The Russo-Ukrainian conflict has demonstrated these past 2+ years that Industry, Manufacturing & the Physical Economy have always been relevant. It may sound like a truism, but after December 25, 1991, Many a so-called analyst argued that said Industrial Norms had outlived their usefulness.
What the SMO has decisively shown is that when one lives in said Fantasy & Delusion, you get outcomes like the DPRK producing more artillery shells than the combined EU.
What was that quote again? 'Play Stupid Games, Win Stupid Prizes!'
Would to God that you prove correct, but the West has already invested so many sunk costs, not just money and materiel but propaganda and diplomatic support that they cannot be seen to lose now.
We see this every single time when the West escalates. First they deny, as this would unduly provoke Russia. Then some clamor, and some American snaps his fingers, european knees hit the floor with a resounding thwack! and the latest red line is crossed. See, e.g., starting with weapons in general, then intelligence, ex-Soviet equipment, ex-Soviet aircraft, cluster munitions (but it's a war crime if Russia does it!), armored vehicles but not tanks, then tanks ("Release The Leopards!"), F-16, long-range missiles, etc..
The leak yesterday about British troops being already in Ukraine simply reflects what has long been an open secret. This will be used to pressure Scholz "See, the British are already there and WWIII hasn't broken out so get of the fence and send the army, already!"
We also hear of the Bundeswehr proposing to supply Taurus missiles to Ukraine, with sheep-dipped German crews, without bothering to tell the Chancellor or anything. Again, this is an effort to pressure Scholz, who offers a couple days of token resistance before he caves. Same thing, every time.
Of course, whenever you hear that something controversial is "under consideration", that means that the decision has been made. Any consideration, debate or ratification is just a stage-managed rubber-stamp.
The West escalates until it suddenly pulls the ripcord on the entire operation. See Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and to a very small extent Lebanon in the early 80's.
They did not suffer the Kind of losses n Syria or Iraq that they suffered for example in Vietnam.
Iraq was a failed state before the war that collapsed Saddam's government already.
The US still needed to field more than a million man.
It's doubtful they'd come remotely close to those numbers today.
And if they'd somehow manage to mobilize that many able and willing to fight, the losses in Vietnam (or world war II for that matter, where the US in particular are concerned) would soon pale into insignificance compared to the ones they'd incur fighting Russia directly.
Russia won't do the heavy lifting for you when it's Russia you are fighting.
Germany and Japan had a MUCH smaller industrial base, a comparatively tiny amount of natural resources and at least against Japan the US enjoyed a comparatively greater technological advantage.
And yet the US not only avoided ever fighting Japan's main forces in mainland asia the way the Devil is said to avoid holy water, they were quite unwilling to tank the kind of losses that conquering the home islands would have required.
I agree that the war almost certainly is unavoidable, sadly, but it will just as unavoidably be a complete catastrophy for the West and end in ignomious defeat.
Even if it doesn't go nuclear, but it very likely will.
The best plausible outcome probably wouldikely see the utter devastation of Western Europe and NATO, with Russia giving the US a final chance to decide how lucky it feels that day.
Perhaps failed is indeed too strong a Word, but Iraq very much was in a quite desolate state.
It had never recovered really from America's previous effort, from the sanctions put upon it, indeed not from the devastating war with Iran either.
The iraqi army was not in a good condition at all and soldiers and officers had long stopped getting regular pay.
Which made it easy for the CIA to bribe large numbers of officers into just standing aside with their men and not fighting at all.
In Libya NATO's contribution of course consisted mostly of using their unchallenged airial dominance to support their terrorist militias on the ground.
One can hardly escape the conclusion that Libya in the end was more of a collection of tribes held together by an irreplaceable, charismatic leader (whose charisma probably had been quietly crumbling for quite a while) rather than anything resembling a functioning nation state, with a broadly shared national identity that citizens of every stripe can rally around in difficult and trying times.
Which is a shame really, as clearly in some ways Libya had a comparatively good thing going.
Alas, under such conditions it can indeed be relatively "easy" to push the whole edifice into collapse.
But nowhere where such a common conception of nation and statehood has deep, long established roots can any would be conqueror or festroyer expect things to go so "easy".
Indeed, a mation that is weak and/or small may eell be conquered by a sufficiently powerful force, but it is unlikely to crumble in it's entirety or break apart.
So basically the US had long been making war on Iraq. It's like saying that the Cuban economy has "failed" without mentioning the US role in ensuring that failure.
"...the West has already invested so many sunk costs, not just money and materiel but propaganda and diplomatic support that they cannot be seen to lose now".
If the West (or even its constituent nations) were one monolithic whole, that would be worryingly true. But we have to remember that each national government consists of individual human beings; that NATO is a purely imaginary entity that relies for any power it has on those governments doing what they are told; and that politicians can lose power - sometimes with devastating suddenness - when they are found to be naked.
If Mr Trump, or even more so Mr Kennedy, were to become President of the USA, I suspect things would change a lot quite quickly. And in Europe, we are already seeing increasingly open in-fighting between the UK, France, and Germany, not to mention the Poles and Baltics. I think the Russians are fully aware of this, and indeed that they have deliberately engineered it. By subtle judoka thinking, they have taken hold of the levers the West tried to use against them, and are using them to break up NATO and some of its leading members.
As the saying goes, Russia doesn't (usually) start wars; it finishes them. By any and all means.
To say he is easily manipulated does not necessarily reflect on his character or abilities. In Washington it is extraordinarily difficult, approaching impossibility, to get anything done - regardless of the formal hierarchy - without "political capital" (which means having done an awful lot of favours, many of them illegal, for politicians and civil servants). No president can accomplish anything if the Deep State digs its heels in. The Cuban Missile Crisis would never have happened if the Pentagon had obeyed JFK's perfectly clear instructions to remove the American Jupiter missiles from Turkey months before. The Pentagon simply ignored Kennedy's orders. Trump suffers in a similar way, but much worse, as he is not a career politician, doesn't speak the language (basically, money, ironically enough), and hasn't done anywhere near enough favours for politicians.
