Congratulations Frantic, first again. It seems as though the Russian game plan is finally becoming clear. Belusov as Minister seems to be paying off. Even with Ukraine's attempt to hit their economy hard and destabilise the people the Russians seem to be steaming ahead with their stand off weaponry development. Every month seems to be a new system coming into production. I wonder when the US will finalise their hypersonic missile? It's been a long time coming.
Thank you. I seem to have consistently been at the right place and at the right time, when these last few new Simplicius' issues were released.
Belusov's nomination finally paying off sounds like a long-yield investment by now. In fact, I currently barely remember the name of Shoigu, the inner member of Putin's circle former defence minister, if it had not been uttered many times in contempt in Prigozhin's memorable old rants.
Indeed the Banderol appears to be a good no-frills cheap soviet-style missile for the sake of a swarming stand-off attack.
The US need to solve the problem of finding out the correct ablative materials to protect the surface of the missile from hypervelocity atmospheric friction, in order to develop their hypersonic non-ballistic missile.
It's been a lifetime they are trying without any success though, so I wouldn't hold my breath for their women and chino-indian scientists to succeed in some breakthrough any time soon. I wonder though why is it they have by this day consistently failed to steal the Russian technology for that, as I reckon theft is their best option.
The US need to solve the problem of finding out the correct ablative materials to protect the surface of the missile from hypervelocity atmospheric friction
----------
Or figure out how to use the energy of the plasma field formed around a hypersonic vehicle to both power and implement an ionic repulsion & steering system, mostly or totally keeping the atmosphere from even contacting/heating the vehicle.
Both the RF and Chinese regularly allude to some "new physics" of their weapons, rather than "new materials science" when touting these new hypersonic, high accuracy and maneuverable re-entry vehicle systems.
and why can't the Indian, Chinese and women rocket scientists employed at NASA, Northrop-Grumman, Lockheed-Martin or McDonnell-Douglas-Boeing come up with some reverse engineering of these Soviet "new physics"? It's not like they haven't had enough time.
ChatGPT tells me these Soviet supercavitation torpedoes were deafeningly loud, but does not say whether this drawback limited the torpedo effectiveness, ie it's easily detectable even by ear but is the ship capable of neutralising it then or is it a sitting duck by that point. This from the defensive side of things. From the offensive side, the loudness did indeed mess with the torpedo's own sonar, but we are not in the 1970s anymore so contemporary more advanced pathfinding technologies have probably solved the issue.
Anyways, who needs easily detectable torpedoes today, when other means of strike warfare (ballistic missiles, hypersonic cruise missiles, drones) can easily obliterate a naval task force of surface vessels? Oh I get it, submarines!
Belousov was a brilliant pick, an unimpeachable and analytical gigabrain is just what was needed. The type of men he will advance within the apparatus will and have transformed the VS.
Belousov is the pampered son of a Soviet communist economist apparatchik.
Curiously his father name was 'Rem' which is actually an acronym, for Revolution Engels Marx. Just imagine the trajectory of your life if you yourself were named like that, it's bewildering
Lem Belousov was a brilliant economist. He analyzed the USSR as not a socialist state, but a warped market economy captured by the design bureaus. “Pampered” would apply to all of your bosses
Belousov gives the impression of being haughty and po-faced. Most people infer from his mannerisms that he must be competent. People get subliminally convinced of this, because he projects the image of the minister of defence you'd see in a Hollywood movie.
And I bet he really is like that. He really sees himself as this cold and calculating technocrat. It's like boys when they sign up to university and imagine their future adult selves at work, and this image they concoct is invariably so stereotyped.
But this adolescent bubble, Belousov never had it burst by contact with harsh reality as most people do. Being the son of his father, he learned economics by osmosis. He also definitely took advantage of his father's connections since before starting his career.
Thus you will excuse me if I remain of my opinion that Belousov is in fact quiet the pampered character. Contrary to Putin and most of the inner circle, his life trajectory from cradle to grave has elapsed, and will continue to elapse (we can be sure) in total detachment from that of the common man in Russia.
This 40 days campaing was planned just before the September general elections in Russia, kind of electoral influence.
The next step would be some terrorist bombing campaign weekend before elections so on 10th September. Possibly Moscov and Petersburg metro trasport systems.
And at the same time false flag operation against NATO facilities on eastern flank, likely in Poland, a serious of bombings.
The last elections in Russia was Crocus City Hall terrorist attack with 149 dead and 500 injured. That was proved to be Ukrainian job. But the CIA knew well in advance about planns and warned American citizens living in Moscow
It's about time that every construction worker refuses to get out of bed at 5:00 in the morning and rebuild all that's destroyed by the will of those who live in the mansions. When is the world ready to shed those parasites?
I just want to talk about the Patriot Missiles. According to MIT professor Theodore Postol the Patriot missiles are not very effective in intercepting incoming missiles. In fact the PAC-3 is no better than the previous versions. In fact Dr. Postol has shown where the intercepting rate is less then 3%.
