to Be Completely Run by Jews? . . . https://russia-insider.com/en/why-do-ukrainians-allow-their-country-be-completely-run-jews/ri27010
.
Zelensky, Biden, Satanism, War, Greed, Theft, Propaganda, Domestic Spying, International Intrigue, Treason, Sedition, FTX, Ukraine, Israel . . . https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/zelensky-biden-satanism-war-greed
.
Documents leaked from Soros’ “Open Society Foundation” show how the Jewish billionaire behind Hillary Clinton gave orders to the State Department and manipulated media coverage of events in Ukraine . . . https://nationalvanguard.org/2016/09/documents-show-soros-ran-us-foreign-policy-on-post-coup-ukraine/
.
How Christine Lagarde, Hillary Clinton and Victoria Nuland Funded a Massive Ukrainian Ponzi Scheme . . . https://russia-insider.com/en/how-christine-lagarde-clinton-and-nuland-funded-massive-ukrainian-ponzi-scheme/ri27390
.
Jewish Corruption in Ukraine . . . by Andrew Joyce, Ph.D. . . . https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2023/02/17/jewish-corruption-in-ukraine/
"Consider a 20-something guy in Ukraine with few economic prospects. EU membership would be very attractive as it holds out the potential of employment in the EU. I would argue that was a motivating factor for many young Ukrainians regardless of ethnicity, and would have created the illusion of greater support for the nationalist faction than actually exists."
It's no secret that this was the original motivating factor behind Maidan - the protesters were hoping to be able to emigrate to someplace that offered better prospects and EU association (conflated with membership) was the surest way to do that.
PROTOCOLS OF THE MEETINGS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION . . . Protocol No. 16 – Brainwashing
❝We must introduce into their education all those principles which have so brilliantly broken up their order. But when we are in power we shall remove every kind of disturbing subject from the course of education and shall make out of the youth obedient children of authority, loving him who rules as the support and hope of peace and quiet.❞
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/protocol-no-16-brainwashing
Great summary, I do agree with your socio-economic assessment of the whole Euro-maidan oligarch game as it is playing out. Realistically though I do not see how the UAF leadership can act on its own -- everybody is bought, sold, implicated or could be blackmailed in Kiev, on top of it, US/UK minders have everybody by the balls there. Zelensky will go down to the end (he thinks he has a golden parachute) with most of Kiev's "leadership" . It is a one in a life time opportunity for them to syphon off so much money and blame the West for not delivering enough at the end... Something tells me he'll end up like Sakashvilli though...
It will only end when there is a financial and military implosion where the propaganda can't cover for it...
Russia can accelerate this, but not sure it sees the urgency to do so. The longer game here is to get concessions from Europeans and US on the new European security architecture. In the current economic war of attrition Russia is actually not doing too bad, it is also taking time to reform, retrain, modernize its army against a NATO-led opponent in a "hands on environment"
"Zelensky will go down to the end (he thinks he has a golden parachute) with most of Kiev's "leadership" ."
I often hear this, but the US offered Zelenskii an exit early in the war, and Ghani and his crew all are alive and well.
And neither the US nor the EU are anywhere near offering any sort of concession. Quite the opposite.
Volodymyr Zelensky is an Israeli operative . . . Ukraine’s Azov Regiment Visits Israel: ‘Mariupol is our Masada’ . . . https://nationalvanguard.org/2022/12/ukraines-azov-regiment-visits-israel-mariupol-is-our-masada/
.
Why Do the Ukrainians Allow Their Country to Be Completely Run by Jews? . . . https://russia-insider.com/en/why-do-ukrainians-allow-their-country-be-completely-run-jews/ri27010
.
Zelensky, Biden, Satanism, War, Greed, Theft, Propaganda, Domestic Spying, International Intrigue, Treason, Sedition, FTX, Ukraine, Israel . . . https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/zelensky-biden-satanism-war-greed
.
Documents leaked from Soros’ “Open Society Foundation” show how the Jewish billionaire behind Hillary Clinton gave orders to the State Department and manipulated media coverage of events in Ukraine . . . https://nationalvanguard.org/2016/09/documents-show-soros-ran-us-foreign-policy-on-post-coup-ukraine/
.
How Christine Lagarde, Hillary Clinton and Victoria Nuland Funded a Massive Ukrainian Ponzi Scheme . . . https://russia-insider.com/en/how-christine-lagarde-clinton-and-nuland-funded-massive-ukrainian-ponzi-scheme/ri27390
.
Jewish Corruption in Ukraine . . . by Andrew Joyce, Ph.D. . . . https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2023/02/17/jewish-corruption-in-ukraine/
All true!
Worth mentioning too that the drive for a separate Ukrainian identity, as with the Catalunyan identity, was initiated by romantic intellectuals in the late 19th century. Both created dictionaries out of the local demotic, both are border conditions, both had periods of historic power in their past. A recipe for trouble :-(
I was in Spain in 1975 during the final days of Franco. I was a young guy hitchhiking around Europe, which was the thing to do back then. Wound up marrying a Spanish gal, which is another story. I was in the Catalan speaking areas, but didn't notice any discord. The big issue back then was Basque separatism (ETA) and they took it very seriously, including adopting some of the tactics of the IRA. Bombs went off in the railway stations while I was there, and for a while the border was closed. Interior ministry police in armoured vehicles with machine guns were a common sight. One of the measures they were resisting was the banning of the Basque language in schools and publications. Same thing the Ukrainian nationalists are doing today with Russian. I had no idea what I'd walked into actually. My approach back then was to just head out in a direction and see what happened. I don't think I even had a travel guidebook.
Owing to my marriage I speak Spanish. As a test, I took the text you wrote and ran it through Google Translate, into Catalan. Surprisingly I can understand most of it. It's closer to Spanish than Portuguese, which I can also read and even speak a bit. Funny how these slight cultural and linguistic differences get amplified into political movements. Sometimes it's organic if the cultures and languages are very different, as with the Basque people, but where the differences are slight I always suspect a political rather than cultural motive is at work. That said, the Spanish government let the mask slip in the way they handled the Catalan movement. Vestiges of the Franco era are still present in Spain to this day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism_of_small_differences#:~:text=In%20psychoanalysis%2C%20the%20narcissism%20of,of%20hypersensitivity%20to%20minor%20differences
Another tragic example: Serbs and Croats.
The Croats were Roman Catholics, and the RC church has a long history of intolerance of other Religions including other Christian sects - which the Serbs are.
Interesting. I hadn't come across that concept before but it seems to make sense. Dr. Seuss wrote something along the same lines I think, with his North Going Zax and South Going Zax. That might also explain why my wife (current, not the Spanish one) and I get along so well. We have absolutely nothing in common...lol!
The Seuss book that's most directly on the nose about this is "The Butter Battle Book," a highly didactic parable about nuclear war and mutually assured destruction:
"As you know, on this side of the Wall, we are Yooks.
On the far other side of this Wall live the Zooks."
Then my grandfather said, "It's high time you knew
of the terribly horrible thing that Zooks do:
In every Zook house and in every Zook town,
every Zook eats his bread with the butter side down!"
"But we Yooks, as you know, when we breakfast or sup,
Spread our bread," Grandpa said, "with the butter side up!
That's the right honest way!" Grandpa gritted his teeth.
"So you can't trust a Zook who spreads bread underneath!
Every Zook must be watched! He has kinks in his soul!
That's why, as a youth, I made watching my goal,
Watching Zooks for the Zook-Watching Border Patrol!"
Bravo my friend, you sound like a kindred soul as I hitch hiked around much of the western world solo back in the early 1980s with a spirit of wanderlust worthy of the Odyssey ...unfortunately, bad things can happen to hitch hikers
"...I’d like my pen back please".
Brilliant! Because so true.
The West think they can drive Russia to an armistice and military stalemate, something like the Korean War but Russia fought this war largely to keep NATO away from its borders so they will never tolerate a rump state of UKraine in NATO . They want a minimum of regime change in KIev with a de-militarised UKraine sworn to neutrality something like Austria after WW2
Good comment. One point you overlooked (though I'm sure you're aware of it) is that many moderates have fled Ukraine, either to Russia or to Western Europe. What's left are fanatics and corrupt war profiteers who pretend to be fanatics as long as that benefits them, plus the poor, the stupid, the elderly, the maimed ex-soldiers.
I did overlook that actually, and it is a major factor. By some accounts Ukraine has lost 25% of its population. How you recover from that is a big question as many of the people who left are likely the more educated part of their population and surveys suggest that as many as 70% will never return.
I have a (west) Ukrainian friend who left just before the Maidan for economic reasons. He was ready to go and fight for Ukraine when Russia invaded but I managed to talk him out of it as he has a wife and three children. He did return briefly a few months ago, along with the family which I felt was a mistake. Fortunately they're in a remote village far from the fighting. He was technically exempt from the draft owing to the three kids, but he still had to register and take the physical. There were no jobs though, so he returned to Canada, and not a moment too soon. About two weeks later they changed the exemptions which made him eligible, so he literal dodged a bullet there.
Another point I didn't raise, which is significant. It took Russia almost 9 years to respond to what was happening. That means that kids 8 or 9 years old who were indoctrinated into the nationalist identity through youth camps and other organizations are of fighting age now, and many still believe the nonsense they were taught. I can't imagine anything more disheartening than seeing your friends killed and finding out much too late that everything you were taught was a lie, a fact which becomes more obvious with each passing day. To me that's the greatest tragedy of this whole affair - the betrayal of idealistic youth by fanatics and opportunists. There is no worse crime than the abuse of children, and that has been a feature of this war from the beginning.
Remarkably, western MSM reported accurately on this aspect. I guess they hadn't yet received their marching orders.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiBXmbkwiSw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpV16BQfbrQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsHBdyqKpfo
I knew from day one that Russia was provoked into this war by NATO advancement , but it's more than that the frightens the Russians, as it's the neo liberal Globalist agenda that includes the nefarious LGBTQ ideology and lifestyle that's shocking to a conservative and traditional culture
Russia always saw themselves as the ''Third Rome'' and as things turn out they are correct, insomuch, they are the last bastion of Christendom in the West , and it's their historic ''backwardness '' and anachronism that's saving them from the fate of the decadent and degenerate WEst . They are like we were back in the 1980s before liberalism undermined our conservative and traditional values . Moreover, they are just coming out of a 70 year murderous utopian cult and have no desire whatsoever of engaging in a liberal, more feminised version of it with the EU
NATO – an anti-white and anti-family institution . . .
After the apocalypse of 1945, a number of global organizations have been formed with the aim of maintaining and expanding totalitarian liberalism. One of the earliest organizations formed for this purpose was the war alliance "North Atlantic Treaty Organization", or NATO, which can be seen as the military wing of globalism.
In addition to ensuring that Washington always has international support for its military campaigns, NATO as an institution is explicitly anti-white and explicitly dedicated to "racial justice" for racial aliens living in white countries. As early as 1999, NATO authored reports blaming nationalists for a number of modern problems and warning against the influence of nationalism.
In 2023, the war alliance held a summit at its headquarters in Brussels on race where the alliance's leaders pledged to fight "homogeneous attitudes" and to use NATO's "collective intelligence" for the purpose.