'When contemplating General Eisenhower winning the Presidential election, Truman said, “He’ll sit here, and he’ll say, ‘Do this! Do that!’ And nothing will happen. Poor Ike—it won’t be a bit like the Army. He’ll find it very frustrating”'.
I get your point, but it doesn't change the outcome.
If there is anything to be gained from a Trump presidency, it is that America's european puppets, vassals, flunkies and buttbois may be less willing to slavishly follow orders if they come from someone as gauche as Trump.
Trump isn't president. Biden is. And he is all you accused Trump of being in addition to senile, delusional and subject to angry impulse. Moreover when Trump was in office none of this was happening. Why? Because Trump is way more sober and rational than most of you delusional jokers comprehend. You exulted that the "adults were back in charge," when, in reality it was only those who were wearing adult diapers.
I simply pointed out that Trump isn't president. Many of your comments here make sense. The shot at Trump did not given that this entire catastrophe has occurred under Biden. Perhaps you aren't part of the contemptible greek chorus of losers who lambast Trump at every turn, while turning a blind eye to the imbecile who succeeded him. But it sure sounded that way.
Nobody said that Trump is president, nor am I blaming him directly for what is happening now. I am saying that, judging by 2016-2020, a President Trump would likely not be a panacea.
I wonder if Russia should adopt the following motto "if a Taurus missile is fired at a Russian bridge, we will attack an equivalent German bridge, in Germany". The Russians, to date, have not imposed a single material consequence on any of this weapons escalation, and so, it goes to say that the escalation will continue. Why wouldn't it? The single biggest "response" was targeting French mercenaries/legion in Ukraine.
Scholz is such a lame duck, nothing he says means anything.
I find little evidence that the West is spoiling for a fight. I think the West would be thrilled with a status quo ante. I believe most rational people believe Ukraine can never win in the sense of regaining pre-2014 borders regardless of the amount of Western arms. And no significant country is willing to contribute their own troops to the Ukrainian meat grinder. Certainly not here in America.
So that must be why Zelenskii is still treated as if he were Churchill, Caesar, Washington and Jesus, all rolled into one.
That must be why the MSM is stocked with hysterical stores either of imminent Russian collapse or how Russia will overrun europe if we don't escalate now.
That must be why germanTV is depicting long range missiles as cuddly cartoon animals.
Thst must be why France is clamoring for direct open intervention.
If you truly believe that 'The West' wants war then you are living in a parrallel universe. 'The West' wants nothing more than to enjoy decadence and not have to worry about war. Lauding Zelensky is not the same as wanting war with Russia.
You are correct that the population in "the West" has no desire to go to war, but you ignore the level of propaganda moving that populace towards both hatred and fear of Russia and China. I am not convinced that our governments do not have the capability of convincing and forcing us to support war.
The manufacturing capacity to support a war would be a more insurmountable problem, but I am not sure our "leaders" understand that, so it might not influence the drive towards war.
A really great article, except for the fact that it ignores the role of the USA. In MSM, Ukraine is always given credit for making its own decisions, but since 2014 every decision in every department, particularly at the higher levels of civilian and military life, has been made by the Pentagon and the CIA. Ukraine exists only as an expendable appendage in a US-designed war to crush Russia. All of Ukraine's fanaticism and failures, including its incredible corruption, are the responsibility the USA.
A few years ago my two adult son's said, "We'll never have another big war."
I said, "Pfffft!"
As I read about this war, and that the MSM in the US and European articles said wildly different things, I began to doubt.
It seems the US, we here, have helped make sure a generation of Ukrainian men would die, to further our geopolitical goals. And we did, except it did not work.
Russia is still whole, not 6 seperate nations and it's ramping up it's war production.
Ukraine is already a demographic disaster and the mobilization proposal making its way through the approval process, if approved , will only make it much worse. Throwing newly mobilized civilians into battle with less than adequate training is effectively self-genocide.
Also, while describing the 3rd Assault Brigade as “elite” why no mention of them as Neo-Nazi as well?
Yep. Euro statistics showed another half a million receiving the temporary refugee status last year (with the program extended for one more year til March 2025). That's largely women and children, IOW the demographics of the future for UA.
Germany and Poland are the top destinations [clarification: within EU], but the rest taken together are just as much or more. Of those that are military age men (maybe 1/6 of the total if I remember right), I think Germany and Poland would rather spend a few years to assimilate them, and then have them in their own military! Poland especially, since they're so paranoid about being attacked. Plus what sane Euro kid would join the military with the current lunatics in power, unless they lack other options?
"We have more people pointed at our own citizens, that at our adversaries"
Over and over, we have seen the intelligence agencies + State Dept. develop propaganda + other societal control techniques and programs outside USA and then BRING THOSE TECHNIQUES HOME.
The last population that the USA MIC/ownership class will lose control of is going to be the USA's own population.
Their grip is slipping. That’s why they panicked in 2016 with the Russia collusion hoax. Someone like Trump never should have slipped through, and they did everything to block him once he did - fire, plague and, worst of all, the FBI.
We will see how the lawfare strategy works. If the leading candidate, who tens of millions of people want to vote for, is thrown into prison just before the election ‘to save democracy’ I have hopes that Americans will at least respond accordingly.
That is the goal though. Zelenskiy is tasked with putting as many ukrainians as possible through the meatgrinder, so that when Russia inevitably wins, it's left with a territory, populated mainly with pensioners and cripples. Making any task of post-war rebuilding and healing much harder.
Actually, of course, Ukraine still has a very large and well-armed army. With the will, they could arrest Zelezny and the rest of his snivelling crew tomorrow (today would be better) and sue for peace. The Russians would be delighted, the war would end, and what remains of Ukraine could return to normality.
If Oliver Cromwell could lead a handful of soldiers into the English Parliament and order the MPs, "In the name of God, go!", something similar can be done almost anywhere. Cromwell's greatest strength was that he combined and focused the wishes of the Puritans, the Parliamentarians, and the Army.
