Desirable but impossible not enough manpower and weapons unfortunately.Odessa and Kharkov 'in' + the 4 new oblasts will be a victory.But even in these two ''russian cities'' lot of pro ukies...more than we think.
Disagree. Russia needs to seize Odessa, and along the right bank of the Dnieper, leaving western Ukraine to its fate. It's too much of a headache to control and West Ukrainian ideology is what influences and created "Ukrainian identity" in former Russian territories East of the Dnieper. Separating Ukraine into East and West, Korean style is the best option imo
- Subscription; I subbed but accidentally to Dark Fatura. I assume its all the same to you!
- EU largely subsists and survives on the legacy of its post WW2 growth. There was a time when Europe was a titan of innovation and industry; led by Germany. That time has passed; it is impossible to build anything in Europe anymore. I go often and all over - and I love it. Its a beautiful continent with amazing food, culture, people. But its just that; a museum and a restaurant. Politically, ideologically and culturally, their primary objectives are around conservation, environmentalism, and social issues. Not development, technology and whatnot. This is an important distinction but nontrivial. Look at Musk building his factory in Germany; supposedly with massive political support it still took him years to get done, wheras the same facility (much larger) in China took just a few months from start to finish. In my own line of work, when I'll send an enquiry out to vendors say in China, the US, and the EU, I get replies back in 1) 1-4h 2) 1-4 days and 3) maybe a week or two, if they ever respond
The US is a little different owing to its republican nature and states doing their own thing. But the more the federal government encroaches on state's rights, with things like the EPA and whatnot, the harder it becomes to do anything. Again, Musk has alluded to this that any large scale construction project is more or less illegal now. This has consequences but that take 10-30 years to wash out.
Russia is not without problems but fundamentally is on better grounds. Building alliances with like minded nations - those interested in development, industry and so on - is the key to success. Right now the biggest players in that game are India, China, and to varying extents other Southeast Asian states + Africa and Latin America. We are either in the midst of the great rebalancing, or the great unravelling. Time will tell
Thanks for the sub. Substack unfortunately treats each publication as separate, which I wish it wouldn't do because it forces people to pay twice and subscribe to each one. So I'll internally 'comp' your account for a sub onto this publication, so you can have access to paid pledger only things like mailbag questions.
As for the rest, I agree.
For U.S. I foresee states seceding by 2035 or so if gov't doesn't stop its current tack. Texas is already planning to introduce its own gold backed currency I just read. Strong states like Texas will eventually be forced to secede from the disastrous neoliberal gov't which could result in domino effect of secessions.
The US with its common language and such represents a fascinating case study of how societies self-segregate according to political and cultural preferences. I read an article (can't remember where) that showed that, while at state levels vote counts can be close, at the individual counties it tends to be landslides one way or another. People will naturally gravitate to places which reflect their preferences.
Much has been made about the so-called population exodus from places like NY and CA; mostly people who are escaping liberal insanity - BUT, there are always people going the OTHER WAY. The lunatics who live in "red" places who want to escape to enlightenment. In recent years the polarization and cleaving of society has taken on a new meaning. In my case for example, I look at 'doctors' who willingly perform gender surgeries on children as butchers who should swing or get the chair; and I mean that literally. Yet they are celebrated in other circles. How do you ever come back from that? On the other hand, I suppose I sound like the anti-abortionists on the day after Roe V Wade. Who knows.
I live in Oregon, where most counties want to leave Northwestern Portland and Salem to their nutty selves and join Idaho. Northern CA wants to split off from the South, where 100 years of water wars continues . The problem I see everywhere is that the states share different natural resources like water and forests, agricultural land or ports. So much benefit to be lost by separation. If only there was more honest political and economic collaboration, we could all be winners instead of losers.
Nothing wrong with a split . It would tame the immense power of Washington DC . In addition since folks on the east and west coast have little in common with folks living in the Midwest and south , A split up would mean Less stress in society, more collaboration and more folks living the way they choose
Perhaps breaking up the US is desirable . The immense power of Washington DC would be tamed , nothing wrong with that …and more importantly since folks on the east and west coast have nothing in common with folks in the Midwest or the South there would be less stress and conflict
And there it is. The most important part of the whole thread. Come On Russia! Get 'er done.
Fuck the twisted neo-imperials and their lust for greed and domination. I despise them w/a passion, time to end their rule. I am paying the price anyway, and won't be alive to see the Phoenix, so bring them down until there is no more.
"But rather, I believe that such a circumstance would be much worse for the U.S. simply because it would be a major victory for the warmongers an neocons in control of the country, and therefore would empower them to further continue destroying both the U.S. and the rest of the world with their twisted neo-imperialistic lust.
But if the neocons lose by the fact of Russia winning, that could lead to a final disempowerment an overthrow of their rule, as it would look like a catastrophic foreign policy and malfeasance in hindsight, and could usher in a new age of more sound, reasonable U.S. rulership and policies, at least eventually.
In short, Russia losing “enables” all the worst elements of the U.S. deepstate/MIC superstructure. While Russia winning could sap and gut them and go a long way towards helping restore any semblance of true ‘democracy’ or real leadership/representation in the U.S. as the deepstate’s failures could lead to its undoing."
"In short, Russia losing “enables” all the worst elements of the U.S. deepstate/MIC superstructure. While Russia winning could sap and gut them and go a long way towards helping restore any semblance of true ‘democracy’ or real leadership/representation in the U.S. as the deepstate’s failures could lead to its undoing."
Lord knows I detest the Empire, but losing in Afghanistan and elsewhere just made the neocons double down. Even as the War on Iraq proved a disaster worse than anyone would have predicted, the neocons insisted that the problem was just a lack of commitment, the war could never fail, the war only could be failed. Even now, they are still hailed as Serious Thinkers and Foreign Policy Heavyweights.
Unless and until the neocons start facing very real and very personal consequences, they will continue.
Yes, but eventually you can't cover up the disaster. Not towards the American public: they get the wool pulled over their eyes like every other time in the last 100 years, lol.