In fact, NATO is so dedicated to its anti-white agenda that it openly advocates that institutions must be reshaped to be "inclusive," in other words, restructured to be more anti-white, and consist of fewer white employees and executives.
https://nordfront.se/nato-en-antivit-och-familjefientlig-institution
It's a brilliant summary, you've obviously researched a lot of the actual facts. It's unbelievable for me, to see & hear those Eastern European countries who aren't in the EU, believing it's some kind of paradise. I'd advise the citizens of these countries to speak to Hungarians, Croatians, Bulgarians & many others. The 1st thing they'd be told is how everything at least doubles in price. As a British person who was ecstatic we voted to leave, I can say without any doubt. Do not believe any of the bullshit about Britain's regretting leaving the EU. The only ones that do are the ones that voted to remain. If you were to ask those very same people how worse off they are. You'll be waiting a long time for a reply. The EU is a neo liberal dictatorship, that is designed for mass corruption. Just watch the only rich countries of the EU collapse in the coming years. It was fine carrying the burden of the poorer countries when the going was good for them. Just watch what happens now. For a those trying to say the UK is just as bad, the UK had just gave the EU 30 billion. In an illegal none binding divorce settlement it didn't have to make. Show me any EU country who could give that amount to the UK this week. There's a lot of things that aren't known about the EU purposely kept quiet. It's a failing monster that needs to expand to survive. The big problem is the only countries that can enlarge it are all very poor countries that won't bring anything but debt & extremists to the monster.
Sodom Hussein Obama's mentor Zbigniew Brzezinski (Mika’s father, next to Nasty Pelousy in the link below) was the monster in the Carter administration who armed and financed the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan to fight against the Soviets... after the Mujahedeen were armed with sophisticated weapons, the Soviets left, the result was the USA got 911, and women now can walk 3 paces behind the donkey, the Mujahedeen evolved into the Taliban, who evolved into Al-Qaeda, who evolved into ISIS/ISIL/Daesh... Brezinski, for all practical purposes, can be called the ‘Grandfather of ISIS’... https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/sodom-hussein-obama
.
Jews Albright and Clark (pictured in the link below) had NATO bomb Serbia so the IMF Jews could make loans for rebuilding and get control of Serbian iridium assets… while Saudi non-profit NGOs kept the KLA terrorists well fed and well-armed… Just like ISIS in Syria… their Zionist bedfellows on Wall Street want Ukraine for GMO grain crops . . . Monsanto (now Bayer), Genentech, ADM, etc., are all buying land with the help of the Jews at the IMF by giving the Ukrainian “Dill” idiots debt relief . . . https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/sodom-hussein-obama
.
Jewish U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D), great grandson of Jacob Schiff (who funded Bolshevism, Leon Trotsky, and the October Revolution from Wall Street) is following in his great grandfather’s footsteps by illegally trafficking weapons with Igor Pasternak (seated behind John Kerry in the link below), funding foreign conflicts abroad... and trying to get Syria for the oil pipelines by blaming the Russians for another false flag... https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/schiffty-schitty-kike-adam-schiffs-collusion-with-oligarch-ukrainian-arms-dealer-exposed
I knew all those things as it happens, but the more I've learnt about Soros. The more I know he believes only 1 race should be pure. All of his financing points to this fact also. He's one if the chosen ones the same as Bibi who believe the rest of us are scum. Make no mistake all Christian faiths are held in same light as the Islamic ones. Soros stirs up a lot of conflict along with his disciples. Obama the ass bandit is a proud one. He's one if the worst, he tried all of his dirty tricks by stealth. But what can we expect from someone who has lived a clue all of his life.
❝. . . the entire establishment in the Western world is attacking Russia in unison. The propaganda machine is in full swing in an effort to make the whole world hate Putin and take Ukraine’s side in the war. The same propaganda machine that wants nothing more than you as a White person to stop having children and instead focus on your career, race-mix or become homosexual. What this establishment wants you to think is often a very good indicator of what you should absolutely not think, and by this measure, Russia appears to be the side to support 100%.
From a global geopolitical perspective, if we theorize from the unlikely idea that this conflict will lead to a third world war, then all pro-Zionist liberal monster-nations like Great Britain, France, Germany, the United States and, of course, Israel itself would side with Ukraine, while more traditional and sovereign anti-Zionist forces would likely stand behind Russia. Mark my words when I say that the Nordic Resistance Movement will NEVER stand on the same side as Israel or the Zionist entity that the USA represents today – whatever the issue or conflict may be!
If we look at the situation from a revolutionary point of view, it is also natural to support Russia. By challenging the USA and the Western world, one acts against the status quo – the present situation that must be destroyed in order for any true changes to take place, and for us National Socialists to be able to make real progress. The more the current ruling powers are challenged, and the harder the world economy is combated, the greater the chance for widespread disruption, which is a necessity for the Nordic revolution to become fact. Please note that I do not mean the coming changes will necessarily be better for us; however, in the dramatic situation in which we find ourselves, we must see hope in every potential radical change that arises within the global environment.❞
https://nordicresistancemovement.org/which-side-are-we-on-in-the-ukraine-war/
One of the best responses I've read.
Volodymyr Zelensky is an Israeli operative . . . Ukraine’s Azov Regiment Visits Israel: ‘Mariupol is our Masada’ . . . https://nationalvanguard.org/2022/12/ukraines-azov-regiment-visits-israel-mariupol-is-our-masada/
.
Why Do the Ukrainians Allow Their Country to Be Completely Run by Jews? . . . https://russia-insider.com/en/why-do-ukrainians-allow-their-country-be-completely-run-jews/ri27010
.
Zelensky, Biden, Satanism, War, Greed, Theft, Propaganda, Domestic Spying, International Intrigue, Treason, Sedition, FTX, Ukraine, Israel . . . https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/zelensky-biden-satanism-war-greed
.
Documents leaked from Soros’ “Open Society Foundation” show how the Jewish billionaire behind Hillary Clinton gave orders to the State Department and manipulated media coverage of events in Ukraine . . . https://nationalvanguard.org/2016/09/documents-show-soros-ran-us-foreign-policy-on-post-coup-ukraine/
.
How Christine Lagarde, Hillary Clinton and Victoria Nuland Funded a Massive Ukrainian Ponzi Scheme . . . https://russia-insider.com/en/how-christine-lagarde-clinton-and-nuland-funded-massive-ukrainian-ponzi-scheme/ri27390
.
Jewish Corruption in Ukraine . . . by Andrew Joyce, Ph.D. . . . https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2023/02/17/jewish-corruption-in-ukraine/
You have great articles. Not sure why you blocked me on X. I commented on your Sean Penn tweet agreeing he's a blowhard basically. Not sure if there was a misunderstanding.
I'm not on X. Never have been. I think you replied to the wrong post.
You need to get your own substack!
I already have a substack. Click on where it says: Writes когда сталкиваются миры
That's Russian for "When Worlds Collide" but don't worry, the site is in English. It's a music site that profiles artists of the post-Soviet republics. I don't comment on politics or current events there, just the music. There are plenty of sites where politics and current events are discussed, like the one we're on right now. There aren't many sites that examine different cultures from the viewpoint of their music, so I thought I'd do that. Besides, I don't feel qualified to host a site on politics. I wander around the different sites where those discussions take place and occasionally add comments where it feels appropriate. I'm kind of surprised by the response to this one actually as it's not an especially unique insight. Lots of people have made similar observations, I'm just one of them.
Усама бен Мухаммед бен Авад бен Ладен — основатель и первый эмир международной исламистской террористической организации "Аль-Каида" создан США в Афганистан для борьбы с СССР... И вот что из этого вышло.
В украинском парламенте полно еврейских аппаратчиков. Украина должна забыть о Крыме и НАТО. Власть на Украине в сговоре с олигархами, им никто не противостоит.
Евреи и мусульмане имеют схожие корни и обычаи . . . Женщины всегда были целью джихадистов . . . Изнасилование - главное оружие джихада. Мусульмане увеличили свою численность только за счет изнасилования женщин.
Хиллари Клинтон пыталась украсть выборы в России с некоммерческими организациями, как дома в Америке, но Владимир Путин победил их, поэтому они вызвали все трудности с глупой панк-рок-группой и гомосексуалистами на Олимпиаде в Сочи.
Ожесточённые марксисты ненавидят кавказцев. Еврейские банкиры заполнили Европу мусульманами, а Америку мусором из стран третьего мира. Евреи - нечистые демоны, как турки. Гитлер был прав.
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/67b
It's going to end with a rump something. The big question for Putin is how to get a situation where the rump can't do a quickie marriage with NATO. Or if that is impossible, then the rump has to be pretty harmless. That's bad news for Ukraine. In twenty years if we are lucky, we'll wonder why we let the Iraq and Afghan War geniuses set this whole thing up with Maidan and a good grifting along they way. At least the big guy got his 10% and 5 million.
> The big question for Putin is how to get a situation where the rump can't do a quickie marriage with NATO.
The easiest way to do this is actually already on the table--whatever is left of Ukraine simply refuses to concede defeat, and continues to claim all lost territory as its own. No country with an ongoing territorial dispute is eligible to join NATO. UA status quo will become not unlike North/South Korea, officially at war but with an indefinite ceasefire.
Volodymyr Zelensky is an Israeli operative . . . Ukraine’s Azov Regiment Visits Israel: ‘Mariupol is our Masada’ . . . https://nationalvanguard.org/2022/12/ukraines-azov-regiment-visits-israel-mariupol-is-our-masada/
.
Why Do the Ukrainians Allow Their Country to Be Completely Run by Jews? . . . https://russia-insider.com/en/why-do-ukrainians-allow-their-country-be-completely-run-jews/ri27010
.
Zelensky, Biden, Satanism, War, Greed, Theft, Propaganda, Domestic Spying, International Intrigue, Treason, Sedition, FTX, Ukraine, Israel . . . https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/zelensky-biden-satanism-war-greed
.
Documents leaked from Soros’ “Open Society Foundation” show how the Jewish billionaire behind Hillary Clinton gave orders to the State Department and manipulated media coverage of events in Ukraine . . . https://nationalvanguard.org/2016/09/documents-show-soros-ran-us-foreign-policy-on-post-coup-ukraine/
.
How Christine Lagarde, Hillary Clinton and Victoria Nuland Funded a Massive Ukrainian Ponzi Scheme . . . https://russia-insider.com/en/how-christine-lagarde-clinton-and-nuland-funded-massive-ukrainian-ponzi-scheme/ri27390
.
Jewish Corruption in Ukraine . . . by Andrew Joyce, Ph.D. . . . https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2023/02/17/jewish-corruption-in-ukraine/
Additionally, a 'quickie marriage' to NATO is theoretically not possible - admission requires a consensus of all existing members. There is no obligation to vote for acceptance, although the United States and its close allies would certainly apply pressure. But skeptics could fall back on the rules: to be considered for acceptance, a country must
1. Uphold democracy, including respect for diversity. Ukraine's nationalist element would ensure failure on that score alone, as the postwar country will need its Russian-ethnic labour and cannot afford a purification drive;
2. be underway with progress toward a market economy. Take a look at what Ukraine was selling to Europe and its NATO partners before the war, and recall that was under preferential conditions which gave it certain advantages. For those who can't remember, it was almost entirely agricultural products and some raw materials. Ukraine exported almost no finished goods to Europe - in fact, the flow was all the other way.
3. have its military forces firmly under civilian control.
4. be a good neighbour and respect sovereignty outside its borders. Ukraine's borders remain disputed and in flux, as you have alluded;
5. must be working toward compatibility with NATO forces. Ukraine would be glad to do that, but all its equipment is going to have to be gifted to it and soldiers are going to be in kind of short supply no matter how things end up.
