A few weeks ago the U.S. Army War College released a paper which was an urgent call for the U.S. armed forces to adapt to the modern style of warfare being innovated in the Ukrainian conflict. The paper made the rounds due to some startling admissions, which we’ll get to. But what’s most important to understand is that the paper represents a general major shift in thinking propagating throughout the entire sphere of the Atlanticist West, and was released in concert with several other key thinktank pieces and policy shifts announcement from the EU, NATO, etc., which holistically represent a mass internal panic deep within the structures of the West, and a subsequent need to urgently change their strategy.
Either the "west," is going all Sun Tzu (appear weak, when one is strong) or Russia may feel the time is right to complete their SMO before the west learns new methods.
Knowing what is known, there are way too few Col. MacGregor's in the US military and too many woke retards, to coin a phrase.
Pretty much the entire RAND analysis is based on fundamental assumptions - Ru being a poor warfighter, and no match for NATO divisions should they enter the war.
This is why I keep saying Russia needs to DO something in terms of a significant battlefield success; not overwhelming, but enough to break the illusion these think tanks keep creating. Taking Kharkiv, Kherson, Odessa, whatever. If I'm Lindsey Graham reading this report, I am honestly wondering why the USAF just doesn't start bombing Russian positions directly.
With 77% undraftable it makes you wonder about the other 23%. What percentage of those will disqualify themselves? And; where is the competence to run the industrial part of any war? Nobody seems to be doing the math.
I think Nafo has painted itself into a corner here. They clearly cannot escalate directly; the main forces in nafo (USA, UK) are so casualty averse as to be considered incapable of actually fighting a war. The only likely proxies are Poland, Baltics, and Romania and their armies combined are smaller and less well-armed than Ukraine was at the start of the war. Besides, that opens a particularly dangerous can of political worms that I doubt the Nafos have the stones to open. Perhaps a few of the Russian-derived jews who make up a large portion of the war faction want this, but I think there are enough non-insane, non-Russian jews and gentiles within the power structure to prevent this.
The only tangible option is, as you said: giving Ukraine longer range weapons. But what weapons? Any that might be given have been made in such tiny quantities that their effect would be minimal (storm shadow anyone?) and the lead-time necessary to train Ukes or to get nafo mercs to use them would be so long as to further negate their effectiveness.
One has to wonder why these supposedly smart and perceptive people have absolutely no ability to foresee or even consider possible second and third order effects resulting from decisions and actions. It reminds me of the old "stonks" meme. Provoke war ---> Stonks! Seriously, just on the COIN stuff alone I, as a dumb college student, could clearly see how stupid Rumsfeld's ideas were 20 years ago and how they would lead to a crippling of the US military and what an unmitigated strategic disaster would unfold from the GWOT. It is actually funny to watch how each of their decisions further limits, narrows, and degrades their subsequent choices until they are left with nothing but "end game."
Sick of all this war porn. One wonders where we'd be if they all were to use their energies for positive (not woke) change and the good of humanity. We are obviously still a planet full of crazy monkies brandishing jawbones.
I note that the 'Army War College' Report totally glosses over 2 critical problems that face the United States right now:
#1 Russia's game changing development of new weapons, based on secret breakthroughs in advanced physics.
Not just offensive (eg manoeuvrable hypersonics) but also defensive systems (eg lasers)..
The advantage Russia enjoys in this area is exponential. The returns accelerate the longer the competition (America) fails to understand the physics behind these weapons.
To crack this will require a genius to emerge in the United States (ie pure luck), or a revolution in the American education system, which is in ruins. Even then it's debatable whether the Americans can ever catch up.
#2 America's poor / non existent military industrial capacity. Right now America can't sustain a major war against Russia, let alone China and certainly not Russia/China combined, for more than a few weeks.
Building this capacity would take years, and would be based on fossil fuels. It would require abandoning pretty much the entire global warming/climate change project.
By failing to include these two factors, the Report is pretty much meaningless drivel, consistent with the amateurs who seem to have written it.
Katie Crombe - hot chick. Oops, that wasn't "woke", was it? Fuck it, I still want to do her - particularly since it's likely that's all she's good for in the Defense Department.
Basically everything you said here - albeit in more detail - boils down to what Andrei Martyanov says almost every day in a much shorter post: The West doesn't understand, has never fought, has never won, and can't win "real modern war." Period. End of story.