Ukraine has to get rid of Z and its people need to stop letting themselves be slaughtered for a bunch of crazed neocons. They are the only ones who can stop this.
The multiplication of calls, no matter how foolish or ridicule, for NATO to send its own troops to the front, is serious evidence of how critical the situation is for Ukraine. This reminds me of that moment when Russia decided it needed to stage a direct intervention in Syria: it demonstrated the dire situation the Syrian regime and its Iranian backers were in.
.
The difference is, that absolutely nothing allows to believe that NATO would have the means to reverse the situation, let alone the issue of starting a nuclear world war... Can EU leaders understand that their military power is meant for very short, very strong action to impose losses on a potential Russian assault that should deter Russia from even thinking about that assault? Can they accept that if they decide to enter an attrition war, they're bound to lose it?
.
I look back at the last 25 months of Western posturing and propaganda discourse, and I see the uncontrolled slide, from promises of Russian collapse to more promises of overwhelming means insuring Ukrainian victory, to new promises that this would never slide towards uncontrolled extension of war. And then every self-proclaimed "red line" had to be crossed, one after another, as reality bit Ukrainians again and again. Long-range weapons were given, tanks were given, modern A2A systems were given... all for no improvement of the strategic situation. The tangible effect is the continued bloodbath in which any possibly deserving Ukrainian Nation saw its future wagered, bankrupted, and finally erased through exodus, mass casualties, mass maiming, limitless accumulation of financial debt, and physical destruction. The second tangible effect, is that the "most powerful military alliance in history" and its 31 members (now 32, actually), saw continued attrition of its stocks and military potential, while not even being at war!
.
Can they stop this train wreck before Europe runs to its third collective suicide in a just more of a century? As a European, I am more and more convinced that while the vast majority of us sees how wrong, hopeless and unnecessary this is, and how it could simply be stopped if someone had the b*lls to stand up and call the end of the BS, our Potemkine democratic institutions are already so far gone into oligarchic degeneracy that we will not escape our fate.
Just like in 1914, we Euros seem to sleep walking into something terrible. Germany is in total hysterical meltdown with its insane war stance and green policies. France is, well, France, and the UK still thinks it's an Empire and Palmerston can send gunboats to frighten the natives.
An excellent analysis on the military position, though it pre-supposes that Ukraine (NATO) ever thought it could "win" a military victory against Russia. I think the original calculation was "probably not". However the impact of war, political unrest and the economic dislocation of sanctions would surely bring regime change in Russia? I'd say that was more likely the initial plan, with the added benefit to the USA of economic damage to its rival the EU.
Anyway it is easy to start a war and harder to stop one. We routinely read about Russia's "Full Scale Invasion" but this never occurred - what happened was a strong military demonstration against what was then superior numbers of UAF forces - but in an attempt to force the Ukraine regime to its senses. That nearly worked but the Ukraine and NATO started to believe their own propaganda and thought they could defeat Russia. Your article explains why they thought this.
Now bizzarely to me, most serious Western analysts do believe the narrative of huge Russian losses and the opposite for Ukraine. Well my judgement is the UAF have sufferred near terminal losses in combat troops (plenty of remfs left) and have few weapons and little ammo left. Morale is holding up but signs are there that it is beginning to crumble. Russia has superiority in numbers, training, leadership, weapons, firepower, air power, air defence, reserves, industry and allies with kit and factories. There is no way out for Ukraine. Western decision makers still appear delusional about all this but in my view NATO should now be in a damage limitation situation. Though doubling down seems to be the preference.
My overall prediction is that come the end of the spring Raputitsa in May we will start to see the UAF collapsing. We have now about 10 weeks where I expect to see pressure ratcheting up on the UAF, with Russia launching multiple operations across a wide front designed to attrit the UAF, use up its stocks of munitions and deplete reserves. Key ground will be taken in limited attacks. There will be continued long range strikes and my guess would be all those foreign "volunteers" will be a particular target.
NATO sabre rattling about boots on the ground may be just that. I hope so as WW3 beckons otherwise. But a Russian military victory (and I see that developing over the summer) will not of itself bring the war to an end. Ultimately we will have peace talks. Or radioactive rubble.
"it pre-supposes that Ukraine (NATO) ever thought it could "win" a military victory against Russia."
I think the original plan was for the economic destruction of Russia. The sanctions appeared immediately, indicating they were prepared in advance, with the expectation that the Ruble would be rubble, and VVP would be crushed by popular revolt. I guess they hadn't paid attention to Russia's clear preparations against that.
I also think that NATO saw Russia's small expeditionary type force, misread its intent, and thought Ukraine really could do a number on Russia militarily and therefore ordered Zelenskiy to continue fighting.
Having said all that I still think NATO wanted its fight with Russia not realizing until too late that Russia had prepared since 2014 for what I think Moscow knew was inevitable.
As I have been saying for well over a year now, Russia has functionally unlimited steel, fuel, grain, and men at the current use rate, and Ukraine does not. That is what matters the most. Russia's first limiting factor is public support, which seems fine.
Also people really are crazy set on this "human waves" idea. They will share a picture of a human wave and its literally 10 guys carefully moving one at a time!
I never got the deal with Zalhuzny generally, they love to make a huge deal of random hacks.
that is a thing about using auxiliary troops, and NK could certainly use the money, but for a variety of reasons it's best to stick with Russians and Russia-based mercs for as long as they can.
no they're not short of men at all, but NK would probably want to send troops given the opportunity for the money and the experience, I don't know why he brought it up though
"All of this is inconsistent with the trope about Russian “human wave” assaults - which, we should note, have never been caught on camera".
Well, of course! Because the Kiev gang and their Western masters always play that trick of blaming their designated "adversaries" for what they themselves have been doing. The Russians have plenty of everything - including time and professional military expertise. It's the Ukrainians who suffer from divided commands, insane political goals, and an ultimate "high command" in Washington and London who would love to defeat Russia but, failing that, rub their hands and chortle over every Russian or Ukrainian who dies, and every Russian or Ukrainian town or piece of infrastructure that is flattened.