As well, unwritten conditions are that the candidate's joining must 'materially strengthen the alliance', and increase security and stability across Europe. Adding Ukraine would demonstrably incur a liability, while Zelensky's precious air of entitlement and inference that the world owes Ukraine tribute because Ukraine is the spear point of European defense will not sit well, considering NATO is bankrupting itself just to keep the guns firing, without any strategic gains to show for all the noise.
Regardless of any rule or statute, the only thing that matters in NATO membership is that the US approves it.
Master says "go" and the marionettes fall into line.
I tend to agree with you on this point. The exception seems to be North Macedonia, where Greece blocked its becoming a full member over its use of the name 'Macedonia'.
NATO – an anti-white and anti-family institution . . .
After the apocalypse of 1945, a number of global organizations have been formed with the aim of maintaining and expanding totalitarian liberalism. One of the earliest organizations formed for this purpose was the war alliance "North Atlantic Treaty Organization", or NATO, which can be seen as the military wing of globalism.
In addition to ensuring that Washington always has international support for its military campaigns, NATO as an institution is explicitly anti-white and explicitly dedicated to "racial justice" for racial aliens living in white countries. As early as 1999, NATO authored reports blaming nationalists for a number of modern problems and warning against the influence of nationalism.
In 2023, the war alliance held a summit at its headquarters in Brussels on race where the alliance's leaders pledged to fight "homogeneous attitudes" and to use NATO's "collective intelligence" for the purpose.
In fact, NATO is so dedicated to its anti-white agenda that it openly advocates that institutions must be reshaped to be "inclusive," in other words, restructured to be more anti-white, and consist of fewer white employees and executives.
https://nordfront.se/nato-en-antivit-och-familjefientlig-institution
Keep in mind that US hegemony and European buttkissing have only increased since then.
Nobody is going to fight a war for Biden, he is dumber than Bush . . .
Even with a full-on declaration of war from Congress, if Gavin Jewsome could be cheated in by ZOG, with Globohomo brigades going door-to-door looking to impress American children into military service, they will be met with armed, well-trained opposition.
People are best to make note of where their Congresscritter lives, they are all traitors . . . and they have to register their addresses when they file for their candidacy.
With the country being invaded right now, an open war within U.S. borders is a certainty if a foreign war is declared.
NATO – an anti-white and anti-family institution . . .
After the apocalypse of 1945, a number of global organizations have been formed with the aim of maintaining and expanding totalitarian liberalism. One of the earliest organizations formed for this purpose was the war alliance "North Atlantic Treaty Organization", or NATO, which can be seen as the military wing of globalism.
In addition to ensuring that Washington always has international support for its military campaigns, NATO as an institution is explicitly anti-white and explicitly dedicated to "racial justice" for racial aliens living in white countries. As early as 1999, NATO authored reports blaming nationalists for a number of modern problems and warning against the influence of nationalism.
In 2023, the war alliance held a summit at its headquarters in Brussels on race where the alliance's leaders pledged to fight "homogeneous attitudes" and to use NATO's "collective intelligence" for the purpose.
In fact, NATO is so dedicated to its anti-white agenda that it openly advocates that institutions must be reshaped to be "inclusive," in other words, restructured to be more anti-white, and consist of fewer white employees and executives.
https://nordfront.se/nato-en-antivit-och-familjefientlig-institution
I am someome who has followed the development of this war closely, that said, I have no relevant experience or depth of historical knowledge to refute any of the the contents of the discussion below. The commenters all seem knowledgeable and able to point out the various factors that have led to this war in the first place and to it dragging out as it has.
The Putin/military leadership's minimumalist goals, seems to be conditon one.
As a veteran, with the limitations mentioned above, it has always struck me as strange that the Russian military did not do one thing, that showed serious intent. The shelling of Donetsk goes on to this day. Given Russia's capacity to pump out munitions, I don't understand why the Russian military didn't turn the area between Donetsk City and from where the Uke fascists were firing on civilian targets, into a total wasteland, in which all that could happen with further bombardment, is make the rubble bounce and mine the area so densely, a rat couldn't make its way though it.
Then move onto other strategic objectives.
Maybe what I said above reflects ignorance on my part, but the US Neo-Cons have no problem with "making the rubble bounce", which is about all the US's direct invasion of Afghanistan seems like it could accomplish, in military terms. The US's proxy war had already succeeded in destroying what there was of Afghan civil society. The US had some identifeable goals: A beach head in the underbelly of the Asian continent and the riches gained from looting Afghanistan's natural resources. Some other goals of the US, it might be pointed out, were not so much strategic, as opportunist. The Afghan War was an excuse to funnel trillions into the Pentagon's wealth transfer to the US's oligarchs apparatus. Allow the opium trade, which had been largley shut down by the Taliban, to flourish.
There is a long history of US/Western involvement in wars in which drugs are a significant element, though, perhaps, as a lucrative and useful (In crippling and creating underclasses where the drugs are ultimately dumped and profits for the int'l banks involved in laundering the drug trades money) side benefit.
I think the point made below about failing to respond to "Red Lines" for 2 decades is correct. A number of informed commentators, that all of us have listened too and have reason to respect, have pointed out, that the US Neo-Cons have become convinced that Russia is weak and its leadership indecisive. Russia is still characterized as a "gas station masquerading as a country". Neo-Con scribblers have advocated using tactical nuclear weapons against Russia. I suppose to some extent, the perceived need by US war hawks for using tactical nuclear weapons against Russia, is a back handed acknowledgement that Russia is more than a "gas station".
Some among the Neo-Con loonies speculate that Russia will not respond to the use of nuclear weapons, by unleashing a full on nuclear exchange. "Tactical" nukes are just one more Red Line that can be ignored.
Other Neo-Cons are not only nihilist enough to chance a nuclear war, they express fantasies about the US coming out on top of a nuclear exchange.
John Mearsheimer has repeatedly said, he thought a nuclear exchange was most likely to be started by a Russia that was loosing and was being backed into a corner by the US and its sycophants in "The Garden". Mearsheimer asserts it is a good thing that Russia is not on a path to complete defeat, as that reduces the likelihood of the use of nukes in this war. I think it is more likely that the US will resort to nuclear weapons, as its goal of re-assuming the mantle of World Hegemon continues to recede.
I remember sitting in a college level history class in the 70's, arguing with people that the US is willing to use nuclear weapons in a first strike. The answer as to whether or not the Shining City on a Hill will resort to the use nuclear weapons has been answered, twice.
A tip of the hat, and a thanks for the useful comments to Big Serge and to the people who have commented on his article.
And...we haven't mentioned China in all of these exchanges.
Russia really does not want this war. Russia does not want to make war on their brethren. Russians also see the West as the Magical Land Where Institutions Basically Work (regardless whether there is any truth in this) and does not want to admit that it will never be admitted to that blessed land or that the rulers of that land hate Russia and fear it. Hence the Minsk-2 sham, even after it was obvious that Minsk was a sham.
Unfortunately, this also causes the Russian leadership to basically continue to hide their head in the sand rather than admit unpleasant facts. This began with the start of the war and continues to this day. This lack of resolve has gotten a lot of good people killed.
This is also why Ukraine fights. They also want to be part of the Golden Billion, and if hating their brothers and their grandparents is the price that the West charges for admission, then they will pay that.
Sodom Hussein Obama's mentor Zbigniew Brzezinski (Mika’s father, next to Nasty Pelousy in the link below) was the monster in the Carter administration who armed and financed the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan to fight against the Soviets... after the Mujahedeen were armed with sophisticated weapons, the Soviets left, the result was the USA got 911, and women now can walk 3 paces behind the donkey, the Mujahedeen evolved into the Taliban, who evolved into Al-Qaeda, who evolved into ISIS/ISIL/Daesh... Brezinski, for all practical purposes, can be called the ‘Grandfather of ISIS’... https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/sodom-hussein-obama
.
Jews Albright and Clark (pictured in the link below) had NATO bomb Serbia so the IMF Jews could make loans for rebuilding and get control of Serbian iridium assets… while Saudi non-profit NGOs kept the KLA terrorists well fed and well-armed… Just like ISIS in Syria… their Zionist bedfellows on Wall Street want Ukraine for GMO grain crops . . . Monsanto (now Bayer), Genentech, ADM, etc., are all buying land with the help of the Jews at the IMF by giving the Ukrainian “Dill” idiots debt relief . . . https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/sodom-hussein-obama
.
Jewish U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D), great grandson of Jacob Schiff (who funded Bolshevism, Leon Trotsky, and the October Revolution from Wall Street) is following in his great grandfather’s footsteps by illegally trafficking weapons with Igor Pasternak (seated behind John Kerry in the link below), funding foreign conflicts abroad... and trying to get Syria for the oil pipelines by blaming the Russians for another false flag... https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/85711501/schiffty-schitty-kike-adam-schiffs-collusion-with-oligarch-ukrainian-arms-dealer-exposed
Largely in agreement with the cat here, but I have a few particular points which may help illuminate.
1) Russia has, largely perforce, turned Ukrainian defensive concentrations within easy artillery range of Donestk, into moonscapes. Check out pictures of Avdiivka for instance, which also answers the question of why they haven't taken and held it yet - taken and held what?
2) Russia's still largely fighting on soil it claims to be Russian, and against people it claims to be brothers. Western Ukrainians largely aren't on the front lines, but rather Eastern Ukrainians dragooned into fighting other Russian-speakers by the Kiev government. This is why there are common stories of Russian/Ukrainian personnel accidentally falling in to fight on the wrong side before realizing that oops, they're firing on their brothers-in-arms!
3) A much broader point, but shock and awe, strategic bombing, etc. just plain don't work, from the point of view of waging a war to win a lasting and thrifty peace. Bouncing rubble's not good for anything when the war's over except the provision of grudges.
Russia pretty much waged a scorched earth campaign in Chechnya and seems to have pacified the region.
I would have to do a lot of reading of what may be available in the accessible media, about the 2nd Chechnya’s War, to have full confidence, or not, in my reaction to your comment.
What I recall, was that the Chechnyans were egged on by the Bush the Lesser regime. The Chechnyan's experience in that war is one shared by people as diverse as the Montagnard's of the mountainous region of Viet Nam, the Miskitos of Nicaragua's Atlantic Coast and the Kurds.
For example, when the former European and US direct colonial rule was abandoned in favor of neocolonialism (imperialism), the colonial powers drew up the new state borders, malice aforethought, so as to guarantee that there were unfulfilled nationalist aspirations. Aspirations that could always be exploited in the future, to frustrate the development of the post colonial states.
Other commentators have pointed out that the US, if it can not directly impose its will, will resort to creating chaos. Examples of this might be, the US's backing of the groups of thugs it supported in Angola and Nicaragua. The central government was frustrated in delivering services to people, especially in the rural areas. The US and Apartheid backed thugs could render health clinics and schools, unusable, with nothing so much more than a hand grenade or two. This is to say nothing of assassinating health care workers and other service professionals.
The Kurdish leadership seems incapable of learning this lesson and neither has the regime in Turkey.
The Kurds were a respected minority in Syria. But due to nationalist sentiments, Kurds within the boundaries of Syria, continue to be manipulated by Washington.
As far as I know, the Kurds in Iraq have carved out a largely autonomous province in Iraq. This, with US blessing. That may well be a source of inspiration for the strident nationalists who aspire to cobble together a Kurdistan State, out of the Kurdish areas of Türkiye, Syria and Iraq.
This aspiration has impeded a settlement in Syria. The Kurdish leadership refuses to accept the reality that the US will abandoned them like a soiled napkin.