And yet, they're gonna try precisely because the leadership of the West lacks that understanding. And that's why we're headed directly for WWIII within the next 2-5 years, either against Russia, China or both.
How much damage Russia and China sustain isn't clear and mostly depends on 1) how well their air defenses work, and 2) how the war actually starts and evolves. What is clear is that the West will lose it and probably cease to exist as functioning states.
This reminds me of a comment I heard a few years ago from Pravin Sawhney, an Indian military analyst from "Force" magazine (worth checking out, he's on YouTube). He said that the next big war (the one we are in now) will be fought in 6 major war fighting domains, the 3 old ones of Air, Land and Sea and the 3 new ones of, the EM spectrum, Space and Cyberspace (the one you are battling in now).
Some other points'
1) How bright an Army HQ will "glow" applies at sea as much as on land if not more so. All the internet speculation about if a Chinese hypersonic or anti-ship ballistic missile can hit a US Navy carrier would be made moot if it's constantly broadcasting its real time location. I just can't see how it can operate aircraft and remain radio silent. That alone would be a mission victory for the "Reds".
2) Even a limited draft in the USA would be a socio-political bomb that will explode in multiple directions. The semi-literate good ol' backwoods boys of previous generations will be premier special forces guys compared to some of the dysgenic mess that's coming down the pipeline today. The US military has recruited non-citizens before but only in limited numbers, drafting tens of thousands of Mexicans, Salvadoreans, Hondurans let alone Indians and Chinese will set off shock waves that will echo for generations. You can't be drafted if you're undocumented for one thing so that will have to be sorted out. This will apply all across NATO as well.
3) Millenium 7* has dropped another video and it's rather good.
They’re looking for a Pearl Harbor. FDR provoked it to pull the US out of economic malaise and to enter the war at the behest of the bankers and empire builders. Biden and co are tempted to the same. Of course the USA of 1940 is not that of 2023 militarily, economically, or socially.
I wouldn’t be so sanguine on hitting Russia proper especially with missiles and not the pin prick drones until now. The risk is not political instability or reduction in government popularity but increased demands of escalations either in Ukraine or outside of it. Asymmetric parallel responses are out of the public eye no matter how effective so they won’t register as much.
The three points of escalation only contain one that matters, hitting NATO territory. The first, if NATO troops are in Ukraine in any capacity they are fair game. That’s to be expected in a war zone and Russia already signaled that with respect to Poland. The second, downing a manned recon aircraft in the Black Sea is a step further than the unmanned they already did however depending on what happens right before (e.g. a strike on a military installation that causes real damage and assigning targeting and redirection functions that directly caused it) should give ample reason as these assets are part of the offense which makes them legitimate targets even outside Russia’s maritime borders.
Ultimately though I think Russia should, and has been, preparing for a direct conflict with NATO. Clearly the only path to saving Ukraine from total collapse is for NATO to directly get involved and Russia has been preparing for this since at least June 2022.
When you hear Russia designating clearly (officially) actions that would require a NATO territory response (i.e. new and unambiguous red lines) is when you know they are ready to destroy NATO’s army in direct conflict.
It would be a grave mistake for NATO to cross them.
Funny but I just mused that the Heritage Foundation's annual assessment of the US Military is usually published in October where it will very likely score lower than last year.
On the Public-Private Partnerships MIC ploy, that will never fly because of the outrageous amount of corruption endemic to what already exists. And the newly drafted soldiers will need weapons that work and many of them given the projected loss rate--weapons that work now mostly missing in action.
The main problem for NATO is that all this thinktank content is just schlock put out to justify them getting paid for decades of equally poor work.
These are... what's the favourite westoid appropriated Russian words? Ah right, apparatchiks. The system is rotten to the core, rife with bureaucracy and legacy money sucking staff. Their job isn't to come up with new strategies and insights. Their job is to create an ILLUSION of that work being completed.
Just a bunch of blather from the Stink Tanks. The US military is kaput. Which is a good thing for the world. It's all just a clown show. There won't be a draft. Western collapse is here and accelerating. Here's a senior Pentagon official who got arrested today for running a 20-year dog fighting ring. He's black, of course. https://dailycaller.com/2023/10/02/pentagon-official-accused-abusive-dogfighting-ring-2-decades-frederick-moorefield/
"Army War College Report Predicts Mass Casualties in Near-Peer Fight Against [Russia]"
AKA: NSA. No Shit Analysis.