Syrskyi: Avdiivka has fallen. Russian troops are advancing from the east and south. They have taken Lastochkino. Now they are attacking Orlovka and Rabotino.
Zelensky: If the Americans send another $60 billion, everything will be alright. We will use it to retake Crimea and kill Putler.
Syrskyi: Mein Fuhrer... The Americans...
Umerov: The Americans are not laundering more cash. We are running out of men.
What Washington believed in was making lots of money by killing Native Indians and stealing (then selling) their land. In other words, this Washington D.C. policy and action is exactly in line with his original plans and beliefs.
There is no auditing or control over the funds we send them. A “skim fund” created by Ukraine makes sure that the “Z”s get their taste of this adventure. Much of the money goes to our defense contractors who then ship already built weaponry.
Not all the money we send is for military equipment. We also find their government operations. We are paying the costs of their government pension programs. And there is the skim fund for the oligarchs.
“The United States has thus far contributed $19.25 billion in budget support to enable the Government of Ukraine to pay salaries of first responders and government officials, meet pension obligations, and operate hospitals. The United States and the OECD continue to further deepen and strengthen our cooperation with Ukraine to support its recovery.”
Biden and the Dems et al send money to Ukraine. There is no accountability. Large amounts of that money flow back into the coffers of the Bidens personally, and the Dems collectively.
Ukraine vs Russia is similar to our USA vs CSA in logistics, armaments, and a Divided People.
With unreconcilable differences being provoked and prodded into open conflict.
The Slavic capacity for war is due in large part to it's Defensive nature from foreign invasions. Americans have not had to fight a Defensive War on it's homeland. Only the Southerners experienced the devastation of burned out cities and destroyed agricultural lands.
The point being We/Me/You have no concept of War in our neighborhoods, towns, or cities; .........
Other than the Crime Waves that will probably result from the millions of Illegal "Immigrants" or the recently introduced democRat Bolshevik terminolgy "Newcomers."
Understand that No USSA Grub-Mint entity either State or Feral is going to Stop this Invasion anytime soon....
The Russo-Ukrainian conflict has demonstrated these past 2+ years that Industry, Manufacturing & the Physical Economy have always been relevant. It may sound like a truism, but after December 25, 1991, Many a so-called analyst argued that said Industrial Norms had outlived their usefulness.
What the SMO has decisively shown is that when one lives in said Fantasy & Delusion, you get outcomes like the DPRK producing more artillery shells than the combined EU.
What was that quote again? 'Play Stupid Games, Win Stupid Prizes!'
(For those interested)
If you wish to read (& listen!) to more of My commentary, here is my Main Stack:
https://thefallofthewest.substack.com
Thank You Kindly to everyone!
But we can bury them under printed fiat currency
lol
One spark and chao
Would to God that you prove correct, but the West has already invested so many sunk costs, not just money and materiel but propaganda and diplomatic support that they cannot be seen to lose now.
We see this every single time when the West escalates. First they deny, as this would unduly provoke Russia. Then some clamor, and some American snaps his fingers, european knees hit the floor with a resounding thwack! and the latest red line is crossed. See, e.g., starting with weapons in general, then intelligence, ex-Soviet equipment, ex-Soviet aircraft, cluster munitions (but it's a war crime if Russia does it!), armored vehicles but not tanks, then tanks ("Release The Leopards!"), F-16, long-range missiles, etc..
The leak yesterday about British troops being already in Ukraine simply reflects what has long been an open secret. This will be used to pressure Scholz "See, the British are already there and WWIII hasn't broken out so get of the fence and send the army, already!"
We also hear of the Bundeswehr proposing to supply Taurus missiles to Ukraine, with sheep-dipped German crews, without bothering to tell the Chancellor or anything. Again, this is an effort to pressure Scholz, who offers a couple days of token resistance before he caves. Same thing, every time.
Of course, whenever you hear that something controversial is "under consideration", that means that the decision has been made. Any consideration, debate or ratification is just a stage-managed rubber-stamp.
The West escalates until it suddenly pulls the ripcord on the entire operation. See Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and to a very small extent Lebanon in the early 80's.
Sometimes. They still haven't left Syria or Iraq, or anything they really care about.
Sure, but I was only pointing out that the West does give up sometimes and tries to sweep it under the rug.
Absolutely. Afghanistan or Vietnam come to mind.
I figure US troops, special forces, have been there the entire time?
I worry that these "leaks" are also to prepare the West that a big war is coming?
It "feels" like here in the US that our kids are being pshyched into the fact that they will be used by the military, e.g. a draft?
Most right leaning Americans will tell their kids not to go, go to jail instead.
Of course, the purpose of these leaks is to condition the public for WWIII.
Notice that neither Afghanistan nor Vietnam has any well-known natural resources of great value. Unlike, say, Iraq, Syria, or Russia.
Heroin for thé black ops and budgets OF thé empire
Hundreds OF billions or dollars are generated in Colombia or Afghanistan
They did not suffer the Kind of losses n Syria or Iraq that they suffered for example in Vietnam.
Iraq was a failed state before the war that collapsed Saddam's government already.
The US still needed to field more than a million man.
It's doubtful they'd come remotely close to those numbers today.
And if they'd somehow manage to mobilize that many able and willing to fight, the losses in Vietnam (or world war II for that matter, where the US in particular are concerned) would soon pale into insignificance compared to the ones they'd incur fighting Russia directly.
Russia won't do the heavy lifting for you when it's Russia you are fighting.
Germany and Japan had a MUCH smaller industrial base, a comparatively tiny amount of natural resources and at least against Japan the US enjoyed a comparatively greater technological advantage.
And yet the US not only avoided ever fighting Japan's main forces in mainland asia the way the Devil is said to avoid holy water, they were quite unwilling to tank the kind of losses that conquering the home islands would have required.