Thus, the US is free to stir up chaos in other areas of Kurdish presence.
All of this is to say, that what I have read in the past, is that the Chechnyans have learned that Washington is not their friend and the arrangement with Moscow is working in everyone's favor.
Chechnya's a lot smaller than Ukraine, and there were a lot fewer Chechnyans than Ukrainians at the start of both wars.
...whether that's still true at the end of both wars, we'll see.
True, to the extent relevant.
Chechnya also had a much younger median age than does Ukraine.
And probably other cultural differences that mattered. I could see an argument that Chechnyan culture has more respect for the 'firm hand' approach, though I won't make it because I don't know it from the inside so I'd be talking from my rear.
No prescription on what will work and what won't is absolute.
Nobody is going to fight a war for Biden, he is dumber than Bush . . .
Even with a full-on declaration of war from Congress, if Gavin Jewsome could be cheated in by ZOG, with Globohomo brigades going door-to-door looking to impress American children into military service, they will be met with armed, well-trained opposition.
People are best to make note of where their Congresscritter lives, they are all traitors . . . and they have to register their addresses when they file for their candidacy.
With the country being invaded right now, an open war within U.S. borders is a certainty if a foreign war is declared.
It's not easy to bomb a large area into wasteland. The US coundln't do it successfully in Vietnam and Korea, why do you think Russia can do it in Donbass? Don't you think Israel would have bombed long ago Southern Lebanon into a wasteland if they could? Bringing strategic bombers or additional artillery and rockets won't change much the battlefield on the ground, as soldiers will jump out of trenches after the raid and quickly shovel into new positions, and it's easy to replace trenches and rotate soldiers. You don't need to study in a military academy, it's just common sense and some maths, saturation with bombs will not do much if the enemy's infantry is dug underground, and they are. Watch some war videos of how trenches are being attacked, if the above does not make sense.
I was thinking of a No Man's Land area, of enough depth, to hold artillery at bay.
I will have to take up your suggestion of study.
A few things readilly come to mind, short of doing that study. The first is the accuracy that is now capable with all kinds of munitions. A 250 pound bomb exploding within a radious of a few yards, or less, of one's trench position, is likely a rather unpleasant experience.
Weighing in favor of your comment, is the analysis I have seen of how largely ineffective cluster munitions are, as a threat to dug in troops.
I remember reading stories of the NAZI's chaining workers to their machines, so they would not be able to leave their work stations, when the Allied bombs were falling around their factories.
However, I do know that the saturation bombing of eastern Cambodia, a rural area, is estimated by the US Air Force to have murdered 500,00 rural Camodian residents. This led to a flight of the rural population into the cities
It is true that the immense "strategic" bombing of Germany and Japan in WW2 had hardly any impact on their war effort. I heard that German factory workers used to joke that the safest place during an allied raid was inside the target buildings, as the "precision" bombing often missed its targets by literally miles.
Dr. Robert Oppenheimer’s dream failed at the first hurdle.
Hat-tip to Billy Bragg …
This war is just math. Russia has a 10:1 advantage in artillery and ammunition; air superiority; and twice the number of available (better trained) troops; well prepared fortifications and minefields; and surveillance and intelligence assets to know exactly where Ukrainian forces are at any given moment.
Why would anyone think an offensive would have any chance of strategic success under these circumstances? It's literally insane. It's basically the George Armstrong Custer theory of offense -- i.e., just recklessly attack a vastly superior force and see what happens.
The really interesting question is **why** the US (who apparently demanded and planned the offensive) is so stupid militarily? Potential explanations: (a) They really are just that stupid due to a retarded decision making process based on groupthink, believing their own propaganda, and perhaps deliberately politicized intelligence assessments; or (b) They somehow cynically calculated that a counter-productive doomed offensive would somehow play better politically than just a grinding attritional defense.
My personal view - having forced myself to consume much western MSM BS - is that they believed their own BS. They thought the defences were a sign of weakness and Ivan would flee when the first Leopard came into view. NATO employed psychologists apparently to give this message to assault troops. Maybe those poor schmucks are now suffering from cognitive dissonence - the ones still able to think. It is hard to believe but there we go.
The alternative [as you allude to] is that the NATO masters were prepared to risk everything on a pair of sixes- cause they would lose anyway and who gives any thought to hundreds of thousands of UAF casualties anyway? Alas I can believe that too, but would prefer not to. I think this was a case of institutional delusion.
You're right. It's the old 'racial characteristics' canard all over again. The Japanese couldn't possibly have a good fighter plane; the Russians couldn't possibly have an industrial or the morale to hold a defensive position.
There is a strong racist under-current IMHO under-pinning much of the western assessments of Russia and its military, reminiscent of pre-Barbarossa Germany.
"Barbaric and primitive Russia" is an old fairy-tale, which people in the West use to justify the war against Russia. When they lose this war they use it again to sedate themselves -- surely the Russia could only win because of endless barbaric meatwaves. This narrative survives the generation that lost the war. Then the following generation inherits it and uses it to justify a new war. Alas, this story repeats itself once or twice every century.
❝. . . the entire establishment in the Western world is attacking Russia in unison. The propaganda machine is in full swing in an effort to make the whole world hate Putin and take Ukraine’s side in the war. The same propaganda machine that wants nothing more than you as a White person to stop having children and instead focus on your career, race-mix or become homosexual. What this establishment wants you to think is often a very good indicator of what you should absolutely not think, and by this measure, Russia appears to be the side to support 100%.
From a global geopolitical perspective, if we theorize from the unlikely idea that this conflict will lead to a third world war, then all pro-Zionist liberal monster-nations like Great Britain, France, Germany, the United States and, of course, Israel itself would side with Ukraine, while more traditional and sovereign anti-Zionist forces would likely stand behind Russia. Mark my words when I say that the Nordic Resistance Movement will NEVER stand on the same side as Israel or the Zionist entity that the USA represents today – whatever the issue or conflict may be!
If we look at the situation from a revolutionary point of view, it is also natural to support Russia. By challenging the USA and the Western world, one acts against the status quo – the present situation that must be destroyed in order for any true changes to take place, and for us National Socialists to be able to make real progress. The more the current ruling powers are challenged, and the harder the world economy is combated, the greater the chance for widespread disruption, which is a necessity for the Nordic revolution to become fact. Please note that I do not mean the coming changes will necessarily be better for us; however, in the dramatic situation in which we find ourselves, we must see hope in every potential radical change that arises within the global environment.❞
https://nordicresistancemovement.org/which-side-are-we-on-in-the-ukraine-war/
The Japanese certainly couldn't fly or fight in the air, even if they had decent planes. being short, bandy-legged, short-sighted, etc. And probably "too primitive" to operate machinery.
I have always believed that war is God's way of educating racists that there is no such thing as an "inferior human". Although it does tend to kill a lot of them first.
I remember reading a CNN article in the early weeks of the counteroffensive quoting some US officials who literally said that the Russians were fighting better than they expected, so I think you’re right that these people actually believed their own propaganda. That’s an incredibly worrying sign about the larger delusions of the US foreign policy establishment.
First rule of the propagandist: don't use what you cook. It's too bad they forgot this rule.
Eh, no, I think this is unlikely.
There are certainly many ground-level analysts and commentators who spew, and likely even believed these propaganda lines. But the leadership of the west are unsurprisingly not retarded; They have known this outcome was feasible for decades, and have pursued it. They have a very singular goal and have done a pretty good job of seeking the best possible paths to it, without suffering from the delusions that they inflict upon their own masses.
For the rootless cosmopolitans that are the western elites, they are entirely okay with an outcome where Ukraine is left with barely any male population and is reduced to a rump state. I imagine that the intersection of ideals and realistic goals had them wanting to end up in a position where Odessa remained in their hands, but Ukraine was depopulated, Russia's ties with the west were severed, and their fist could be tightened around their vassals under the excuse of war.
So far they're at 3/4 of these goals. Losing Odessa is likely, but not a crippling matter. Far more important are the others: Ukraine has already lost a massive portion of its male population, which suits their ultimate goal of wiping out the European peoples wholesale. Russia has lost its pipeline to Germany and, despite the economic backlash that Europe will suffer, has lost much influence over them, and this may complicate matters for them abroad. And with that loss of influence, the US has managed to exhaust the armories of their allies, and leave them ever more dependent on the US itself.
Maybe I was being a bit vague when I referred to western leaders.... I was mainly thinking about the elected clowns, not the career sociopaths.
Same thing.
An oft-forgotten fact about propaganda is that it ends up fooling its purveyors as well as those on the receiving end. How come we ordinary schlubs can see the truth about this and these "experts" can't?
It's similar to Afghanistan (and Vietnam, for that matter.) They define winning differently than we do, as they don't look at it from the PoV of a nation that cares about people and territory. They look at it from the PoV of globalist oligarchs who see an opportunity to expand their markets and their control over units of production and consumption (what some would refer to as "people.")
When you say "lose", think about what you mean. Now think about what that means to those who are really calling the shots. It means nothing to them if the entire nation of UKR goes up in flames, or even a few Euro cities get nuked. Sounds like a great way to artificially stimulate demand for decontamination contracts!
For example many say they lost in Afghanistan, but what did they lose? They converted trillions of worthless taxpayer dollars into valuable military contracts and political kickbacks, and the CIA took out about $1Trillion in opium. Sure thousands of our troops died, maybe a million afghanis, and the internal cohesion of the US as well as its international standing suffered. But that isn't a cost for them, only for us.
As long as they control most of the West, they can't lose, only win or tie.
But the resources are not in the west... even the 0s and 1s need electricity, servers, cooling water, and some biofeed and shelter for the sheeple plugged into the matrix...
This is true, but how many of the people making these decisions understand the real basics of industrial production? I'll give you a hint: the number, at least in the US, can probably be counted on one hand and with digits left over.
You can live on the fat only for so long...
True. But also, there's a lot of ruin in a nation - and finally, predicting behaviour isn't a question of reality, but of perception and motive. People are very capable of being very badly wrong and acting on that misapprehension to their ruination.
Key phrase "in a nation."
They don't care about nations, they are above them. When 1 nation fails, they move on to the next like a cloud of locusts. They've been doing this for centuries, perhaps millennia.
In 100 years I wouldn't be surprised to see them ruling from China, with the ruined wastelands of Europe and North America acting as a 3rd world supply of resources and cheap labor.
Those resources are still controlled by the West. Any nation that decides it isn't going to transfer those resources as the West commands will suddenly find the West to have declared it in need of more Democracy. Any leader that tries to do so will be removed by any means, including accusations of being a narco-terrorist, rapist, etc. etc. Just ask Evo Morales.
Rape is the main weapon of jihad. Muslims have increased their numbers only by raping women.
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/67b
How is that working now for France in Niger, or Gabon? There is blood in the water so to speak, and all these countries are itching for a better deal... Plus, China can offer better deals. Look at Indonesia that wants to do value added and refined nickel, etc., at home. Canadians are livid and with the US want to sue Indonesia at WTO. China has no problem in building enrichment and refining plants in Indonesia. Slowly but surely, it seems is the Global South tha will be doing colour revolutions on the Wes's puppets...
c) the West will use Ukrainians as cannon fodder for as long as possible before sending in Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, etc., whether officially or as "volunteers".
Thank god I'm not the only one wearing a tin hat :D
Maybe that was the plan all along: destroy Ukraine, blame Russia, incentivize a Polish takeover and now you have: NATO surrounding Belorussia and Moldova/Transnistria and bordering Russia in the South. NATO's eastern border is locked, the alliance borders Russian across the entire Eurasia apart from Belorussia, no American lives were lost; and now we can look into Taiwan...