Theodore Postol, an MIT professor, has critically analyzed the success rate of the Patriot missile system, particularly during the Gulf War, estimating its effectiveness at only 2-3% against modern ballistic threats
Yes, Postol estimates the older Patriot interceptor rates in the Gulf War was between 0 and 3%. Could not confirm that any were successful. But Congress is only shown corporate propaganda for more orders, as the Pentagon is not fessing up as to the costs vs. uselessness of these Patriots. Top Pentagon generals have one foot on the MIC boards in any event. Utter corruption.
I too have seen the Postol analysis. I've seen different showings by him, to Deepdive, Larry Johnson et al, giving many different points of view to back up his thinking. He makes a very good argument.
Even if he is only partially correct, and for Gulf War 1, the US Congress accepted a mere 3% success rate, then it is a damning indictment of, firstly, the product itself; and, secondly, the American military that they can be so bamboozled. Or, that the military hierarchy is so corrupt.
It is well known that the only effective weapons of the military-industrial complex are the corruption of Congress, political parties, and the administration. A 100% success rate.
He also shows on YouTube that the latest PAC-3's are no better. If you haven't seen this it is explained through video's of incoming Iranian missiles that are coming in on Tel Aviv. He details what a person is seeing and explains when a Incoming missile is hit by a outgoing interceptor. It doesn't take 10 years of college to understand and see there are very few incoming missiles being hit and destroyed. In fact the video he showed there was 1 intercept and many misses. This is not rocket science. Each PAC-3 costs the taxpayers $4 million dollars and when they don't intercept more than 3% of the time the taxpayers should understand we have a no nothing burger interceptor and based on how much they cost we are losing not only in what they are designed to do but the manufactures are making tons of taxpayer money and the taxpayers get an additional cost and that is called inflation.
Exactly, we are being ripped off by Congress, whose members are awarded large campaign contributions by the companies who make these self evidently ineffective weapons, the Pentagon which is either completely corrupt, incompetent or probably both, and our national security is severely compromised due to starting and maintaining multiple ongoing wars with no viable means to win or end them. I am led to understand the Patriots are closer to $6 Million each. The only motives for these wars is to A) create massive profits for the MIC, politicians and generals and B) to serve the interests of a foreign entities' criminal, terror regime in Tel Aviv/Jerusalem.
Those who know about these things state, on condition of anonymity, that the Iskanders being "intercepted by UAF forces" are actually being taken down by random collisions with seagulls.
I shouldn't really tell you this - but that is precisely what they are doing, as supplies are relatively inexhaustible.
As you know, juvenile seagulls are instinctively drawn to peck at the yellow spot on the parental beak so as to induce the vomiting-up of fish; so when the adult sees the Red Star painted on the nose of the Iskanders, they automatically peck at it - with unfortunate results for them, but salutary results for any Ukrainians who happen to be on the ground below.
If a missile gets through the seagull line, a handfull of crumbs is thrown into the expected area of missile arrival, and the pigeons rise together in a cloud.
I very much doubt that a collision with any bird would stop or deflect a ballistic missile. Airbreathing jets can malfunction after a collision with birds, the re-entry vehicle with the warhead is a different matter.
"Most 60's era technologies are..........obsolete."
----------
Do you remember all the attempts to replace the several AR15/M16 variant weapon systems fielded by the US military?! Each of which spent millions in development and trials, then was not implemented since replacing all that would be "too expensive".
As of 2026, the oldest Minuteman III (LGM-30G) missiles still in active silos are roughly 56 years old. The first ones were deployed in 1970, they are still out there. Yes, they have had some upgrades. But STILL.
the PAC-3 is certainly not useless, with the Banderites and Zionist clamoring for me. But it takes 6+ interceptors to take on a single IRBM. It is no S-400
Or maybe this is great source of corruption for both Ukraine and US handlers. So far Patriots were notorious of successfully intercepting apartment buildings in Kiev when launched at steep angles
Well, I find Postol accurate. His analysis on the different podcasts is loaded with PowerPoint slides.
His predictions have been confirmed repeatedly.
But I acknowledge that I oppose US actions around the world. Maybe too much Berletic?
I find it strange that many, if not most, of the pundits I agree with used to be regulars on Fox. Like Tucker though they tell a very different story than the did then.
Likewise, I find myself very jaded with the so-called “progressives “ I admired years ago. Rachael Maddow for instance. I’m sure many of you never heard her until she moved to MSNBC and morphed into the shill she is now.
My brother in law subscribes to the WSJ. I’m visiting. Interesting perspectives on current events. They almost sound reasonable. 😀
I have always taken what Colonel Douglas Mc Gregor says is factual and he always explains specifics of his facts he presents. He has appeared on Fox News but just as a guest.