I agree that the war almost certainly is unavoidable, sadly, but it will just as unavoidably be a complete catastrophy for the West and end in ignomious defeat.
Even if it doesn't go nuclear, but it very likely will.
The best plausible outcome probably wouldikely see the utter devastation of Western Europe and NATO, with Russia giving the US a final chance to decide how lucky it feels that day.
Iraq was hardly a failed state before the United States attacked it. Nor was Libya, and that didn't require any million men.
Perhaps failed is indeed too strong a Word, but Iraq very much was in a quite desolate state.
It had never recovered really from America's previous effort, from the sanctions put upon it, indeed not from the devastating war with Iran either.
The iraqi army was not in a good condition at all and soldiers and officers had long stopped getting regular pay.
Which made it easy for the CIA to bribe large numbers of officers into just standing aside with their men and not fighting at all.
In Libya NATO's contribution of course consisted mostly of using their unchallenged airial dominance to support their terrorist militias on the ground.
One can hardly escape the conclusion that Libya in the end was more of a collection of tribes held together by an irreplaceable, charismatic leader (whose charisma probably had been quietly crumbling for quite a while) rather than anything resembling a functioning nation state, with a broadly shared national identity that citizens of every stripe can rally around in difficult and trying times.
Which is a shame really, as clearly in some ways Libya had a comparatively good thing going.
Alas, under such conditions it can indeed be relatively "easy" to push the whole edifice into collapse.
But nowhere where such a common conception of nation and statehood has deep, long established roots can any would be conqueror or festroyer expect things to go so "easy".
Indeed, a mation that is weak and/or small may eell be conquered by a sufficiently powerful force, but it is unlikely to crumble in it's entirety or break apart.
So basically the US had long been making war on Iraq. It's like saying that the Cuban economy has "failed" without mentioning the US role in ensuring that failure.
"...the West has already invested so many sunk costs, not just money and materiel but propaganda and diplomatic support that they cannot be seen to lose now".
If the West (or even its constituent nations) were one monolithic whole, that would be worryingly true. But we have to remember that each national government consists of individual human beings; that NATO is a purely imaginary entity that relies for any power it has on those governments doing what they are told; and that politicians can lose power - sometimes with devastating suddenness - when they are found to be naked.
If Mr Trump, or even more so Mr Kennedy, were to become President of the USA, I suspect things would change a lot quite quickly. And in Europe, we are already seeing increasingly open in-fighting between the UK, France, and Germany, not to mention the Poles and Baltics. I think the Russians are fully aware of this, and indeed that they have deliberately engineered it. By subtle judoka thinking, they have taken hold of the levers the West tried to use against them, and are using them to break up NATO and some of its leading members.
As the saying goes, Russia doesn't (usually) start wars; it finishes them. By any and all means.
I would normally agree, but Trump is weak, stupid and easily manipulated.
To say he is easily manipulated does not necessarily reflect on his character or abilities. In Washington it is extraordinarily difficult, approaching impossibility, to get anything done - regardless of the formal hierarchy - without "political capital" (which means having done an awful lot of favours, many of them illegal, for politicians and civil servants). No president can accomplish anything if the Deep State digs its heels in. The Cuban Missile Crisis would never have happened if the Pentagon had obeyed JFK's perfectly clear instructions to remove the American Jupiter missiles from Turkey months before. The Pentagon simply ignored Kennedy's orders. Trump suffers in a similar way, but much worse, as he is not a career politician, doesn't speak the language (basically, money, ironically enough), and hasn't done anywhere near enough favours for politicians.
'When contemplating General Eisenhower winning the Presidential election, Truman said, “He’ll sit here, and he’ll say, ‘Do this! Do that!’ And nothing will happen. Poor Ike—it won’t be a bit like the Army. He’ll find it very frustrating”'.
- Richard E. Neustadt, “Presidential Power, the Politics of Leadership”, p. 9 (1960). https://www.bartleby.com/73/1514.html
I get your point, but it doesn't change the outcome.
If there is anything to be gained from a Trump presidency, it is that America's european puppets, vassals, flunkies and buttbois may be less willing to slavishly follow orders if they come from someone as gauche as Trump.
Trump isn't president. Biden is. And he is all you accused Trump of being in addition to senile, delusional and subject to angry impulse. Moreover when Trump was in office none of this was happening. Why? Because Trump is way more sober and rational than most of you delusional jokers comprehend. You exulted that the "adults were back in charge," when, in reality it was only those who were wearing adult diapers.
Perhaps you could point to my praise of Biden?
I simply pointed out that Trump isn't president. Many of your comments here make sense. The shot at Trump did not given that this entire catastrophe has occurred under Biden. Perhaps you aren't part of the contemptible greek chorus of losers who lambast Trump at every turn, while turning a blind eye to the imbecile who succeeded him. But it sure sounded that way.
Nobody said that Trump is president, nor am I blaming him directly for what is happening now. I am saying that, judging by 2016-2020, a President Trump would likely not be a panacea.
Agreed about Trump. He just listens to whichever family member talked to him last and then appoints Deep State slimeballs to the top jobs.
Underestimating someone like Trump is....unwise.
The man who attacked Syria twice, who cozied up to Netanyahu and worst elements in Israel and who enabled the Saudi genocide in Yemen?
None of which have any bearing on the lack of wisdom of underestimating Trump.
I provided concrete examples of Trump's weakness, stupidity and ease of manipulation.
As Warren Buffett has been quoted as saying, it's when the tide goes out that you see who has been swimming naked.
Apologies for any fits of vomiting induced by that image.
I wonder if Russia should adopt the following motto "if a Taurus missile is fired at a Russian bridge, we will attack an equivalent German bridge, in Germany". The Russians, to date, have not imposed a single material consequence on any of this weapons escalation, and so, it goes to say that the escalation will continue. Why wouldn't it? The single biggest "response" was targeting French mercenaries/legion in Ukraine.
Scholz is such a lame duck, nothing he says means anything.