The US lost a great deal of guys there. From mercenaries to special forces along with a few stars. They will never acknowledge it.
As long as there’s no official troops on the ground it doesn’t really matter, at least not in Washington.
The U.S. military are that stupid because the 4 stars are politicians, and they dance to that tune.
And to reflect on a previous comment re the 2024 election, I'm still getting the feeling that there will not be one. The Biden administration cannot afford to let Trump win; therefore some excuse will be fabricated.
Simply using some legal pretext to keep Trump off the ballot will be enough to ensure victory for Biden.
And Trump proved weak, stupid and easily manipulated during his term. There's no reason to think that he has gotten any smarter.
Trump things Lindsey Graham a good fella. Nuff said.
Trump is a showman with an entourage of Q believers. So it doesn't matter who the clown in charge is - the US is going down and will likely take a fair swathe of its vassals with it.
❝. . . the entire establishment in the Western world is attacking Russia in unison. The propaganda machine is in full swing in an effort to make the whole world hate Putin and take Ukraine’s side in the war. The same propaganda machine that wants nothing more than you as a White person to stop having children and instead focus on your career, race-mix or become homosexual. What this establishment wants you to think is often a very good indicator of what you should absolutely not think, and by this measure, Russia appears to be the side to support 100%.
From a global geopolitical perspective, if we theorize from the unlikely idea that this conflict will lead to a third world war, then all pro-Zionist liberal monster-nations like Great Britain, France, Germany, the United States and, of course, Israel itself would side with Ukraine, while more traditional and sovereign anti-Zionist forces would likely stand behind Russia. Mark my words when I say that the Nordic Resistance Movement will NEVER stand on the same side as Israel or the Zionist entity that the USA represents today – whatever the issue or conflict may be!
If we look at the situation from a revolutionary point of view, it is also natural to support Russia. By challenging the USA and the Western world, one acts against the status quo – the present situation that must be destroyed in order for any true changes to take place, and for us National Socialists to be able to make real progress. The more the current ruling powers are challenged, and the harder the world economy is combated, the greater the chance for widespread disruption, which is a necessity for the Nordic revolution to become fact. Please note that I do not mean the coming changes will necessarily be better for us; however, in the dramatic situation in which we find ourselves, we must see hope in every potential radical change that arises within the global environment.❞
https://nordicresistancemovement.org/which-side-are-we-on-in-the-ukraine-war/
"The Biden administration cannot afford to let Trump win; therefore some excuse will be fabricated. "
The excuse is already in the works, the new variant BS 24/7. Lockdowns (illegal home detentions) are a great way to stop people voting in person.
Covid won't work for 2024. They'll have to go bigger.
“The choice that we faced in Ukraine — and I'm using the past tense there intentionally — was whether Russia exercised a veto over NATO involvement in Ukraine on the negotiating table or on the battlefield,” said George Beebe, a former director of Russia analysis at the CIA and special adviser on Russia to former Vice President Dick Cheney. “And we elected to make sure that the veto was exercised on the battlefield, hoping that either Putin would stay his hand or that the military operation would fail.”
Hope and prayers... a perfect strategy
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/russia-s-ukraine-invasion-may-have-been-preventable-n1290831
❝. . . the entire establishment in the Western world is attacking Russia in unison. The propaganda machine is in full swing in an effort to make the whole world hate Putin and take Ukraine’s side in the war. The same propaganda machine that wants nothing more than you as a White person to stop having children and instead focus on your career, race-mix or become homosexual. What this establishment wants you to think is often a very good indicator of what you should absolutely not think, and by this measure, Russia appears to be the side to support 100%.
From a global geopolitical perspective, if we theorize from the unlikely idea that this conflict will lead to a third world war, then all pro-Zionist liberal monster-nations like Great Britain, France, Germany, the United States and, of course, Israel itself would side with Ukraine, while more traditional and sovereign anti-Zionist forces would likely stand behind Russia. Mark my words when I say that the Nordic Resistance Movement will NEVER stand on the same side as Israel or the Zionist entity that the USA represents today – whatever the issue or conflict may be!
If we look at the situation from a revolutionary point of view, it is also natural to support Russia. By challenging the USA and the Western world, one acts against the status quo – the present situation that must be destroyed in order for any true changes to take place, and for us National Socialists to be able to make real progress. The more the current ruling powers are challenged, and the harder the world economy is combated, the greater the chance for widespread disruption, which is a necessity for the Nordic revolution to become fact. Please note that I do not mean the coming changes will necessarily be better for us; however, in the dramatic situation in which we find ourselves, we must see hope in every potential radical change that arises within the global environment.❞
https://nordicresistancemovement.org/which-side-are-we-on-in-the-ukraine-war/
More "democracy" between state entities, the better, and that could percolate within states at individual levels...
Nobody is going to fight a war for Biden, he is dumber than Bush . . .
Even with a full-on declaration of war from Congress, if Gavin Jewsome could be cheated in by ZOG, with Globohomo brigades going door-to-door looking to impress American children into military service, they will be met with armed, well-trained opposition.
People are best to make note of where their Congresscritter lives, they are all traitors . . . and they have to register their addresses when they file for their candidacy.
With the country being invaded right now, an open war within U.S. borders is a certainty if a foreign war is declared.
Wonderful writing and analysis. Rare and beyond compare.
Humility might not come easy to me. Big Serge just knocked it out of the park, to coin the American phrase. I find it rare, beyond compare, to obtain this incredibly insightful and detailed analysis available for all the world to see, even though all the world is not much given to thoughtful, detailed analysis.
One of things people seem to slide right over, this is not a war between Russia and Ukraine. It is a war between Russia and the NATO states. Where Serge rightly points out Ukraine cannot fight a war of attrition, what could also be noted is that it's likely NATO cannot fight a war of attrition. NATO does, however, have additional resources that Ukraine does not have and that are not yet engaged, clearly nuclear and biological - and possibly, perhaps fantastically, depending on what Lahaina tells us, directed energy weapons.
It's a war between Russia and the NATO states and Ukraine is only the name of a particular field army.
Of course this is a war between Russian and NATO. Once NATO runs out of Ukrainians to catch bullets, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Romanians, etc. will be sent in.
The question is whether Russia is prepared to admit this and act accordingly. Everything I have seen shows that Russian really does not want this war and simply hopes it will go away. It will not.
Russia, IMHO, is totally rational here.
The military and responsible political leaders have war-gamed this out and have done the estimations.
They will continue to do so.
They know what's at stake.
Russia has been there and has faced it before.
Their horrendous wounds of WW2 speak with megaphones.
Russians=Tough, hardened, stalwart SOBs.
Assumes a lot of facts not in evidence.
Ukrainians like to say much the same about themselves, BTW, even if they fudge over some of the more unsavory WWII aspects of their current national heroes.
Assumes facts not in evidence?
Are you suggesting that the Russian military has not wargamed this out?
I consider that a safe assumption.
Please give me a break.
I'm sure many Ukrainians suffered in WW2.
What does that have to do with it?
The Ukrainain people have no say in what is going on - allegedly they voted for Zelensky 90% because he promised peace with Russia - he was bought by the US and he lied.
He betrayed his country and sold out to the US and Nato.
It seems that the Ukrainians live under a totalitarian, bullying and brutal regime.
The war is between Nato and Russia.
Ukraine is the current tool.
Most of us have figured this out.
Why do you assume that the Russian military has wargamed this out and not NATO, for instance?
And you are the one who brought sufferings during WWII as evidence of some kind of toughness or capability. Not I.
We all know the circumstances of Zelenskii's election. However, Hermann Goering's words on getting the common people to support a war that in no wise benefits them ring true.
"Once NATO runs out of Ukrainians to catch bullets, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Romanians, etc. will be sent in."
YOU'RE SO FULL OF SHIT, YOU KIKESUCKING ZIONIST ASS-WHORE.
Several top US/NATO military leaders have said that in every wargame pitting NATO against Russian Federation, US has lost. I do not have the links, but I am sure you can find the papers and videos if you look. One general said that even after trying to handicap the 'Russian' team and give advantages to the 'NATO' team, the Russians still win.
I suspect that the non-political military leaders would have given very different advice about entering into this proxy war than the politically appointed military leaders who support it.
Of course some wizards at NATO probably wargamed it out - but perhaps they were overruled by the DC NeoCons.
Why the useless polemic? Nothing else to do?
FF has been doomin' and gloomin' since the start of the SMO. No amount of facts will make him see sense.
Don't feed the troll.
You're making alot of moral claims that don't really describe much else, or have much to do with the realities on the ground or what might be an outcome of the war.
There are no stupid sides here, and a war from 80 years ago has zero bearing on that truth; Both NATO military and leadership have wargamed things out, just as the Russians have. The question is merely who has gone to greater depths and who is ultimately achieving their strategic objectives here.
It is objectively inarguable that Russia is achieving its military goals here in quite a rational fashion. Despite early setbacks and failings, they have managed to settle into the positional grind with efficacy and displayed the skill needed to ensure a victory of value greater than was expected.
Yet, on a political scale, this is not quite so, as NATO has managed to achieve many of their own strategic aims and goals. The west was the one who provoked this war, don't forget, and their leadership did not delude themselves as their braindead foot soldiers do into thinking it was something they would win.
I agree with much of what you say except with "there are no stupid sides here, and a war from 80 years ago has zero bearing on that truth," which I find to be an astounding statement, especially with the inexplicable [to me, at least] self-assurance with which it seems to be stated.
"NATO has managed to achieve many of their own strategic aims and goals" is another statement that is obscure [how about listing the successes [if any?] and also all the blatant failures as well], and seems to be plucked from the propagandistic rantings of a Washington Post editorial.
Again, most of your post I agree with.
Actually, top Russian political leaders have repeatedly stated the war is with NATO.
Their continually expanding mobilization, of military and military production reflects their clear recognition that this is not simply a war with Ukraine, and their need to hold military resources ready to repel a possible broader NATO attack.
People now frequently ignore the fact that it was a 2 front war by NATO: Ukraine and economic. Russia has now so comprehensively won the economic war that it is waved away, yet it was potentially the bigger threat to Russia. The US/EU expected it to destroy the Russian economy and defeat Russia in a few months, if not weeks.
Russia needed to deploy national resources in a way that first dissipated the threat of the economic war (an outcome which depended not just on Russian society but on the reaction of key other countries, particularly China and India, and so was not wholly predictable at the outset).
Every day which passes sees Russia increase its military and economic capabilities relative to the totality of NATO. That allows it to achieve its Ukraine objectives with less total loss of Russians while positioning it to more quickly defeat a wider NATO attack should that come.
Given the success Russia has achieved on both the economic and military fronts in this war with NATO, while NATO economies are imploding and NATO is failing in its war efforts, and US/NATO is losing global support and influence in favor of Russia and BRICS, I find it amazing that so many commentators imagine they understand how Russia should fight its battles better than does Russia's leadership.
The Russian leaders say that they are at war with NATO, usually as an excuse for lack of victory.
But do they act like they are at war with NATO? Not really.
I'd argue they act tepidly as though they were, but not with the goals they should have if they really thought they were.
That's kind of a recurring theme with post-60s opposition to Neolibs though. They all seem to be in a stupor where they don't actually act as if they really think their lives are on the line. If NATO won, Russians would cease to exist altogether. Not as a nation, as an ethnic group.