Either the "west," is going all Sun Tzu (appear weak, when one is strong) or Russia may feel the time is right to complete their SMO before the west learns new methods.
Knowing what is known, there are way too few Col. MacGregor's in the US military and too many woke retards, to coin a phrase.
Pretty much the entire RAND analysis is based on fundamental assumptions - Ru being a poor warfighter, and no match for NATO divisions should they enter the war.
This is why I keep saying Russia needs to DO something in terms of a significant battlefield success; not overwhelming, but enough to break the illusion these think tanks keep creating. Taking Kharkiv, Kherson, Odessa, whatever. If I'm Lindsey Graham reading this report, I am honestly wondering why the USAF just doesn't start bombing Russian positions directly.
Excellent overview, thanks.
With 77% undraftable it makes you wonder about the other 23%. What percentage of those will disqualify themselves? And; where is the competence to run the industrial part of any war? Nobody seems to be doing the math.
I think Nafo has painted itself into a corner here. They clearly cannot escalate directly; the main forces in nafo (USA, UK) are so casualty averse as to be considered incapable of actually fighting a war. The only likely proxies are Poland, Baltics, and Romania and their armies combined are smaller and less well-armed than Ukraine was at the start of the war. Besides, that opens a particularly dangerous can of political worms that I doubt the Nafos have the stones to open. Perhaps a few of the Russian-derived jews who make up a large portion of the war faction want this, but I think there are enough non-insane, non-Russian jews and gentiles within the power structure to prevent this.
The only tangible option is, as you said: giving Ukraine longer range weapons. But what weapons? Any that might be given have been made in such tiny quantities that their effect would be minimal (storm shadow anyone?) and the lead-time necessary to train Ukes or to get nafo mercs to use them would be so long as to further negate their effectiveness.
One has to wonder why these supposedly smart and perceptive people have absolutely no ability to foresee or even consider possible second and third order effects resulting from decisions and actions. It reminds me of the old "stonks" meme. Provoke war ---> Stonks! Seriously, just on the COIN stuff alone I, as a dumb college student, could clearly see how stupid Rumsfeld's ideas were 20 years ago and how they would lead to a crippling of the US military and what an unmitigated strategic disaster would unfold from the GWOT. It is actually funny to watch how each of their decisions further limits, narrows, and degrades their subsequent choices until they are left with nothing but "end game."
Sick of all this war porn. One wonders where we'd be if they all were to use their energies for positive (not woke) change and the good of humanity. We are obviously still a planet full of crazy monkies brandishing jawbones.
England behind all this push for war - the rich Jews and zionists that is. War to the last Ukrainian and then bring in the cannon fodder from UKUS
Yet another insightful post.
I note that the 'Army War College' Report totally glosses over 2 critical problems that face the United States right now:
#1 Russia's game changing development of new weapons, based on secret breakthroughs in advanced physics.
Not just offensive (eg manoeuvrable hypersonics) but also defensive systems (eg lasers)..
The advantage Russia enjoys in this area is exponential. The returns accelerate the longer the competition (America) fails to understand the physics behind these weapons.
To crack this will require a genius to emerge in the United States (ie pure luck), or a revolution in the American education system, which is in ruins. Even then it's debatable whether the Americans can ever catch up.
#2 America's poor / non existent military industrial capacity. Right now America can't sustain a major war against Russia, let alone China and certainly not Russia/China combined, for more than a few weeks.
Building this capacity would take years, and would be based on fossil fuels. It would require abandoning pretty much the entire global warming/climate change project.
By failing to include these two factors, the Report is pretty much meaningless drivel, consistent with the amateurs who seem to have written it.
I always knew you can’t win a war when you’re only eating hamburgers.
Katie Crombe - hot chick. Oops, that wasn't "woke", was it? Fuck it, I still want to do her - particularly since it's likely that's all she's good for in the Defense Department.
Basically everything you said here - albeit in more detail - boils down to what Andrei Martyanov says almost every day in a much shorter post: The West doesn't understand, has never fought, has never won, and can't win "real modern war." Period. End of story.