Russia should enforce its red lines. Otherwise, it is making idle threats that invite further escalation.
The problem is that Russia does not do so, because Russia really does not want this war.
The West, by contrast, is spoiling for a fight.
I find little evidence that the West is spoiling for a fight. I think the West would be thrilled with a status quo ante. I believe most rational people believe Ukraine can never win in the sense of regaining pre-2014 borders regardless of the amount of Western arms. And no significant country is willing to contribute their own troops to the Ukrainian meat grinder. Certainly not here in America.
So that must be why Zelenskii is still treated as if he were Churchill, Caesar, Washington and Jesus, all rolled into one.
That must be why the MSM is stocked with hysterical stores either of imminent Russian collapse or how Russia will overrun europe if we don't escalate now.
That must be why germanTV is depicting long range missiles as cuddly cartoon animals.
Thst must be why France is clamoring for direct open intervention.
If you truly believe that 'The West' wants war then you are living in a parrallel universe. 'The West' wants nothing more than to enjoy decadence and not have to worry about war. Lauding Zelensky is not the same as wanting war with Russia.
If the West wanted to enjoy decadence, it would not be acting like this.
https://t.me/geromanat/21761
France and Canada to send "non-combat units". If you think that this is the end of the escalation, then you are high.
Your description of the desperation of the West is accurate - the problem is that you continue to ignore physical reality.
The West has neither desire (in its populace) or capability (in manufacturing) to step into direct conflict with Russia.
Terrorism will continue apace, but the actual policy outcome in the West is restricted to either "declaring victory and going home" or "epic sulking".
You are correct that the population in "the West" has no desire to go to war, but you ignore the level of propaganda moving that populace towards both hatred and fear of Russia and China. I am not convinced that our governments do not have the capability of convincing and forcing us to support war.
The manufacturing capacity to support a war would be a more insurmountable problem, but I am not sure our "leaders" understand that, so it might not influence the drive towards war.
They don't seem to think so. For the sociopaths who rule the West, it's a Martingale bet.
The sociopaths ruling the West just lost their Sheriff: the Cookie monster.
A really great article, except for the fact that it ignores the role of the USA. In MSM, Ukraine is always given credit for making its own decisions, but since 2014 every decision in every department, particularly at the higher levels of civilian and military life, has been made by the Pentagon and the CIA. Ukraine exists only as an expendable appendage in a US-designed war to crush Russia. All of Ukraine's fanaticism and failures, including its incredible corruption, are the responsibility the USA.
A few years ago my two adult son's said, "We'll never have another big war."
I said, "Pfffft!"
As I read about this war, and that the MSM in the US and European articles said wildly different things, I began to doubt.
It seems the US, we here, have helped make sure a generation of Ukrainian men would die, to further our geopolitical goals. And we did, except it did not work.
Russia is still whole, not 6 seperate nations and it's ramping up it's war production.
“I fear we have awakened a sleeping giant, and filled him with a terrible resolve”
They gonna need babies. Were importing ours, idk how eastern europe will do it.
By fucking, one would hope.
That might work. Especially if you have traditional men and women, not transgendered dweebs like us in the West.
And don’t get me started on Portugal….
Hungary, Germany, and Poland continue their important, gender affirming work at turning out stunningly hot women.
Phenomenal work Big Serge.
Ukraine is already a demographic disaster and the mobilization proposal making its way through the approval process, if approved , will only make it much worse. Throwing newly mobilized civilians into battle with less than adequate training is effectively self-genocide.
Also, while describing the 3rd Assault Brigade as “elite” why no mention of them as Neo-Nazi as well?
Yep. Euro statistics showed another half a million receiving the temporary refugee status last year (with the program extended for one more year til March 2025). That's largely women and children, IOW the demographics of the future for UA.
These people are in Germany? But will be drafted?
Man, that's reach. ?
Germany and Poland are the top destinations [clarification: within EU], but the rest taken together are just as much or more. Of those that are military age men (maybe 1/6 of the total if I remember right), I think Germany and Poland would rather spend a few years to assimilate them, and then have them in their own military! Poland especially, since they're so paranoid about being attacked. Plus what sane Euro kid would join the military with the current lunatics in power, unless they lack other options?
Or Americans.
When Obama fired 800 Navy Chief Petty Officers with one stroke of the pen to "save money" the purge of our military had began.
I think it was a move to make them pro-totalitarian, pro US DNC, and anti-rebellion in nature from the old and traditional American way.
We used to all mistrust the goverment and the military helped keep it in check. Not anymore.
We have more people pointed at our own citizens, that at our adversaries.
@Philip
(Quote)
"We have more people pointed at our own citizens, that at our adversaries"
Over and over, we have seen the intelligence agencies + State Dept. develop propaganda + other societal control techniques and programs outside USA and then BRING THOSE TECHNIQUES HOME.
The last population that the USA MIC/ownership class will lose control of is going to be the USA's own population.
Their grip is slipping. That’s why they panicked in 2016 with the Russia collusion hoax. Someone like Trump never should have slipped through, and they did everything to block him once he did - fire, plague and, worst of all, the FBI.
We will see how the lawfare strategy works. If the leading candidate, who tens of millions of people want to vote for, is thrown into prison just before the election ‘to save democracy’ I have hopes that Americans will at least respond accordingly.
Главное направление Россия, более 4,5 млн беженцев из Украины.
true
That is the goal though. Zelenskiy is tasked with putting as many ukrainians as possible through the meatgrinder, so that when Russia inevitably wins, it's left with a territory, populated mainly with pensioners and cripples. Making any task of post-war rebuilding and healing much harder.
As usual: informed, accurate, and temperate. Serge does not do propaganda; for anyone. This is unheard of in The Empire and its Euro punks and whores.
Great article. Ukraine needs to break with Biden and negotiate a durable peace.
Ukraine is a puppet regime with less authority than a calf in a veal pen.
And the US are now actively adding to their suffering and death.
Ive tried to tell people that here.