But when the people of Taiwan are pushed to die for Uncle Sam's war machine, they just might resist. Unfortunately, once the US establishes an Atlanticist deep state, it's very hard to change course, as we saw in Ukraine, after 2014. Even though Zelensky, the pro-peace candidate won in a landslide, he was very quickly subverted into shelling the Donbass and arming up for war.
Well, the withdrawal from Afghanistan was a fiasco worse than anyone was predicting, and all played out live on TeeVee and the internet. Talking Heads were wrapping their eyebrows around their noses asking What Does This Mean For American Power?
A few months later, the masses were waving Ukrainian flags, a country that most could not find on a map, while the commentariat were posing as experts on Crimea.
This will continue until a serious military defeat or economic collapse.
Yes, my point exactly. Just hopeful that the Taiwanese people have not been subverted to the point of no return, and won't be goaded into a war like the Ukrainians.
Although seeing that their army is entirely dependent on the US, I am doubtful they can resist the push.
neocons dont walk backwards. so it will be interesting to see their ever increasing bag of dirty tricks deployed. but certainty is their empires will fall from economic , and then social unscrambling. you cant talk up tranny armies invading mexico without more than that falling apart.
Wow, wow. You are amazing to produce this in 3 days or so , not to mention the insights and detail. I loved the answer to my question with the added bonus to a link to a musical concert in Red Square. Thank you.
Whether you are a Believer or not, I hope everyone had a lovely Easter. And if you are not a Believer you might want to think about becoming one because it is a great way to fight back. Of course providing it comes from the heart!
This makes me angry, we are not the Ukraine or China, at least on the surface.
Fight back people, they cannot be allowed to take our religion, they stole Easter from us w/the lockdown for Covid, and they are still at it. Go fill up the churches!
Warning at the end of this fundamental text, in my opinion
Internet and especially Telegram are buzzing with an attack under Russian false nose in Ukraine
According to reports, Ukrainian special forces would move bodies of their dead soldiers and civilians to a village under Russian fire, bodies which would be used to pretend an attack, with the use of Russian chemical weapons.
Evidence would be accumulated in advance (including false documents and Russian mission orders)
If this information is true
Here is my analysis
Our President has just returned from China and declared “Be careful, we follow the Americans too much and must find a form of autonomy in the interest of the EU”
Everyone is surprised and thinks the Chinese have sent a message that has been received
I OBVIOUSLY THINK THE OPPOSITE!
The message has been sent and received...but remember we are in an ALL-OUT WAR between Good and Evil, all means are good
So … following this attack under a false nose but perfectly prepared (which explains the leaks … the more it is prepared in amount and precisely the more there is a risk of leaks, the less it is prepared, the less there is a risk of a leak, but the easier it is to show the false nose … in short the liars must choose…),
One can easily imagine that “France” would immediately take a position against Russia and in support of the Ukr (as we do with each operation under false chemical noses all over the world)
Obviously the West would ask China to dissociate itself from Russia (this is the objective and the timing would be perfect with China's strong desire to take back Taiwan without effusions)
The declarations of 3rd way / possible voice for the EU, made by Macron, would thus aim to give more weight to an EU which had precisely distanced itself from the USA, which will also be very vehement on the subject, see the same analysis facts (and the same complicity?)
The turn would be played
Again, misleading statements would have hit the bull's eye on many Westerners and would be taken up by accomplice analysts (unknowingly of their own free will?) to give weight to the case (to also be an alibi...), but above all to prove that decidedly neither Russia nor China can be trusted... while we, the French and the EU, were ready to give them credit...
Obviously neither the Russians nor the Chinese believe in such statements, nor in chance
They know who decides and the @role@of each (they know more and more clearly in any case and such an episode would be another electric shock…)
But that would once again prove all the perfidy and cynicism of our representatives on the international scene.
I am still disgusted by the remarks of F Hollande former president of France, which was recorded when he thought he was talking to the predecessor of Zelenski (Poroshenko) and in fact a series of revelations, each more astounding than the other, including meetings of 2013 about the coup targeting Yanukovych (cf Maidan) who will be replaced by Poroshenko
Obviously all of the above is only speculation and analysis of speculation
Ignore what Macron says and watch what he does. If France ever starts actually trying to act independent, the US will snap the leash and Macron (or any other politician part of the acceptable political spectrum in France) will meekly come to heel.
Hello Simplicius, excellent writings as usual. One tid bit about your point on the Fed. As an economist, I must point out that the Fed is only in charge of monetary policy (setting a federal funds rate for example) and does not control the fiscal policy. That would be left up to Congress. Borrowing for the US Government occurs when the US Treasury releases bonds/notes. This is also outside the Fed's control. The US Treasury and Fed are completely separate. The Federal Reserve is a pseudo-private entity. Overall, the Fed could screw around with rates but this has absolutely no effect on the political will in Washington to invest more in the war industry, or the ability for the government to borrow. Hope that clears things up. Cheers!
Because of interest rate changes, the effect of the Fed cannot be understated on all US fiscal policy, albeit indirectly. The political will of politicians to invest in war is largely dependent on economic conditions of their constituents. And their constituents are getting tired.
You assume that the government cares about it's "constiuents". It's a rather common problem Westerners have. Government willdo as it wishes and as it views strategically or politicall necessary. If it coincides with the interests of the constituents, great! Less work for them. In contrast, if it doesn't coincide with the interests of constituents, they will be taught through propaganda that whatever it is, is in their interest and that they have a say
Regarding on how to fight liberalism in Russian society/universities. The more I think about it and observe international events, the more I am convinced that the solution to fighting liberalism in Russian society, is the same solution to demographic crises seen in Russia, China, Korea, Japan - Propaganda.
We see how easily Ukrainians were convinced to abandon their "Russian identity" in the East and assume a "pro-Ukrainian" identity. All it took was raising one generation and a ton of propaganda to shift the social overton window to be more "pro-Ukarianian". What do I mean by shifting the "social overton window"? I mean that humans are a species very responsive to what their neighbors/social groups think. If social groups are taught to be "pro-Ukrainian" or view "pro-Ukrainian views" as being those which give them the highest social status, that is the view they will have.