❝. . . the entire establishment in the Western world is attacking Russia in unison. The propaganda machine is in full swing in an effort to make the whole world hate Putin and take Ukraine’s side in the war. The same propaganda machine that wants nothing more than you as a White person to stop having children and instead focus on your career, race-mix or become homosexual. What this establishment wants you to think is often a very good indicator of what you should absolutely not think, and by this measure, Russia appears to be the side to support 100%.
From a global geopolitical perspective, if we theorize from the unlikely idea that this conflict will lead to a third world war, then all pro-Zionist liberal monster-nations like Great Britain, France, Germany, the United States and, of course, Israel itself would side with Ukraine, while more traditional and sovereign anti-Zionist forces would likely stand behind Russia. Mark my words when I say that the Nordic Resistance Movement will NEVER stand on the same side as Israel or the Zionist entity that the USA represents today – whatever the issue or conflict may be!
If we look at the situation from a revolutionary point of view, it is also natural to support Russia. By challenging the USA and the Western world, one acts against the status quo – the present situation that must be destroyed in order for any true changes to take place, and for us National Socialists to be able to make real progress. The more the current ruling powers are challenged, and the harder the world economy is combated, the greater the chance for widespread disruption, which is a necessity for the Nordic revolution to become fact. Please note that I do not mean the coming changes will necessarily be better for us; however, in the dramatic situation in which we find ourselves, we must see hope in every potential radical change that arises within the global environment.❞
https://nordicresistancemovement.org/which-side-are-we-on-in-the-ukraine-war/
It seems to me Russia knows this and is mobilizing precisely with that in mind and they can do it whereas the West cannot - not unless the aliens in the spaceships gave them some wonderweapon (hence Lahaina). The end of this war will not be when Ukraine collapses, but MAYBE when NATO pulls back. Seems to me it's the West that doesn't realize who is fighting who and that's why I posted this comment. Gimme a break, the West is not at war? Really? They are in la-la-land. The Russians probably don't want a continental war, but they cannot settle for anything that will amount to an ongoing war. They might not force a "surrender"; they would likely allow a much more diplomatic "realignment" or something.
After that, the wrath of the elites will be turned even more intensely on "their" people and "their" democracies, etc... The Russians know as well that in that situation, anything could happen, so oddly, they have to fight this war while allowing the West to maintain some semblance of order.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a strike on a decision-making center in DC that might take out my so called representaives. They are the ones the Russians are really at war with.
I have seen no evidence of such mobilization. And nothing that suggests that the West will not keep on doubling down, especially as Russia has not responded to red line after red line being crossed with impunity.
The decisionmakers in Washington see this, not as reasonableness or humanity, but as contemptible weakness.
And don't kid yourself that anything in the West will change. As long as the police and army will still shoot when ordered, the rulers can sleep soundly in their beds. Nothing indicates that the security forces are anywhere near the breaking point, and should any political forces that seek to challenge the consensus arise, they will be dealt with. Witness the upcoming ban on the AfD in Germany.
Volitionally yes, the west and US will double down, over and over and over. But that doesn't mean they can double down and arm and fit another Ukrainian army, and then another. They already think they provided a mountain of steel to Ukraine to begin with and there isn't another mountain to speak of, while Russia has a full mountain range to speak of. Never mind the strategic depth that China's productive capacity can ultimately provide.
And the west cannot just shoot and beat and imprison their populatin into submission and march the rest in goose steps on the eastern steppes. Soon enough their police units will turn against them.
The ban on AfD is only talked about but I really want to see the current government disenfranchaising 20+ % of their population...
I dunno, the US committed an act of war against Germany when they blew up NS and the response of the German public has been to hide their head in the sand.
Let me know when we start seeing large scale civil disobedience in Europe. Even the French protests were not enough to do anything, and faded out quickly.
This war made me humble. I listen and read and write less.
Militarily, Ukraine is fucked and has little hope of recovery. Unless everyone is wrong and the F-16s are the first real gamechangers out of dozens, it's over - And it's probably been known to be a hopeless fight since the 10s.
But the idea that the west will collapse or that this is beyond their plans is delusional. The west quite literally has been shooting, beating, and imprisoning their population with total impunity since 2020. Their police aren't even their own citizens these days, but are quite often foreigners with blood libels and ethnic grudges AGAINST the western populations. They've disenfranchised the whole of their own native populations with success.
There is going to be no popular uprising or collapse from a lack of support in the west. There never was. The destruction of Ukraine's fighting age male population and the resulting dysgenic change is entirely in alignment with their ideals and goals.
What may not be, and what may one day kill them, will be the demographic collapse of their own core states. But, we will not fully realize this for decades to come, and much will have changed by that point.
I don't think that the European population is as tame as the US/Canada population. Look at the French for instance and their Yellow Vests, or the protests concerning retirement age. And lately the German Chancellor is booed at evry public apparition. Also, a lot of other europeans have protested, but it doesn't appear in MSM. The tree that fell in the forest that nobody heard. This means that it didnt happen?
What are the 10s?
Also worth mentioning that the necessity of censorship and repression of dissent is now normalized. I heard a human, a goodthink liberal and wannabe journalist (long story) explain to me that censorship is necessary to protect Muh Precious Freedom Of The Press.
I'm not convinced Russia hasn't responded with her own escalations. For example, critical single-points-of-failure in the industrial chain of US arms manufacture have been mysteriously blowing up lately. That said, the problem is still one of communication, as the people on the NATO side are self-absorbed enough that nothing short of hypersonic delivery to Brussels and D.C. would register.
You're kidding, right? By that logic, the CIA is behind every factory explosion and house fire in Russia.
I am not kidding. "I am not convinced X" is not the same as "I am convinced the opposite of X." What I'm convinced of is that there is a whole lot going on that's not immediately obvious to casual interest, so that over-certain declarations are often wrong.
What virtually every commentator on the war - with the possible exception of Scott Ritter - fails to point out is that Ukraine is out of men. And no, you can't just throw three million civilians into the front with AK's and hope for the best.
As my Substack posts have shown - using very conservative figures - Ukraine is losing at least 60-100,000 men per month. Ukraine can't possibly keep that up for more than another 1-3 months before it runs completely out of men. And long before that, as Big Serge notes, their combat and operational effectiveness will cease. We're already seeing that now with the Ukrainians barely able to launch small unit attacks with minimal armor - which means combat effectiveness is on the wane - and the complete failure of the "counter-offensive" - which it isn't - demonstrates that Ukraine has lost all operational effectiveness.
Another Less-Than-Short Ukrainian Interlude...
Wherein I explain how I calculate Ukrainian losses and estimate the remaining length of the war...
https://richardstevenhack.substack.com/p/another-less-than-short-ukrainian
A Comment in Response to a Comment...
Wherein I calculate Russian losses in the Ukraine conflict...
https://richardstevenhack.substack.com/p/a-comment-in-response-to-a-comment
A Refresher On How To Read The Daily Russian Ministry of Defense "Clobber Report"...
Gotta remember the little details...
https://richardstevenhack.substack.com/p/a-refresher-on-how-to-read-the-daily
Wherein the U.S. Department of Defense spills the beans...
They unwittingly confirm that the Ukraine military is on the verge of collapse...
https://richardstevenhack.substack.com/p/wherein-the-us-department-of-defense
Yet Another Quick Ukrainian Interlude...
Wherein we show once again that Ukraine is frickin' doomed...
https://richardstevenhack.substack.com/p/yet-another-quick-ukrainian-interlude
And as for the future of Ukraine...
Dmitry Medvedev Agrees With Me...
On the future of Ukraine...
https://richardstevenhack.substack.com/p/dmitry-medvedev-agrees-with-me
You absolutely can try to throw three million civilians at the front with AKs and hope it works out.
(They probably won't all get there; logistics break down.)
It won't work out, and there will be rivers of blood, but you absolutely can try.
Please can you articulate, possibly in details, the estimate of 60K/100K monthly ukraine loss? I assume it's KIA + wounded. I agree with this line of thought, but these numbers seem really too high. Please write about the MUTAL loss ratio, so we can have a picture of the Russian losses too. Grazie.
My estimates are less, but the truth will out. Or maybe not.
How much for you, on both parts? Just the gross estimates, please.
I'm working on roughly UAF 800 to 1000 losses per day - possibly up to half KIA or wounded so badly they cannot recover. Current losses are about 800 per the Russian MOD, and have been both less and higher in the past. That would give total losses in the 500,000 to 600,000 range. That implies (per previous posts) that the teeth elements have been worked through twice in the fighting (personnel turnover 200%) - with more in units heavily engaged. In my view this calculation fits better. However it is really just educated guesswork.
grazie.
"In the case of the Kharkov offensive, Ukraine identified a sector of the Russian front that had been hollowed out and was defended only by a thin screening force. They were able to stage a force and achieve a measure of strategic surprise, due to the thick forests and general paucity of Russian ISR in the area."
IIRC, there was no surprise. Even bloggers on the internet saw the Kharkov offensive coming. However, the Russian leadership refused to do anything about it, even as the scale and scope became abundantly obvious. The Ukrainians took huge casualties, but nobody in Kiev, much less Washington cared then or cares now.
Russia faces a similar problem now, in that it needs to have the stomach to devote the men and resources needed to actually win. Kharkov could easily have been saved with a few thousand more men.
The problem is that Russia cannot really promise the average frustrated citizen much as a result of victory. Whether Russia wins or loses, it matters little to a person in Ekaterinburg whether Kharkov is Russian or Ukrainian.
Ukraine can promise its victims that if they win, the West, The Golden Billion, will finally have to let them join the club.
The other problem that Russia faces is that, short of a nuclear strike, there is nothing Russia can do that so much as mildly inconveniences the decisionmakers in Washington. So the West has every incentive to keep on doubling down.
"Whether 10,000 Russian females fall down from exhaustion while digging an antitank ditch interests me only insofar as the anti-tank ditch for Germany is finished." sums up the mentality in Washington and Kiev just fine.
The question is what Russia proposes to do about it.
I think tactically as well as strategically the Russian leadership is very concerned with saving as many Russian lives as possible, actual material resources be damned. So on the short and long termthis will always be the calculus. Now on the frontline, Ivan might become more and more willing and steeled in confronting his sold out cousins...
This "just the tip" mentality gets more people killed.
The 'offense' to not all it's cracked up to be!
Wellington at Waterloo did not attack until the Emperors Guard were repulsed......
And Bluecher was finally on scent to cover his flank.
Well, let's see whether the Russian leadership has the heart to do so.
You should read up on Wellington, not only him at Waterloo!
Maybe Zhukov could rise....
What specifically are you trying to say?
Embedded in this superb article is this hilariously understated moment of truth regarding Ukraine's recent efforts; "A frontal attack against a prepared defense without the element of surprise is generally considered a poor choice".
Liddel-Hart is screaming in his grave.
Speaking of bats, what comes to mind is a quote from an article which an FBI guy stated the following about the Russians. “Here in the US the national pastime is baseball. In Russia, the national pastime is chess. How the heck are we going to compete with people like that?”
Well, speaking of bats, Victoria Nuland comes to mind.
If one is speaking of old bats especially.
National pastime bats, to the back of its (her?) head.
Sounds like an excellent pastime. Not exactly chess, but, what the hell, let’s take a swing at it.