But, I'm old. Most are young and think wars can be good, which is almost never true.
This border is gonna move 100 miles at the cost of a million lives.
Zero Ukrainians needed to die for a vanity project for the CIA.
They two sides were actively talking.
It's so stupid.
This should have been a velvet divorce, like the breakup of Czech Republic and Slovakia in 1992. But NeoCons wanted war, and now they e got it…
And I like that term. Like the Czech Velvet Revolution.
War as a viable alternative is always stupid unless your actively being invaded.
And I lean right as hard as is possible and I hate war. Especially as I age.
They think they can "manage" entire countries and their wars. And thats' never been true.
We've left but weve never managed them. Zero if you count near peers.
The sociopaths who run the West could not care less.
Actually, of course, Ukraine still has a very large and well-armed army. With the will, they could arrest Zelezny and the rest of his snivelling crew tomorrow (today would be better) and sue for peace. The Russians would be delighted, the war would end, and what remains of Ukraine could return to normality.
If Oliver Cromwell could lead a handful of soldiers into the English Parliament and order the MPs, "In the name of God, go!", something similar can be done almost anywhere. Cromwell's greatest strength was that he combined and focused the wishes of the Puritans, the Parliamentarians, and the Army.
Except then the flow of American goodies would stop and the flow of CIA kompromat would begin.
Ukraine has to get rid of Z and its people need to stop letting themselves be slaughtered for a bunch of crazed neocons. They are the only ones who can stop this.
The multiplication of calls, no matter how foolish or ridicule, for NATO to send its own troops to the front, is serious evidence of how critical the situation is for Ukraine. This reminds me of that moment when Russia decided it needed to stage a direct intervention in Syria: it demonstrated the dire situation the Syrian regime and its Iranian backers were in.
.
The difference is, that absolutely nothing allows to believe that NATO would have the means to reverse the situation, let alone the issue of starting a nuclear world war... Can EU leaders understand that their military power is meant for very short, very strong action to impose losses on a potential Russian assault that should deter Russia from even thinking about that assault? Can they accept that if they decide to enter an attrition war, they're bound to lose it?
.
I look back at the last 25 months of Western posturing and propaganda discourse, and I see the uncontrolled slide, from promises of Russian collapse to more promises of overwhelming means insuring Ukrainian victory, to new promises that this would never slide towards uncontrolled extension of war. And then every self-proclaimed "red line" had to be crossed, one after another, as reality bit Ukrainians again and again. Long-range weapons were given, tanks were given, modern A2A systems were given... all for no improvement of the strategic situation. The tangible effect is the continued bloodbath in which any possibly deserving Ukrainian Nation saw its future wagered, bankrupted, and finally erased through exodus, mass casualties, mass maiming, limitless accumulation of financial debt, and physical destruction. The second tangible effect, is that the "most powerful military alliance in history" and its 31 members (now 32, actually), saw continued attrition of its stocks and military potential, while not even being at war!
.
Can they stop this train wreck before Europe runs to its third collective suicide in a just more of a century? As a European, I am more and more convinced that while the vast majority of us sees how wrong, hopeless and unnecessary this is, and how it could simply be stopped if someone had the b*lls to stand up and call the end of the BS, our Potemkine democratic institutions are already so far gone into oligarchic degeneracy that we will not escape our fate.
Just like in 1914, we Euros seem to sleep walking into something terrible. Germany is in total hysterical meltdown with its insane war stance and green policies. France is, well, France, and the UK still thinks it's an Empire and Palmerston can send gunboats to frighten the natives.
An excellent analysis on the military position, though it pre-supposes that Ukraine (NATO) ever thought it could "win" a military victory against Russia. I think the original calculation was "probably not". However the impact of war, political unrest and the economic dislocation of sanctions would surely bring regime change in Russia? I'd say that was more likely the initial plan, with the added benefit to the USA of economic damage to its rival the EU.
Anyway it is easy to start a war and harder to stop one. We routinely read about Russia's "Full Scale Invasion" but this never occurred - what happened was a strong military demonstration against what was then superior numbers of UAF forces - but in an attempt to force the Ukraine regime to its senses. That nearly worked but the Ukraine and NATO started to believe their own propaganda and thought they could defeat Russia. Your article explains why they thought this.
Now bizzarely to me, most serious Western analysts do believe the narrative of huge Russian losses and the opposite for Ukraine. Well my judgement is the UAF have sufferred near terminal losses in combat troops (plenty of remfs left) and have few weapons and little ammo left. Morale is holding up but signs are there that it is beginning to crumble. Russia has superiority in numbers, training, leadership, weapons, firepower, air power, air defence, reserves, industry and allies with kit and factories. There is no way out for Ukraine. Western decision makers still appear delusional about all this but in my view NATO should now be in a damage limitation situation. Though doubling down seems to be the preference.
My overall prediction is that come the end of the spring Raputitsa in May we will start to see the UAF collapsing. We have now about 10 weeks where I expect to see pressure ratcheting up on the UAF, with Russia launching multiple operations across a wide front designed to attrit the UAF, use up its stocks of munitions and deplete reserves. Key ground will be taken in limited attacks. There will be continued long range strikes and my guess would be all those foreign "volunteers" will be a particular target.
NATO sabre rattling about boots on the ground may be just that. I hope so as WW3 beckons otherwise. But a Russian military victory (and I see that developing over the summer) will not of itself bring the war to an end. Ultimately we will have peace talks. Or radioactive rubble.
"it pre-supposes that Ukraine (NATO) ever thought it could "win" a military victory against Russia."
I think the original plan was for the economic destruction of Russia. The sanctions appeared immediately, indicating they were prepared in advance, with the expectation that the Ruble would be rubble, and VVP would be crushed by popular revolt. I guess they hadn't paid attention to Russia's clear preparations against that.
I also think that NATO saw Russia's small expeditionary type force, misread its intent, and thought Ukraine really could do a number on Russia militarily and therefore ordered Zelenskiy to continue fighting.