How to expand this further onto Russia then? It is important to propagandize heavy anti-Western views, but not in the Soviet way of doing things (which is viewed by youth as 'boomer' methods and cause them to reject it). Instead, it should be done by various pretty girls on social media promoting anti-liberal views, showing the occasional tit or ass pic, on game streaming channels, etc. This will cause boys to adopt anti-liberal views as well. Moreover, to influence girls it is sufficient to have their favorite music/tv/social media stars also have subtle anti-liberal views, girls are big herd creatures and will begin adopting these views if they see themselves as gaining socially from it. This is also the solution to the liberal problem of women not wanting to give birth to kids and instead pursuing careers over family. Show them stars/popular shows/music/social media (that for them is like crack-cocaine) with strong pro-family messages, where glamorous stars talk about how great it is to be a mother with many kids, how careers suck and make women corporate slaves, and how progressive women do not go to work, etc and soon we will see young women eschewing university or careers en masse in favor of family/child rearing.
I strongly believe that propaganda is the solution - it seems Putin is not doing enough in this regard, seeing as how weak Russian propaganda machine remains to this day.
"So just as Russia’s ‘Union State’ with Belarus grows closer and closer to fruition, which will soon bring the total reunification of the two in the coming years, this creates a major threat on the Polish border, as it is now essentially Russia itself on the Polish border—for instance, just look at the new decision to place Russian nukes there."
Exactly. And this is exactly what is going to happen to Ukraine. I agree with your assessment of how this ends - with Russia in charge of Ukraine. I suspect, however, that they won't bother with Medvechuk or Yanukovitch - not that it matters since Russia would be in charge anyway. I don't know how Putin will "legally" "finesse" it - but in the end Ukraine will be like Belarus - part of the Russian Federation or at least part of the CSTO.
The other point I emphasize is that once that is done, Russia will place a Military District in western Ukraine right on Poland's border, with probably two or three hundred thousand troops (the Western Military district of Russia allegedly has 400,000+ - just imagine it moving to the Polish border) along with maybe 1,500 tanks, a couple air bases with Mig-31K's loaded with Kinzhals, some Zircons, and of course a naval base in Odessa with ships and subs loaded with Zircons and Bastion antiship emplacements to defend it.
This is how Russia intends to counter the Aegis Ashore installations in Poland and Romania. This is what the Ukraine war is all about - not the Donbass, not "de-militarization" or de-Nazification" - those are all just preconditions for confronting NATO on the Polish and Romanian borders.
After which, Putin calls up Biden (or whatever is President at the time) and says the following:
"You know those Aegis Ashore installations we complained about? Well, we just countered them. And I hope you don't like it. Now what are you going to do about it?"
Build up Poland as a threat? Good luck with that...
1) I read, or at least scanned, the Russell Bentley article. As far as I can tell, it's his own speculations piled on his presumption that the Russian General Staff is too obtuse to see what he sees, despite the fact that he is a low-level military grunt with zero operational and strategic knowledge and they have access to the first or second finest C4ISR in the world.
In other words, it's bullshit. Ignore him.
2) There will be no "rump Ukraine" and there will be no giving a portion of Ukraine to Poland. Both of those ideas are idiotic and the Russians are not idiotic. You don't give an inch of territory to your enemies to use against you, regardless of who occupies it at the moment or who used to own it hundreds of years ago. Russia needs to put a Military District on the border with Poland - the current border with Poland, not one a hundred or so miles inland just to make western Ukrainians happy.
After the Russians beat the Ukrainian army to death, there will follow thousands of GRU, SVR, and FSB agents into Ukraine. They will locate all the people across Ukraine who are capable of fomenting trouble either politically or as an insurgency. They will be locate, detain and deport these people elsewhere. There will be no insurgency. Besides which, the Russians have seen Chechyna and Syria since 1947 and have learned about insurgencies. That ain't gonna work for the CIA, just like it didn't back the late 40's and early 50's.
People need to give some credit to the Russians. They aren't afraid of a bunch of disgruntled neo-Nazi football hooligans or the odd crazed Ukrainian nationalist in Lviv. The Russians need to deal with NATO - western Ukrainians will just have to suck it up and get with the program - or get out.
Interesting points. The other scenario, I suppose, is that Russia makes Poland fight for, and "win" the Trojan Horse of Western Ukraine. An argument can be made, Poland gets a highly volatile territory with a strong anti-Polish sentiment and memories of Volyn massacrer, not much different then post 2014 DPR/LNR (Russians would also have an area they can deport dissidents to).
Not really a good plan. Russia would then be forced to cede territory to Poland, thus bringing NATO closer to Russia than it is now.
Russia also has an area they can deport dissidents to - Poland as it is now. After, Poland and Ukraine IIRC have a treaty over the last year where they can share citizens, which Poland initiated as part of their plan to seize western Ukraine. That little trick will come back to haunt them when Russia uses that as the legal excuse to dump dissidents in Poland. Poland can hardly refuse given their past actions. Plus the CIA will want them in Poland so they can mess around with some doomed plan for an insurgency or "Ukraine government in exile" nonsense.
Much better to keep every inch of Ukraine and militarize it to counter any NATO buildup in Poland.
Another possibility is that Poland attacks Russia in Ukraine, then Russia gets to trash Poland, trash the Aegis Ashore installations in the process, and then withdraws from Poland - or not. If the US wants to use Poland as "the next Ukraine", Russia will be happy to accommodate. But Russia will not initiate an attack on NATO - it will wait for NATO to attack Russia.
I suspect Russia doesn't care about western Ukrainians or Poland, and isn't orienting its strategic intention in Ukraine around that issue. People keep trying to make that argument but there's no logic to it. I suspect what it really means is that people are subconsciously afraid that Russia will achieve its maximal objectives in Ukraine, because it represents a major change on the board.
Well, but it does represent such a change. The real purpose of Russia is getting rid of NATO expansion back to the 1997 borders. Ukraine is just the first step in the "military-technical measures" that Russia promised to use in 2021 if the West ignored its treaty initiatives. How that will proceed after Ukraine is taken is unknown, but eventually the West is going to be forced - either by military means or economic means - to do it.
In the meantime, putting a Military District on the current border of Poland is the most effective way to counter NATO's presence there.