In the ranking of who's winning - yes, Russia is winning. Against Ukraine. But not against its primary adversary. Every Russian soldier killed is an irretrievable loss, and the other guy is taking nil casualties. Nobody in the west gave a shit about Ukraine in 2021, and in 2023 they still don't. They just found a tiger willing to fight the bear on their behalf. I remain convinced that they will eventually realize they have the tiger by the tail, but that's another conversation
Somewhat true. Time itself is causing immeasurable casualties to the west, though.
Well, the number of KIAs from NATO-countries is hardly trivial -according to the Russians foreign volunteers/ mercenaries casualties have surpassed 5000 KIAs. Even though that includes foreigners from non-NATO-countries this could easily end up cost more KIAs from NATO-countries that 20 years of bellicose adventuring in the Middle East did.
While I do believe in the ‘demographics are destiny’ maxim, it’s hard to argue that the USSR didn’t come out of WWII stronger than when it went in despite 26+ million losses.
A lot of words but no mention of any Russian offensive to end this thing.
Once the Ukrainian army is thoroughly destroyed, out of ammo, out of men, and out of favor in the West, the Russians can put Ukraine out of its misery in any number of ways. Time seems to be on Russia's side on all these issues. (Especially, while Ukraine is actively destroying itself with stupid offensive operations.)
Plus, the political issues are key. The want the whole thing to collapse at a time when the US or Nato are unlikely to do anything stupid to try to last-minute save face with something like occupying West Ukraine.
It seems to me the best time would be right after the US presidential election, because then there is no need for the neocons to try something crazy to avoid a humiliation that throws the election to Trump. (Although a counterargument would be that a sudden escalation **during** the election would be so unpopular that that would be the best time to launch the "final offensive")
I’m sure that Big Serge has a ring side seat at the Russian military discussions and he is hip to their plans for their offensive, but he’s been told not to share it with anyone. Sheesh.
There probably won't be such a thing. Ukraine/NATO supposedly also has good ISR and they still have some arty and maybe even some loitering munitions from NATO so they'd attrit Russians. Considering that Russians have been *very* casualty-shy, they'll probably just nip at Ukrainians, advancing at a steady rate of 10m/day max and waiting for the Ukrainian state to collapse (in a coup, hopefully as the alterinative is 20 warlords lording over 20 fiefs and fighting each other for the next 30 years and Russia probably doesn't have the resources to handle that level of shitfuckery - and neither does NATO).
I am yet to hear of any war ending in victory without going on the offensive.
I agree, and yet Medvedev speaks of the war lasting additional years or decades, and the West can also ramp up industrial production, and recruit more soldiers. I don’t see what the Russian end-game is here, a decade of trench warfare or a cold peace that re-ignites when their enemies are stronger doesn’t make sense...
https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&q=wars+that+ended+without+an+offensive&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
I am not sure what you are trying to say or whether that addresses my argument.
Really putting the Ukrainian electrical grid out to pasture this coming winter??
Which begs the question of why Russia half-assed doing so last winter.
Because there was still a lot of Ukrainian military to attrite?
That doesn't have anything necessarily to do with the electrical grid, and, for that matter, there's still lots of Ukrainians to attrite.
We really are lucky to have an honest and skilled analyst such as Big Serge to dispel the, frankly, disgusting and mendacious cheerleading of the Western media. Candidly, I lack the acumen of Serge but I cannot but wonder what is gained by hurling elements of Ukraine's rebuilt military into an abyss rather than husbanding it as a defensive force. In any event, it's becoming ever more clear that the nitwits in the Biden cabal and their puppet Boris Johnson were not acting in the interest of the Ukrainian people when they decided to scuttle the peace talks.
Nobody is acting in the interests of the Ukrainian people.
Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin probably cares more about the lives of Ukrainians than does anyone in Kiev, much less Washington.
Likely true but a scary thought.
Good article (and great historical series!).
It looks like the time has come, when most of the existing fleets of military hardware need upgrades across the board to face varieties of smart munitions that are now fielded at scale. Hard to predict what kind of innovations will result.
The question of UA manpower remains, but too much misinformation to know where it's at. Estimates of 250k hard losses per year now seem to be on the low side. But several years of fighting still possible if that is the number. Neither Kiev nor Washington likely to shed tears for the men who die for their privilege.
Moscow seems resigned to several years of this slog going on. Everything I've seen suggests to me they're simply trying to keep losses to a manageable rate, which might be in the 100k / year ballpark, but if pressed hard, the capability is there in Russia to go quite a bit higher.
In broader strategy, US is stuck for the time being by its obsession with "maintaining credibility". Kind-of the domino theory reasoning. Meanwhile PRC, the big dog, must like the situation just fine. EU and Euro currency knocked out from first-class status, US stuck on the fool's errand taking on Russia.
Expecting an inconclusive end to this campaign, followed by some modest RF counter action in the fall/winter, that will likely disappoint most of us; rinse/repeat for next year.
Thank you for this very detailed analysis.
Just a few comments/notes:
1) “The single most coherent core of theoretical writings on operational art is still found among the Soviet writers.” - the link here is broken.
2) "this is a bit like sending a boxer out to fight with a broken arm, and then critiquing his technique. The problem is not his technique - the problem is that he’s injured and materially weaker than his opponent" - I really loved this analogy!
3) "Kiev will either need to admit defeat and acknowledge Russian control over the annexed areas, or it will continue to fight obstinately until it is a failed state with nothing left in the tank."
Personally, I think that, as we stand now, Ukraine will never admit defeat, at least not with Zelensky and his junta in power. Hence, they will keep fighting to the last Ukrainian or until Russians march into Kiev!
It is commonsensical that in an attrition war Ukraine loses. But this is only superficially a war with Ukraine. Ukraine is a proxy for NATO, which is a proxy for the U.S. That is why you hear gleeful comments from U.S. public figures like Lindsey Graham and Mitt Romney. For them the war is a dream come true. It costs the U.S. next to nothing to bleed Russia. It is Afghanistan 2.0. Ukrainian losses simply do not matter. If Ukraine runs out of Ukrainians for this excellent adventure, other Eastern Europeans can take their place. It is chilling because the people behind this war do not see it as a defeat. They see it as a strategic masterstroke. However they are not only malign but wrong. In time NATO and the U.S. may well come out the attritional losers, their "victory" in Ukraine a strategic disaster to impress even a Pyrrhus.
"It costs the U.S. next to nothing to bleed Russia."
I would argue the opposite. It is costing them dearly. It may not seem so at this point but consider recent events:
Six new members added to BRICS, notably Iran and Saudi Arabia, with another 30 odd waiting in line. Combined with Russia, that accounts for 54% of world oil production, which effectively makes BRICS the new OPEC. Saudi Arabia has already started pricing some of their oil in Yuan, and is resisting calls to 'manage' the oil price in the US's favour. I expect a shift in their western investment portfolios will follow, with much of it going to Russia and China to anchor their new commitment.
Arms. The US MIC depends on foreign sales for a significant portion of revenue. Unfortunately, their products have not stood up to their Russian counterparts, so going forward, who are the new BRICS members and other non-aligned nations going to buy from? There are several advantages to buying from Russia. Fewer strings attached, lower cost, and most importantly, the ability to deter US/NATO military interference. Even if you wanted to buy western arms, how long is the wait for delivery, considering that production cannot keep up with current demand, and that rebuilding US/NATO arsenals will be given priority? Russia meanwhile, has geared up to full wartime production, and once the Ukraine conflict ends will be in a position to provide most of their systems on demand.
Sanctions. They have the same effect as tariffs but without the negative political consequences because they can be blamed on external factors, not policy. The net result for a nation with an educated population and abundant internal resources is to increase domestic production and employment, which means less reliance on outside sources, and a greater share of export markets for high end products that don't depend on foreign inputs. Made in Russia means exactly that, right down to the fasteners and other components, thus no risk of supply chain breaks as we've seen recently. As an example, down the road, Russia is going to be supplying commercial aviation, heavy equipment, machine tools and nuclear technology to the ever expanding BRICS, cutting more and more into the market share of US and EU nations.
Those are just a few examples of why I think the US has shot itself in the foot with this operation. Frankly, as an investor I'd be looking for a way to buy the Russian market right now because very few investors have figure this out. It's like the China story back in 1989. If you bought that ahead of the crowd, you're sitting in clover today.
Ebear: I was paraphrasing the good Mssrs. Graham and Romney and their ilk. I hold the opposite view. Hence the remark about Pyrrhus. Camels and straws likewise come to mind. That said, we don't necessarily know which will be the last, and meantime, "Events, dear boy, events." Things happen. What seemed inevitable is indefinitely postponed; what seemed all but impossible is taken for granted. So, on the question of certainty …
Feral: Remember what Scott Fitzgerald wrote: They will smash up things and creatures and then retreat back into their money and their vast carelessness and let other people clean up the mess they had made. And they will sleep just fine. So I am cynical about personal consequences. But the geopolitical consequences are likely—not certain, but likely—to be substantial, and not necessarily to the liking of the self-lickers in Washington. Luckily they will find others to blame. It is what they do best.
"I was paraphrasing the good Mssrs. Graham and Romney and their ilk. I hold the opposite view."
I did get that. Sorry if I didn't make it clear.
>BRICS
>A serious organization
This is one of the strangest copes to ever exist, and one of the least fruitful. Given some the US's recent and crushing geopolitical successes in the middle east and far east with Vietnam, Iran, and the Saudis, one would think that the idea of BRICS as a genuine threat to the west had already been discarded, but I suppose some people always lag behind recent news.
BRICS is not a military, nor even a proper economic alliance. It's too decentralized and misaligned in its interests, while lacking any truly coherent and far-reaching power like China to force its member states to keep in line the way the US does with its vassals in NATO. As a consequence, it lacks for both initiative and for direction.
Even in regards to exports, BRICS has already suffered greatly with Iran essentially noting the collapse of the Su-35 export deals it had made with Russia; The idea that there would be any new and genuine incentives to export from Russia, beyond convenience and lack of alternatives, is as delusional as the claims of Ukraine winning the war.
Likewise, sanctions will have devastating short term repercussions on the internal economies of Europe. This is not a disadvantage to the US, but a boon; Their vassal states grow ever more dependent, while the ability for Russia to influence them and create genuine competition has been all but annihilated. While BRICS own competing economic interests will always keep it unsteady, the US has used the inevitable recession to consolidate its own interest groups and keep them under its greasy thumb.
One effect of sanctions:
https://www.scmp.com/tech/article/3232334/tech-war-china-chip-tool-firm-amecs-profit-boosted-strong-local-demand-it-reshuffles-tech-board-wake
You could be right, but I would argue that it's far too early to make any long range predictions. I take the fact that the BRICS association exists at all as strong evidence of a growing desire to break free of US influence, especially now that the military means to do so are available, which is a fairly new development.
You've made some sweeping statements here, but you're a bit light on supporting facts. For example:
"The idea that there would be any new and genuine incentives to export from Russia, beyond convenience and lack of alternatives, is as delusional as the claims of Ukraine winning the war."
Care to explain why you think that? Russian arms have proven themselves on the battlefield, and anyone wishing to avoid the fate of Iraq or Libya (or Yugoslavia) is looking very closely at purchasing Russian AD systems, plus anti-ship missiles if they're a coastal nation like China. Russia is already a major arms exporter and is poised to not only take market share from the US and EU, but in doing so enable smaller nations to resist the kind of military domination the US has taken for granted since the end of WWII. To me that's a significant new development.