Having said all that I still think NATO wanted its fight with Russia not realizing until too late that Russia had prepared since 2014 for what I think Moscow knew was inevitable.
That pretty well outlines my opinion as well.
Nicely put. Especially the last paragraph.
I’m continuing to observe that this war is being used to reindustrialize and rearm America in particular and the West in general.
I think the war is folly.
I think reindustrializing America is good. This is a terrible way to go about it.
I think destroying the industrial base was evil and stupid, and destroying an armaments base unwise.
@the long warred
Going by their actions, I concur that our rulers do appear to be evil, stupid and unwise.
Now, about that whole "peoples have the governments they deserve" trope???
Can you give any examples of US 'reindustrialisation'? of 'of the West in general'
Eloquently written and flawlessly argued, Big Serge. Thank you for taking the time and effort to "zoom out" to the broader picture.
As Pushkin put it:
Then send your bellicose descendants,
Defamers, over to our place!
There’s room enough, in Russian grasslands,
Among deserving of them graves.
The last line is actually "Among the graves of their ancestors".
Yeah, in literal translation it goes “among the graves that are not alien to them” and clearly implies their ancestors.
As I have been saying for well over a year now, Russia has functionally unlimited steel, fuel, grain, and men at the current use rate, and Ukraine does not. That is what matters the most. Russia's first limiting factor is public support, which seems fine.
Also people really are crazy set on this "human waves" idea. They will share a picture of a human wave and its literally 10 guys carefully moving one at a time!
I never got the deal with Zalhuzny generally, they love to make a huge deal of random hacks.
While Kim in Pyongyang has tens of brigades, fully equipped that would benefit from battle experience, the same for the PLA.
that is a thing about using auxiliary troops, and NK could certainly use the money, but for a variety of reasons it's best to stick with Russians and Russia-based mercs for as long as they can.
Is there an idea that Russia can't draft more men?
Are the people against it to that point?
За 2023 примерно 490.000 заключили контракт.и да мобилизация негативная тема, но на данный момент в ней нет необходимости.
no they're not short of men at all, but NK would probably want to send troops given the opportunity for the money and the experience, I don't know why he brought it up though
"All of this is inconsistent with the trope about Russian “human wave” assaults - which, we should note, have never been caught on camera".
Well, of course! Because the Kiev gang and their Western masters always play that trick of blaming their designated "adversaries" for what they themselves have been doing. The Russians have plenty of everything - including time and professional military expertise. It's the Ukrainians who suffer from divided commands, insane political goals, and an ultimate "high command" in Washington and London who would love to defeat Russia but, failing that, rub their hands and chortle over every Russian or Ukrainian who dies, and every Russian or Ukrainian town or piece of infrastructure that is flattened.
DOWNFALL: ZELENSKY in a Kiev Bunker
Syrskyi: Avdiivka has fallen. Russian troops are advancing from the east and south. They have taken Lastochkino. Now they are attacking Orlovka and Rabotino.
Zelensky: If the Americans send another $60 billion, everything will be alright. We will use it to retake Crimea and kill Putler.
Syrskyi: Mein Fuhrer... The Americans...
Umerov: The Americans are not laundering more cash. We are running out of men.
Look on the bright side. If Washington DC gets nuked then Americans will be free again
Imagine poor George Washington if he saw this Washington DC named after him
It is against everything he believed in
What Washington believed in was making lots of money by killing Native Indians and stealing (then selling) their land. In other words, this Washington D.C. policy and action is exactly in line with his original plans and beliefs.
Yes George became the richest man in America
He had no biological descendants
My theory is he was gay
And that’s ok
But he was anti income tax
And anti central banks
Well, it makes sense that the richest man in America would be anti income tax ;p
Zelensky, hands shaking, taking his glasses off. "There remain in the room: Syrskyi, Umerov and Budanov."
I've never understood the idea that we are laundering cash through the war in Ukraine?
There is no auditing or control over the funds we send them. A “skim fund” created by Ukraine makes sure that the “Z”s get their taste of this adventure. Much of the money goes to our defense contractors who then ship already built weaponry.
There is no auditing or control over the funds... Much of the money goes to our defense contractors... These statements cannot be both true?
Not all the money we send is for military equipment. We also find their government operations. We are paying the costs of their government pension programs. And there is the skim fund for the oligarchs.
I read somewhere that Ukraine has 1.3 million school teachers and the West is paying their salaries. 1.3 milion... really?
That must have been pre-war. Any teachers under 60 will have been drafted long ago.
Where have all the young men gone?
Gone for soldiers, every one.
When will they ever learn?
Does this mean someone is actually skimming cash from our remittances? I mean, how would it work?
Who is Z?
Z was my shorthand for Zelinski
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/01/28/europe/ukraine-weapons-procurement-corruption-shell-intl/index.html
“The United States has thus far contributed $19.25 billion in budget support to enable the Government of Ukraine to pay salaries of first responders and government officials, meet pension obligations, and operate hospitals. The United States and the OECD continue to further deepen and strengthen our cooperation with Ukraine to support its recovery.”
Biden and the Dems et al send money to Ukraine. There is no accountability. Large amounts of that money flow back into the coffers of the Bidens personally, and the Dems collectively.
Rinse, repeat and profit.
Ukraine vs Russia is similar to our USA vs CSA in logistics, armaments, and a Divided People.
With unreconcilable differences being provoked and prodded into open conflict.
The Slavic capacity for war is due in large part to it's Defensive nature from foreign invasions. Americans have not had to fight a Defensive War on it's homeland. Only the Southerners experienced the devastation of burned out cities and destroyed agricultural lands.
The point being We/Me/You have no concept of War in our neighborhoods, towns, or cities; .........
Other than the Crime Waves that will probably result from the millions of Illegal "Immigrants" or the recently introduced democRat Bolshevik terminolgy "Newcomers."
Understand that No USSA Grub-Mint entity either State or Feral is going to Stop this Invasion anytime soon....
Any Ideas, Comrades ???