Thanks so much for this detailed and informative piece. Normally, I jump in with a correction, but I don't want to be such a downer every time :) because, honestly, I always put your pieces at the top of my morning to-read stack.
To the people asking about the Orange Revolution (2014 - Ukraine), I highly recommend visiting academia.edu. Some of the articles there are useless empire fluff, but the website's rather "loose" policies on what can get published means that some genuine information gets through. Just check the author's credentials before reading.
PS - Okay, I couldn't resist one correction. "Attrition" is a noun, not a verb, and there is no verb form of the noun. I'd recommend using "grind/wear down" or "eat away" or "debilitate/weaken" or "sap."
You’re not wrong about ‘attrition’ ... but US military personnel pioneered *to attrit*, so you can hardly blame Simplicius for deploying their own grammatical atrocity against them.
In observing cat-and-mouse games, the rule of thumb is — if observers of the war in the Ukraine have a thumb — to recognise the difference between the cat and the mouse.
On the Ukrainian battlefield, it is now the Russian cat who is waiting for the US, NATO and Ukrainian mouse to break out of his hole and make his run. When he does, the mouse is going to get the surprise of his life. That last noun is the wrong one.
These are the real strategic secrets which have been revealed in the battle plans which spilled into the internet last month, and which the Pentagon arranged for the New York Times to discover and then publish for the attention of Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, and Vladimir Zelensky in Kiev on April 6.
Just a minor point re the first question - the light blue slice of the pie is the DoD, the much smaller dark blue is the oversease contingency operations. Sadly the US wouldn't be saving nearly as much money as you make out were it to slash that to zero.
Yes. I am very impressed. It is precisely the kind of clear, measured, calm, sensible, reasoned presentation I've been seeking for so long. And has the added merit (?) of echoing my own opinions.
There is one thing I would like to ask.
What do you mean when you say 'Russia' ?
Know what I mean? Possibly not. Usually I find people do not. Excuse me if it is superfluous but I will try to make clear what I mean:
For instance you say Russia may be happy to achieve a certain thing by 2100 for instance. Now this means the 350 million Russian people? I think not. They don't think that far nor so coherently in political terms I'd think.
Does that kind of make it clear?
There is a billion word endless discussion about the fates and doings of nations that employs exactly the same language as you do here when you say 'Russia'.
THEY know exactly what you mean.
And you know exactly what they mean.
And you all discuss 'Germany', 'USA', 'China' etc and know what you're all talking about.
But I don't.
I am lost. Truly. Not kidding.
It seems you must mean a coterie always, in whatever country you are talking about. A clique. A relatively small bunch. Privileged I would suppose. Rich. Powerful. Hereditarily so.
I can envisage this easily enough most especially when harking back to Kings and Queens, hereditary monarchies, and 'royal' families.
So is that what it is?
If that is what it is we/I could understand. I think of Hohenzollern in Germany and Saxebourg-Gothas in UK.
If this is the case then who is it in Russia?
That will direct the course of 150 million people for a hundred years or hundreds of years?
And if this is the case - and I can't see really how it can be anything other in essence - then why not call a spade a spade and drop all this 'nation name' obfuscation and speak instead of the motives and 'destinies' of these families rather than pretending a mythical entity - a 'nation' - has these attributes?
For believing in these mythical entities: 'nations' with their own destinies and motivations and imperatives can lead one to inhabit a world of monstrous unreality habitually. Where, for instance, a world quakes in fear of 'china'. See?
Whereas in fact in the human world there's little to be feared from the 1.4 billion Chinese people or the 150 million Russians or the 350 million sleepwalking Americans.
But the discourse, the narrative and learned expositions never leave space for any consideration of the actual people that comprise these 'nations'. All is in terms of this mythical entity which I've surmised is in fact the 'ruling family' or similar.
Elucidation of that would interest and please me greatly. For I think the time has come.
The FED is not responsible for allocating the budget. Congress is. The Fed and the treasury decides monetary policy for the most part.
Also, you might have read the colours wrong, or it's a typo, but the majority of defense spending goes to the DoD. The foreign funding is the dark blue slice, which is a lot smaller.
Not that it matters, the DoD just failed an audit: they don't actually trace their internal spending.
Also, a quick note on US government structure: the federal government is supposed to have a large portion of the budget allocated to the military, bevmcause the federal gov't is supposed to be that: deal with national level issues only. Other things like healthcare and infrastructure spending, etc., is supposed to be the responsibility of state governments. Obviously, as time passed, the feds took over that role, to have the ability to strong-arm states. For example they started to give infrastructure spending to state governments for highways. But states today recieve that money on the condition that they have the legal drinking age at 21 or above. So essentially, they imposed a federal drinking age limit, without ever passig it through congress.
This is unconstitutional, but the federal courts are a bunch of cowards when it comes to holding power accountable.
Great answers: very informative. Excellent questions too.
Re this question: Lastly any links that help explain what was really going on in ukraine in 2004 with the orange revolution? That would be great.
Thank you so much for putting a lot of useful and well researched info into your writings.
Richard Sakwa’s book “Frontline Ukraine” written in 2015 or so is very good on all the background including the Orange Revolution. The whole thing was seemingly linked to conflict between various oligarchs but with a genuine element of popular protest given that half a million people mobilized, albeit provided with provisions which one guesses could only come from friendly oligarchs! Electoral irregularities (no doubt endemic anyway) were the proximate trigger. Sakwa suggests that the full question of whether this was really a coup or a populist revolution is not resolved to this day. He also uses the term “oligarch democracy” to describe Ukraine and it feels an appropriate one.
Desirable but impossible not enough manpower and weapons unfortunately.Odessa and Kharkov 'in' + the 4 new oblasts will be a victory.But even in these two ''russian cities'' lot of pro ukies...more than we think.
Exactly. It doesn't take a lot to be a thorn in Russia's side.
Remember, there is only around a couple of hundred to a few thousand active Antifa members in the US, yet look at the havoc they are causing.
Also, these resistance groups will recieve US support and funding, 100%. So we'll see what happens, maybe It's a Chechen wars 2.0 situation.