And yet, they're gonna try precisely because the leadership of the West lacks that understanding. And that's why we're headed directly for WWIII within the next 2-5 years, either against Russia, China or both.
How much damage Russia and China sustain isn't clear and mostly depends on 1) how well their air defenses work, and 2) how the war actually starts and evolves. What is clear is that the West will lose it and probably cease to exist as functioning states.
Western nations have been quick to relinquish their sovereignty to Washington so when the US crumbles so will they. Sad but true.
Another very fine piece of work Simplicius.
This reminds me of a comment I heard a few years ago from Pravin Sawhney, an Indian military analyst from "Force" magazine (worth checking out, he's on YouTube). He said that the next big war (the one we are in now) will be fought in 6 major war fighting domains, the 3 old ones of Air, Land and Sea and the 3 new ones of, the EM spectrum, Space and Cyberspace (the one you are battling in now).
Some other points'
1) How bright an Army HQ will "glow" applies at sea as much as on land if not more so. All the internet speculation about if a Chinese hypersonic or anti-ship ballistic missile can hit a US Navy carrier would be made moot if it's constantly broadcasting its real time location. I just can't see how it can operate aircraft and remain radio silent. That alone would be a mission victory for the "Reds".
2) Even a limited draft in the USA would be a socio-political bomb that will explode in multiple directions. The semi-literate good ol' backwoods boys of previous generations will be premier special forces guys compared to some of the dysgenic mess that's coming down the pipeline today. The US military has recruited non-citizens before but only in limited numbers, drafting tens of thousands of Mexicans, Salvadoreans, Hondurans let alone Indians and Chinese will set off shock waves that will echo for generations. You can't be drafted if you're undocumented for one thing so that will have to be sorted out. This will apply all across NATO as well.
3) Millenium 7* has dropped another video and it's rather good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrkdKVolikI
Ukraine: Russia Run out of missiles! Answer, no it won't, it may slow down it's attacks, but it's military power is growing not shrinking.
4) Peace be with you, good luck and keep up the good work.
They’re looking for a Pearl Harbor. FDR provoked it to pull the US out of economic malaise and to enter the war at the behest of the bankers and empire builders. Biden and co are tempted to the same. Of course the USA of 1940 is not that of 2023 militarily, economically, or socially.
I wouldn’t be so sanguine on hitting Russia proper especially with missiles and not the pin prick drones until now. The risk is not political instability or reduction in government popularity but increased demands of escalations either in Ukraine or outside of it. Asymmetric parallel responses are out of the public eye no matter how effective so they won’t register as much.
The three points of escalation only contain one that matters, hitting NATO territory. The first, if NATO troops are in Ukraine in any capacity they are fair game. That’s to be expected in a war zone and Russia already signaled that with respect to Poland. The second, downing a manned recon aircraft in the Black Sea is a step further than the unmanned they already did however depending on what happens right before (e.g. a strike on a military installation that causes real damage and assigning targeting and redirection functions that directly caused it) should give ample reason as these assets are part of the offense which makes them legitimate targets even outside Russia’s maritime borders.
Ultimately though I think Russia should, and has been, preparing for a direct conflict with NATO. Clearly the only path to saving Ukraine from total collapse is for NATO to directly get involved and Russia has been preparing for this since at least June 2022.
When you hear Russia designating clearly (officially) actions that would require a NATO territory response (i.e. new and unambiguous red lines) is when you know they are ready to destroy NATO’s army in direct conflict.
It would be a grave mistake for NATO to cross them.
Funny but I just mused that the Heritage Foundation's annual assessment of the US Military is usually published in October where it will very likely score lower than last year.
On the Public-Private Partnerships MIC ploy, that will never fly because of the outrageous amount of corruption endemic to what already exists. And the newly drafted soldiers will need weapons that work and many of them given the projected loss rate--weapons that work now mostly missing in action.
The main problem for NATO is that all this thinktank content is just schlock put out to justify them getting paid for decades of equally poor work.
These are... what's the favourite westoid appropriated Russian words? Ah right, apparatchiks. The system is rotten to the core, rife with bureaucracy and legacy money sucking staff. Their job isn't to come up with new strategies and insights. Their job is to create an ILLUSION of that work being completed.
And that's really what NATO is all about now.