Sanctions, far from weakening Russia, have pushed it to seek internal replacements, which has the effect of broadening their industrial base. For example, they no longer need Pratt & Whitney jet engines for their commercial aviation sector, and the replacement engines they're producing will soon be an export item, as will the finished aircraft, thus taking a significant bite out of Boeing and Airbus. Again, these sort of things take time to develop, but the die is already cast IMO.
Sanctions only work effectively against smaller nations that are import dependent. In the case of Russia they act more like tariffs, strengthening the internal sector without the political disadvantages of tariffs. This can occur because Russia has virtually all the resources it needs, and what it can't produce at present can be imported from China, such as the rare earth minerals needed for advanced electronics systems. The US and NATO have no such ready source and are at risk of being sanctioned themselves in that regard.
The devil as always is in the details but I would point to one overriding advantage that Russia possesses which is cultural unity and a strong sense of national identity. The same is true for China. Neither country has the kind of internal social divisions that are tearing the US and EU apart. No angry racial minorities, no flood of illegal immigrants with no commitment to national identity, no divisive ideologies such as Critical Race Theory, or "gender fluidity." Those problems are specific to the USA and EU and exist almost nowhere else.
The "Great Game" as played by Britain and inherited by the USA post WWII was premised on the idea of keeping Russia and Germany apart. What it didn't take into account was a rising China, ironically facilitated by American corporate greed which undermined the US industrial base. Germany has been weakened (again) but China has now taken its place, and with far more industrial capacity and a much larger educated workforce than Germany could ever hope to produce. So that equation no longer holds true, in fact the quote attributed to Lenin, that the capitalists will sell you the rope to hang them with seems to finally be coming true.
I think it's actually an ideal time to make long range prediction regarding BRICS, considering we have now two decades of additional information on the people who originally made proclamations regarding BRICS, and over a decade's worth of time to see how it has played out since becoming a more formalized association. Plenty of time to see where the lines are being drawn and what it can actually accomplish as a unit.
As far as a desire to break free of US influence, that's something everyone has. Every country wishes to be sovereign, every politician wishes to call the shots, every man wishes to be King. What truly matters is the capability for this to become the case, rather than the desire itself. BRICS as an association itself doesn't show much in that capacity, really.
India remains bound to the US through immigration if nothing else, South Africa continues to suffer demographic collapse and looks more and more like Zimbabwe every day. Brazil I don't know enough of to make any sweeping statements, Russia has both lost its influence in the West and proven its military security at the same time. China continues to rise of its own accord, but remains untested and shows no geopolitical savvy the way the US has. Internally this very loose association still proves itself directionless, and that is a problem if it's going to speed up the invariable collapse of the West's hegemony.
The Russians have proven themselves on the battlefield, but only truly to themselves. The information others see is one saturated with propaganda and a lack of clarity, and certainly, have no guarantees of efficacy against NATO's full potential. And much more troublesome than that, is that regardless of capability, Russia has lost some of its global influence in the process of this war, as the US has been able to maneuver well elsewhere; Look at the Saudis, Vietnam, and the Niger situation. Russian Foreign Policy is not proceeding with great effectiveness at the moment. And due to the Su-35 deal with Iran falling through, Russia has made itself seem a bad partner to pair with for obtaining exports - And this is something that will prove difficult to rectify. Matters of export are still as much as a few years away depending on the course of this war as well, and the time this gives the US to act may prove quite troublesome.
In addition, Russia either never had, or recently lost a very important asset with the death of Prigozhin. Though his ancestry left him suspect, they would have been able to use Wagner much more boldly if they could maintain the idea of them having had rogue leadership. Korobochka/Cirnosad accurately surmised that to make progress on the global front, Russia would require an analogue to America's own state-backed terrorist groups. And for now, they may have lost that. Time will tell if they can act with the political coherence, forethought, and speed needed to re-acquire this asset. But if they can't, and I suspect they can't, it will not do them any favors.
As one example, one could imagine that any country seeking Russian imports will have to contend with three complications:
One, that they may be angering the US in doing so. Few countries can effectively counter prolonged CIA campaigns, and smaller, less stable countries have little hope of it. All the guns, jets, AD, and tanks in the world mean nothing if they eventually end up in the hands of foreign-backed revolutionaries, or you end up getting terror campaign'd for the next decade.
Second, that Russia may not deliver. Yet again, the Iranian problem persists here. Iran should have been an important priority for Russia, but they failed to capitalize on that interest. This will probably cost them in its own way, as I alluded to with its issues in global influence, but it serves as another obstacle to buyers; You can buy all the guns, jets, AD, and tanks in the world, but what good are they if they never arrive?
And third, even if these weapons do arrive, they have not proven themselves against NATO's full arsenal. Now, this is something very unimportant on its own; The Soviets exported tons of weapons despite this. And it's likely that they are quite effective nevertheless. But, this is a straw that can easily break the camel's back; You aren't sure the weapons will arrive, you may be the target of espionage if you do buy them, AND they might not even be effective if NATO decided to come knocking? It is not ideal.
Thuslyly, I believe it's likely that only countries who have no better opportunities to seek will pursue exports from Russia. If the US uses the time they have been given with any skill, they can minimize the number of these countries, and hamper those who they cannot minimize.
As for Sanctions, true and not true.
Sanctions did not cause significant economic harm for Russia, nor would they ever have, nor did they 'strengthen' it in any meaningful way either; Russia's own internal policies have neither failed nor succeeded tremendously in the face of it. It is safe to say that they held up, but at the cost of influence: Russia has lost much of its ability to influence Europe economically. This is not a crippling blow, nor even really significant on its own, but it secures something for the US, and once again leaves them with the initiative.
This, however, was an outcome that had become inevitable over 10 years ago. Realistically, this cost wasn't ever avoidable most like.
Cultural unity and national identity aren't very important, despite popular thoughts; They've never been terribly so, as they are downstream of far more integral, important, and above all, tangibly real factors: Ancestry.
What ultimately matters as a result are demographics, and little else. In this regard, Russia and China are finely positioned compared to the West. Although they suffer from abhorrent birth rates, their actual ethnic and racial distributions are largely unchanged, unlike the West's.
And the West *will* be destroyed by its own collapsing demographics. A side factor of this, like as not, is that many countries in South America and all those in Africa will experience cascading issues as a result, since they've been largely dependent on the West to function, even at as low a level as they do.
However, the West's leadership of rootless cosmopolitans both want, and intend this. In truth, having the European people go extinct benefits nobody but them, and perhaps China. This may also pose an issue for Russia in the long-term; If they should become the last of the Europeans, then the Russian people can expect to be treated to the same eventual fate. The rest of the world will hold no sympathies for them.
Man that's alot of words looking at it now.
The primary TL;DR if you don't want to read it all is; Yeah, the West will certainly collapse, likely before any of its competition ever will. But that's entirely due to its own demographic destiny that has been forced upon it by its leadership, and it will remain politically dangerous until then.
"Man that's alot of words looking at it now."
I can handle it. I'm a rather wordy fellow myself:) No, you raise some very good points, and I have to admit to a certain bias in my outlook. As a student of Russian language and culture I guess that's to be expected, although I do try to keep it in mind. I'm going with Yogi Berra on this, which is to say "it’s difficult to make predictions, especially about the future." If you'd told me 20 years ago we'd be looking at a situation like today I would have laughed out loud. Now I'm not laughing, or at least not so hard. All any of us can do at this point is keep our eye on the ball, which itself is a challenge as there seems to be an abundance of balls in play on several different playing fields. Interesting times.
Another aspect of what it costs the US to bleed Russia, is the quick weakening of the US and all NATO members by way of emptying their stocks, drying out their budgets, limiting their ability to carry out proper operation preparation, etc. European countries make brazen announcements about how much they're willing to invest in defense, but the truth is that the cost of the Ukraine war makes it impossible for them to know how they can afford their promises about their own defense capabilities, and economic uncertainty makes it even worse.
Let's keep in mind that US elites are now promising a war with China to be coming very soon. Yet, we haven't even reached the point where NATO/US comparative disadvantage in terms of stocks and capability to endure a war will be at its lowest compared to the Russia/China couple. If China decides to light up another hot war once the point of maximum relative weakness has been reached, the US will struggle to sustain the fight for more than a few weeks, and in order to hold its place, it will have to exit Europe at once, leaving all possibilities open to Russia.
In short, NATO is extremely weak right now, and instead of making NATO leaders reasonable, it seems this weakness is only drawing them into a reckless rush forward where they'll make their weakness obvious to everyone, without paying attention to who may be willing to exploit it. It's not only Russia and China, it could soon be Turkey, Iran, and who knows who else.
The whole thing is ridiculous IMO. How do you get enough men and equipment to Europe to fight a conventional war without being sunk by Russian submarines or hit by long range missiles? Same is true for China. Once hostilities begin Russia will supply China with the same capacity to hit your surface ships and nothing can be done to stop that. Even supposing you could get a beachhead in China, what then? How do you defeat and occupy a nation of over 1 billion people with an army of 2 million with another 2 -3 million in reserve, fighting on their own territory, where you can't even read the road signs?
Both of these scenarios are non-factors. A conventional war with Russia or China between the US would result in mutual nuclear annihilation; Nobody is pushing that button, and if they are, all the planning in the world won't matter.
What makes you so sure that this cynicism will not pay off?
"[The United States' goal in Angola] was not to keep out the Cubans and Soviets but to make their imperial efforts [sic] as costly as possible to prove that, after Vietnam, we were still capable of response, however insane. It is the story that has been told, and in impressive and convincing detail, by John Stockwell, the former chief of the CIA's Angola 'task force.' His book should not be missed. Since strategic thought survives by ignoring experience, it has a highly professional interest in avoiding accounts such as this. By the same token, all who are alarmed about the tendency toward such strategic thinking should strongly welcome Mr. Stockwell's book." —John Kenneth Galbraith
The quote above is from a review of "In Search of Enemies: A CIA Story," published in 1978, 45 years ago. If it seems uncannily familiar, that is because the "strategic thinking" Galbraith alludes never grows old. It is evergreen. Only the players change, and even some of those—Kissinger, Biden—linger on in this Ukrainian iteration. But history isn't slave to this version of eternal return. It changes, and as it does, new possibilities arise and formerly reliable gambits take unexpected turns. So in history as in physics, when speaking of payoffs we need first to establish a frame of reference. Thus from one perspective Ukraine represents a great if enormously cruel success for certain Western interests. It pays off handsomely, for some understanding of "handsome." But results from outside that frame of reference remain to be seen. Wishful thinking may color analyses of why unintended consequences are likely, but it does not negate objective factors that undermine dominance. In a long game they can be decisive. However what makes cynicism attractive is that here and now there is money to be made. That can change, but generally only when it can no longer go on. When that will be no one knows.
Seems to be paying off just fine, and western elites are in no hurry to end things in Ukraine.
Sadly, yes. But remember the Hollywood-ized words of Deep Throat—Mark Felt, not Linda Lovelace, though it is a sentiment she might be in accord with: "The truth is, these are not very bright guys, and things got out of hand."
Could those same words be applied to the Russian leadership?
That was an honest question, keeping in mind that the Russian leadership enjoy much less margin for error than Western leaders.
I do not know. Time will tell. I try to see events in historical, institutional, and evolutionary contexts. Some dynamics cross national boundaries. So does folly. As of now things both are and are not out of hand. Perhaps it is Schrödinger's hand. Has Russian leadership been not very bright? Opinions will differ and, to coin a phrase, the proof will be in the pudding. I incline toward seeing less hubris, delusion, and sheer dominance striving behind Russian words and deeds than from those of the West.