Disagree. Russia needs to seize Odessa, and along the right bank of the Dnieper, leaving western Ukraine to its fate. It's too much of a headache to control and West Ukrainian ideology is what influences and created "Ukrainian identity" in former Russian territories East of the Dnieper. Separating Ukraine into East and West, Korean style is the best option imo
Always enjoy your writings:
- Subscription; I subbed but accidentally to Dark Fatura. I assume its all the same to you!
- EU largely subsists and survives on the legacy of its post WW2 growth. There was a time when Europe was a titan of innovation and industry; led by Germany. That time has passed; it is impossible to build anything in Europe anymore. I go often and all over - and I love it. Its a beautiful continent with amazing food, culture, people. But its just that; a museum and a restaurant. Politically, ideologically and culturally, their primary objectives are around conservation, environmentalism, and social issues. Not development, technology and whatnot. This is an important distinction but nontrivial. Look at Musk building his factory in Germany; supposedly with massive political support it still took him years to get done, wheras the same facility (much larger) in China took just a few months from start to finish. In my own line of work, when I'll send an enquiry out to vendors say in China, the US, and the EU, I get replies back in 1) 1-4h 2) 1-4 days and 3) maybe a week or two, if they ever respond
The US is a little different owing to its republican nature and states doing their own thing. But the more the federal government encroaches on state's rights, with things like the EPA and whatnot, the harder it becomes to do anything. Again, Musk has alluded to this that any large scale construction project is more or less illegal now. This has consequences but that take 10-30 years to wash out.
Russia is not without problems but fundamentally is on better grounds. Building alliances with like minded nations - those interested in development, industry and so on - is the key to success. Right now the biggest players in that game are India, China, and to varying extents other Southeast Asian states + Africa and Latin America. We are either in the midst of the great rebalancing, or the great unravelling. Time will tell
Thanks for the sub. Substack unfortunately treats each publication as separate, which I wish it wouldn't do because it forces people to pay twice and subscribe to each one. So I'll internally 'comp' your account for a sub onto this publication, so you can have access to paid pledger only things like mailbag questions.
As for the rest, I agree.
For U.S. I foresee states seceding by 2035 or so if gov't doesn't stop its current tack. Texas is already planning to introduce its own gold backed currency I just read. Strong states like Texas will eventually be forced to secede from the disastrous neoliberal gov't which could result in domino effect of secessions.
The US with its common language and such represents a fascinating case study of how societies self-segregate according to political and cultural preferences. I read an article (can't remember where) that showed that, while at state levels vote counts can be close, at the individual counties it tends to be landslides one way or another. People will naturally gravitate to places which reflect their preferences.
Much has been made about the so-called population exodus from places like NY and CA; mostly people who are escaping liberal insanity - BUT, there are always people going the OTHER WAY. The lunatics who live in "red" places who want to escape to enlightenment. In recent years the polarization and cleaving of society has taken on a new meaning. In my case for example, I look at 'doctors' who willingly perform gender surgeries on children as butchers who should swing or get the chair; and I mean that literally. Yet they are celebrated in other circles. How do you ever come back from that? On the other hand, I suppose I sound like the anti-abortionists on the day after Roe V Wade. Who knows.
Thanks for the comp.
I live in Oregon, where most counties want to leave Northwestern Portland and Salem to their nutty selves and join Idaho. Northern CA wants to split off from the South, where 100 years of water wars continues . The problem I see everywhere is that the states share different natural resources like water and forests, agricultural land or ports. So much benefit to be lost by separation. If only there was more honest political and economic collaboration, we could all be winners instead of losers.
Nothing wrong with a split . It would tame the immense power of Washington DC . In addition since folks on the east and west coast have little in common with folks living in the Midwest and south , A split up would mean Less stress in society, more collaboration and more folks living the way they choose
Perhaps breaking up the US is desirable . The immense power of Washington DC would be tamed , nothing wrong with that …and more importantly since folks on the east and west coast have nothing in common with folks in the Midwest or the South there would be less stress and conflict
And there it is. The most important part of the whole thread. Come On Russia! Get 'er done.
Fuck the twisted neo-imperials and their lust for greed and domination. I despise them w/a passion, time to end their rule. I am paying the price anyway, and won't be alive to see the Phoenix, so bring them down until there is no more.
"But rather, I believe that such a circumstance would be much worse for the U.S. simply because it would be a major victory for the warmongers an neocons in control of the country, and therefore would empower them to further continue destroying both the U.S. and the rest of the world with their twisted neo-imperialistic lust.
But if the neocons lose by the fact of Russia winning, that could lead to a final disempowerment an overthrow of their rule, as it would look like a catastrophic foreign policy and malfeasance in hindsight, and could usher in a new age of more sound, reasonable U.S. rulership and policies, at least eventually.
In short, Russia losing “enables” all the worst elements of the U.S. deepstate/MIC superstructure. While Russia winning could sap and gut them and go a long way towards helping restore any semblance of true ‘democracy’ or real leadership/representation in the U.S. as the deepstate’s failures could lead to its undoing."
"In short, Russia losing “enables” all the worst elements of the U.S. deepstate/MIC superstructure. While Russia winning could sap and gut them and go a long way towards helping restore any semblance of true ‘democracy’ or real leadership/representation in the U.S. as the deepstate’s failures could lead to its undoing."
Lord knows I detest the Empire, but losing in Afghanistan and elsewhere just made the neocons double down. Even as the War on Iraq proved a disaster worse than anyone would have predicted, the neocons insisted that the problem was just a lack of commitment, the war could never fail, the war only could be failed. Even now, they are still hailed as Serious Thinkers and Foreign Policy Heavyweights.
Unless and until the neocons start facing very real and very personal consequences, they will continue.
Yup, it is the problem when whichever evil sphere you are looking at, none of them ever face real or personal consequences. It gets old.
Yes, but eventually you can't cover up the disaster. Not towards the American public: they get the wool pulled over their eyes like every other time in the last 100 years, lol.
But when the people of Taiwan are pushed to die for Uncle Sam's war machine, they just might resist. Unfortunately, once the US establishes an Atlanticist deep state, it's very hard to change course, as we saw in Ukraine, after 2014. Even though Zelensky, the pro-peace candidate won in a landslide, he was very quickly subverted into shelling the Donbass and arming up for war.
Well, the withdrawal from Afghanistan was a fiasco worse than anyone was predicting, and all played out live on TeeVee and the internet. Talking Heads were wrapping their eyebrows around their noses asking What Does This Mean For American Power?
A few months later, the masses were waving Ukrainian flags, a country that most could not find on a map, while the commentariat were posing as experts on Crimea.
This will continue until a serious military defeat or economic collapse.
Yes, my point exactly. Just hopeful that the Taiwanese people have not been subverted to the point of no return, and won't be goaded into a war like the Ukrainians.
Although seeing that their army is entirely dependent on the US, I am doubtful they can resist the push.
I doubt they'll be consulted.
neocons dont walk backwards. so it will be interesting to see their ever increasing bag of dirty tricks deployed. but certainty is their empires will fall from economic , and then social unscrambling. you cant talk up tranny armies invading mexico without more than that falling apart.
I’m starting to wonder if you ever sleep Simplicius.
Wow, wow. You are amazing to produce this in 3 days or so , not to mention the insights and detail. I loved the answer to my question with the added bonus to a link to a musical concert in Red Square. Thank you.
Whether you are a Believer or not, I hope everyone had a lovely Easter. And if you are not a Believer you might want to think about becoming one because it is a great way to fight back. Of course providing it comes from the heart!
This makes me angry, we are not the Ukraine or China, at least on the surface.
Fight back people, they cannot be allowed to take our religion, they stole Easter from us w/the lockdown for Covid, and they are still at it. Go fill up the churches!
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/04/jim-jordan-fbi-is-infiltrating-catholic-parishes-agents-engaging-in-outreach-with-catholic-clergy-to-inform-on-americans-practicing-christian-faith/
Warning at the end of this fundamental text, in my opinion
Internet and especially Telegram are buzzing with an attack under Russian false nose in Ukraine
According to reports, Ukrainian special forces would move bodies of their dead soldiers and civilians to a village under Russian fire, bodies which would be used to pretend an attack, with the use of Russian chemical weapons.
Evidence would be accumulated in advance (including false documents and Russian mission orders)
If this information is true
Here is my analysis
Our President has just returned from China and declared “Be careful, we follow the Americans too much and must find a form of autonomy in the interest of the EU”
Everyone is surprised and thinks the Chinese have sent a message that has been received
I OBVIOUSLY THINK THE OPPOSITE!
The message has been sent and received...but remember we are in an ALL-OUT WAR between Good and Evil, all means are good
So … following this attack under a false nose but perfectly prepared (which explains the leaks … the more it is prepared in amount and precisely the more there is a risk of leaks, the less it is prepared, the less there is a risk of a leak, but the easier it is to show the false nose … in short the liars must choose…),
One can easily imagine that “France” would immediately take a position against Russia and in support of the Ukr (as we do with each operation under false chemical noses all over the world)
Obviously the West would ask China to dissociate itself from Russia (this is the objective and the timing would be perfect with China's strong desire to take back Taiwan without effusions)
The declarations of 3rd way / possible voice for the EU, made by Macron, would thus aim to give more weight to an EU which had precisely distanced itself from the USA, which will also be very vehement on the subject, see the same analysis facts (and the same complicity?)
The turn would be played
Again, misleading statements would have hit the bull's eye on many Westerners and would be taken up by accomplice analysts (unknowingly of their own free will?) to give weight to the case (to also be an alibi...), but above all to prove that decidedly neither Russia nor China can be trusted... while we, the French and the EU, were ready to give them credit...
Obviously neither the Russians nor the Chinese believe in such statements, nor in chance
They know who decides and the @role@of each (they know more and more clearly in any case and such an episode would be another electric shock…)
But that would once again prove all the perfidy and cynicism of our representatives on the international scene.
I am still disgusted by the remarks of F Hollande former president of France, which was recorded when he thought he was talking to the predecessor of Zelenski (Poroshenko) and in fact a series of revelations, each more astounding than the other, including meetings of 2013 about the coup targeting Yanukovych (cf Maidan) who will be replaced by Poroshenko
Obviously all of the above is only speculation and analysis of speculation
But sometimes it gets real...unfortunately
Translate Tweet
https://twitter.com/55Bellechasse/status/1645275047156764672
Ignore what Macron says and watch what he does. If France ever starts actually trying to act independent, the US will snap the leash and Macron (or any other politician part of the acceptable political spectrum in France) will meekly come to heel.
Hello Simplicius, excellent writings as usual. One tid bit about your point on the Fed. As an economist, I must point out that the Fed is only in charge of monetary policy (setting a federal funds rate for example) and does not control the fiscal policy. That would be left up to Congress. Borrowing for the US Government occurs when the US Treasury releases bonds/notes. This is also outside the Fed's control. The US Treasury and Fed are completely separate. The Federal Reserve is a pseudo-private entity. Overall, the Fed could screw around with rates but this has absolutely no effect on the political will in Washington to invest more in the war industry, or the ability for the government to borrow. Hope that clears things up. Cheers!
Thanks for the correction.
Because of interest rate changes, the effect of the Fed cannot be understated on all US fiscal policy, albeit indirectly. The political will of politicians to invest in war is largely dependent on economic conditions of their constituents. And their constituents are getting tired.
You assume that the government cares about it's "constiuents". It's a rather common problem Westerners have. Government willdo as it wishes and as it views strategically or politicall necessary. If it coincides with the interests of the constituents, great! Less work for them. In contrast, if it doesn't coincide with the interests of constituents, they will be taught through propaganda that whatever it is, is in their interest and that they have a say
In Europe in particular, politicians appear to be proud of how little they care about their constituents.
Regarding on how to fight liberalism in Russian society/universities. The more I think about it and observe international events, the more I am convinced that the solution to fighting liberalism in Russian society, is the same solution to demographic crises seen in Russia, China, Korea, Japan - Propaganda.
We see how easily Ukrainians were convinced to abandon their "Russian identity" in the East and assume a "pro-Ukrainian" identity. All it took was raising one generation and a ton of propaganda to shift the social overton window to be more "pro-Ukarianian". What do I mean by shifting the "social overton window"? I mean that humans are a species very responsive to what their neighbors/social groups think. If social groups are taught to be "pro-Ukrainian" or view "pro-Ukrainian views" as being those which give them the highest social status, that is the view they will have.
How to expand this further onto Russia then? It is important to propagandize heavy anti-Western views, but not in the Soviet way of doing things (which is viewed by youth as 'boomer' methods and cause them to reject it). Instead, it should be done by various pretty girls on social media promoting anti-liberal views, showing the occasional tit or ass pic, on game streaming channels, etc. This will cause boys to adopt anti-liberal views as well. Moreover, to influence girls it is sufficient to have their favorite music/tv/social media stars also have subtle anti-liberal views, girls are big herd creatures and will begin adopting these views if they see themselves as gaining socially from it. This is also the solution to the liberal problem of women not wanting to give birth to kids and instead pursuing careers over family. Show them stars/popular shows/music/social media (that for them is like crack-cocaine) with strong pro-family messages, where glamorous stars talk about how great it is to be a mother with many kids, how careers suck and make women corporate slaves, and how progressive women do not go to work, etc and soon we will see young women eschewing university or careers en masse in favor of family/child rearing.
I strongly believe that propaganda is the solution - it seems Putin is not doing enough in this regard, seeing as how weak Russian propaganda machine remains to this day.
Propaganda does no good if nobody is allowed to see it, or if it is carefully shielded from the populace, lest they get start to ideas.
"So just as Russia’s ‘Union State’ with Belarus grows closer and closer to fruition, which will soon bring the total reunification of the two in the coming years, this creates a major threat on the Polish border, as it is now essentially Russia itself on the Polish border—for instance, just look at the new decision to place Russian nukes there."
Exactly. And this is exactly what is going to happen to Ukraine. I agree with your assessment of how this ends - with Russia in charge of Ukraine. I suspect, however, that they won't bother with Medvechuk or Yanukovitch - not that it matters since Russia would be in charge anyway. I don't know how Putin will "legally" "finesse" it - but in the end Ukraine will be like Belarus - part of the Russian Federation or at least part of the CSTO.
The other point I emphasize is that once that is done, Russia will place a Military District in western Ukraine right on Poland's border, with probably two or three hundred thousand troops (the Western Military district of Russia allegedly has 400,000+ - just imagine it moving to the Polish border) along with maybe 1,500 tanks, a couple air bases with Mig-31K's loaded with Kinzhals, some Zircons, and of course a naval base in Odessa with ships and subs loaded with Zircons and Bastion antiship emplacements to defend it.
This is how Russia intends to counter the Aegis Ashore installations in Poland and Romania. This is what the Ukraine war is all about - not the Donbass, not "de-militarization" or de-Nazification" - those are all just preconditions for confronting NATO on the Polish and Romanian borders.
After which, Putin calls up Biden (or whatever is President at the time) and says the following:
"You know those Aegis Ashore installations we complained about? Well, we just countered them. And I hope you don't like it. Now what are you going to do about it?"
Build up Poland as a threat? Good luck with that...
Two more quick comments:
1) I read, or at least scanned, the Russell Bentley article. As far as I can tell, it's his own speculations piled on his presumption that the Russian General Staff is too obtuse to see what he sees, despite the fact that he is a low-level military grunt with zero operational and strategic knowledge and they have access to the first or second finest C4ISR in the world.
In other words, it's bullshit. Ignore him.
2) There will be no "rump Ukraine" and there will be no giving a portion of Ukraine to Poland. Both of those ideas are idiotic and the Russians are not idiotic. You don't give an inch of territory to your enemies to use against you, regardless of who occupies it at the moment or who used to own it hundreds of years ago. Russia needs to put a Military District on the border with Poland - the current border with Poland, not one a hundred or so miles inland just to make western Ukrainians happy.
After the Russians beat the Ukrainian army to death, there will follow thousands of GRU, SVR, and FSB agents into Ukraine. They will locate all the people across Ukraine who are capable of fomenting trouble either politically or as an insurgency. They will be locate, detain and deport these people elsewhere. There will be no insurgency. Besides which, the Russians have seen Chechyna and Syria since 1947 and have learned about insurgencies. That ain't gonna work for the CIA, just like it didn't back the late 40's and early 50's.
People need to give some credit to the Russians. They aren't afraid of a bunch of disgruntled neo-Nazi football hooligans or the odd crazed Ukrainian nationalist in Lviv. The Russians need to deal with NATO - western Ukrainians will just have to suck it up and get with the program - or get out.
Interesting points. The other scenario, I suppose, is that Russia makes Poland fight for, and "win" the Trojan Horse of Western Ukraine. An argument can be made, Poland gets a highly volatile territory with a strong anti-Polish sentiment and memories of Volyn massacrer, not much different then post 2014 DPR/LNR (Russians would also have an area they can deport dissidents to).
Not really a good plan. Russia would then be forced to cede territory to Poland, thus bringing NATO closer to Russia than it is now.
Russia also has an area they can deport dissidents to - Poland as it is now. After, Poland and Ukraine IIRC have a treaty over the last year where they can share citizens, which Poland initiated as part of their plan to seize western Ukraine. That little trick will come back to haunt them when Russia uses that as the legal excuse to dump dissidents in Poland. Poland can hardly refuse given their past actions. Plus the CIA will want them in Poland so they can mess around with some doomed plan for an insurgency or "Ukraine government in exile" nonsense.
Much better to keep every inch of Ukraine and militarize it to counter any NATO buildup in Poland.
Another possibility is that Poland attacks Russia in Ukraine, then Russia gets to trash Poland, trash the Aegis Ashore installations in the process, and then withdraws from Poland - or not. If the US wants to use Poland as "the next Ukraine", Russia will be happy to accommodate. But Russia will not initiate an attack on NATO - it will wait for NATO to attack Russia.
I suspect Russia doesn't care about western Ukrainians or Poland, and isn't orienting its strategic intention in Ukraine around that issue. People keep trying to make that argument but there's no logic to it. I suspect what it really means is that people are subconsciously afraid that Russia will achieve its maximal objectives in Ukraine, because it represents a major change on the board.
Well, but it does represent such a change. The real purpose of Russia is getting rid of NATO expansion back to the 1997 borders. Ukraine is just the first step in the "military-technical measures" that Russia promised to use in 2021 if the West ignored its treaty initiatives. How that will proceed after Ukraine is taken is unknown, but eventually the West is going to be forced - either by military means or economic means - to do it.
In the meantime, putting a Military District on the current border of Poland is the most effective way to counter NATO's presence there.
Thanks so much for this detailed and informative piece. Normally, I jump in with a correction, but I don't want to be such a downer every time :) because, honestly, I always put your pieces at the top of my morning to-read stack.
To the people asking about the Orange Revolution (2014 - Ukraine), I highly recommend visiting academia.edu. Some of the articles there are useless empire fluff, but the website's rather "loose" policies on what can get published means that some genuine information gets through. Just check the author's credentials before reading.
PS - Okay, I couldn't resist one correction. "Attrition" is a noun, not a verb, and there is no verb form of the noun. I'd recommend using "grind/wear down" or "eat away" or "debilitate/weaken" or "sap."
You’re not wrong about ‘attrition’ ... but US military personnel pioneered *to attrit*, so you can hardly blame Simplicius for deploying their own grammatical atrocity against them.
New Helmer update:
In observing cat-and-mouse games, the rule of thumb is — if observers of the war in the Ukraine have a thumb — to recognise the difference between the cat and the mouse.
On the Ukrainian battlefield, it is now the Russian cat who is waiting for the US, NATO and Ukrainian mouse to break out of his hole and make his run. When he does, the mouse is going to get the surprise of his life. That last noun is the wrong one.
These are the real strategic secrets which have been revealed in the battle plans which spilled into the internet last month, and which the Pentagon arranged for the New York Times to discover and then publish for the attention of Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, and Vladimir Zelensky in Kiev on April 6.
https://johnhelmer.net/the-writing-on-the-wall-as-revealed-by-the-pentagon-papers-leak/
Just a minor point re the first question - the light blue slice of the pie is the DoD, the much smaller dark blue is the oversease contingency operations. Sadly the US wouldn't be saving nearly as much money as you make out were it to slash that to zero.
I noticed that too but think the chart itself is mislabeled.
Yes. I am very impressed. It is precisely the kind of clear, measured, calm, sensible, reasoned presentation I've been seeking for so long. And has the added merit (?) of echoing my own opinions.
There is one thing I would like to ask.
What do you mean when you say 'Russia' ?
Know what I mean? Possibly not. Usually I find people do not. Excuse me if it is superfluous but I will try to make clear what I mean:
For instance you say Russia may be happy to achieve a certain thing by 2100 for instance. Now this means the 350 million Russian people? I think not. They don't think that far nor so coherently in political terms I'd think.
Does that kind of make it clear?
There is a billion word endless discussion about the fates and doings of nations that employs exactly the same language as you do here when you say 'Russia'.
THEY know exactly what you mean.
And you know exactly what they mean.
And you all discuss 'Germany', 'USA', 'China' etc and know what you're all talking about.
But I don't.
I am lost. Truly. Not kidding.
It seems you must mean a coterie always, in whatever country you are talking about. A clique. A relatively small bunch. Privileged I would suppose. Rich. Powerful. Hereditarily so.
I can envisage this easily enough most especially when harking back to Kings and Queens, hereditary monarchies, and 'royal' families.
So is that what it is?
If that is what it is we/I could understand. I think of Hohenzollern in Germany and Saxebourg-Gothas in UK.
If this is the case then who is it in Russia?
That will direct the course of 150 million people for a hundred years or hundreds of years?
And if this is the case - and I can't see really how it can be anything other in essence - then why not call a spade a spade and drop all this 'nation name' obfuscation and speak instead of the motives and 'destinies' of these families rather than pretending a mythical entity - a 'nation' - has these attributes?
For believing in these mythical entities: 'nations' with their own destinies and motivations and imperatives can lead one to inhabit a world of monstrous unreality habitually. Where, for instance, a world quakes in fear of 'china'. See?
Whereas in fact in the human world there's little to be feared from the 1.4 billion Chinese people or the 150 million Russians or the 350 million sleepwalking Americans.
But the discourse, the narrative and learned expositions never leave space for any consideration of the actual people that comprise these 'nations'. All is in terms of this mythical entity which I've surmised is in fact the 'ruling family' or similar.
Elucidation of that would interest and please me greatly. For I think the time has come.
Quick note on question #1:
The FED is not responsible for allocating the budget. Congress is. The Fed and the treasury decides monetary policy for the most part.
Also, you might have read the colours wrong, or it's a typo, but the majority of defense spending goes to the DoD. The foreign funding is the dark blue slice, which is a lot smaller.
Not that it matters, the DoD just failed an audit: they don't actually trace their internal spending.
Also, a quick note on US government structure: the federal government is supposed to have a large portion of the budget allocated to the military, bevmcause the federal gov't is supposed to be that: deal with national level issues only. Other things like healthcare and infrastructure spending, etc., is supposed to be the responsibility of state governments. Obviously, as time passed, the feds took over that role, to have the ability to strong-arm states. For example they started to give infrastructure spending to state governments for highways. But states today recieve that money on the condition that they have the legal drinking age at 21 or above. So essentially, they imposed a federal drinking age limit, without ever passig it through congress.
This is unconstitutional, but the federal courts are a bunch of cowards when it comes to holding power accountable.
Great answers: very informative. Excellent questions too.
Re this question: Lastly any links that help explain what was really going on in ukraine in 2004 with the orange revolution? That would be great.
Thank you so much for putting a lot of useful and well researched info into your writings.
Richard Sakwa’s book “Frontline Ukraine” written in 2015 or so is very good on all the background including the Orange Revolution. The whole thing was seemingly linked to conflict between various oligarchs but with a genuine element of popular protest given that half a million people mobilized, albeit provided with provisions which one guesses could only come from friendly oligarchs! Electoral irregularities (no doubt endemic anyway) were the proximate trigger. Sakwa suggests that the full question of whether this was really a coup or a populist revolution is not resolved to this day. He also uses the term “oligarch democracy” to describe Ukraine and it feels an appropriate one.