According to people whispering in military RU channels who work in the area, Ukraine never ever ever shot down single Iskander, not to mention any hypersonics. They outright lying. Only things they sometimes shot down were slower cruise missiles like X-101, which is actually doable target for Patriot.
According to people whispering in military RU channels who work in the area, Ukraine never ever ever shot down single Iskander, not to mention any hypersonics. They outright lying. Only things they sometimes shot down were slower cruise missiles like X-101, which is actually doable target for Patriot.
Even disregarding the obvious exaggeration by Ukraine in everything they do, the Patriot situation in Ukraine is different than Israel or US bases in the ME.
Postol has talked about this. If you are targeting the Patriot system itself, the capability for Patriot PAC3s to intercept even hypersonic missiles is significant to high.
The reason for this is because the speed of the missile is not actually the governing factor - what matters is the angle and distance the interceptor has to go in order to intercept, which in turn is expressed as the amount of lateral force required for an interception which an interceptor in turn must tolerate. In more simple terms: the further away the target for an incoming missile from the Patriot system, the harder it is for a Patriot to intercept it. Incidentally, this is very likely why the Kinzhal, for example, does a climb and dive onto the target - it doesn't just increase penetration but also makes interception much, much harder if the target is a defense battery.
In Ukraine, Russia consistently takes shots at the Patriot systems - having destroyed launchers and radars on multiple occasions. So from the above, it is likely that said Patriots successfully intercept incoming missiles even if hypersonic.
But in Israel, Iranian missiles were rarely, if ever, targeting the Patriot (or David's Sling, or Arrow, or whatever) defenses - they were targeting specific strategic assets. So interception rates are likely much, much lower.
Iran has also gone a different route than Russia in terms of making its ballistic missiles harder to stop. Russia went with hypersonic or short range ballistic, but Iran instead built in a variety of anti-defense capabilities into their missiles. We have seen these ranging from showers of flare-like submunitions to engines built into the warhead itself (with fins on the warhead) to both accelerate after booster separation and to maneuver. Postol has shown pictures of these Iranian warhead + booster engine setups, and also video where later generation Iranian missile warheads are actually circling around a target vector. Postol has also said that this circling capability alone makes interception impossible with any present known systems.
hopefully you can understand how stupid you are....the PATRIOTS DO NOT DEFEND THEMSELVES, they defend a COLOCATED POINT TARGET of the missiles! Your statement of "themselves" is inaccurate and needed clarification. If you do not desire your statements to be clarified then try being more precise!
JFC. Hopefully you are capable of understanding this.
It would be laughable, if it were not so sad, just how dumb you are.
Especially given the freely accessible video of multiple Pac2s and Pac3s missing incoming Iranian missiles, hitting the US base that said Patriot batteries were protecting.
The Patriot system was originally developed to provide air defense against aircraft. It still does so just fine both operationally and economically.
And it works fine operationally against drones although the economics of spending $2M to $3M missiles to destroy $20K drones is dubious.
The drone equation also applies for most cruise missiles.
The problem is that the attempt to up-engineer the system to work against ballistic missiles has clearly failed both operationally and economically.
As for putting them everywhere: that's just the MIC at work. It is like the pharma industry - they overcharge domestically to pay for what development costs there are but make pure profit overseas.
The problem is that Pac3s are slower than the Iranian and Russian ballistic missiles that they target.
Being slower doesn't mean you cannot intercept, but it does mean that there is no margin for error. Iron dome, for example, you can see in videos where they miss drones but can catch them from behind.
This obviously will never happen with Pac3s - and the additional problem is the targeting. Postol talks about this as well. If you are shooting at a ballistic missile just entering atmosphere - it takes 50 seconds for a THAAD or Pac3 to reach the rough intercept zone. 50 seconds is a long time - a non-purely ballistic target can easily maneuver (deliberately or no) outside of the narrow window where the THAAD or Pac3 onboard targeting and final approach system can be successful.
A Pac 3 missile will cost $3.7 million with a 38 month lead time. While a Shahed or Geran can cost $50k which can made by the hundreds every day. Game over
" PACs aren't used against shaheds or Gerans. PACs are used against ballistic missiles." Not exactly. That they cost less, fly subsonic and carry a smaller warhead doesn't mean that they can't kill a Patriot control trailer and the guys sitting in it.
That's the reason when drones like Gerans are inbound toward a site defended by a Patriot the Patriot shoots, because it doesn't know if the Geran isn't going to peel off to dive into the Patriot. The guys sitting in that control trailer don't want to get killed, and they don't give a shit if they have to shoot off million dollar missiles to save their own asses. I'd do the same and I bet you would too.
Look at the famous video of the Patriot battery being killed by low-cost drones: the most gripping part of the video is how the Patriot shoots off all its missiles in a desperate attempt to defend itself. But it gets overwhelmed. That's the same strategy Russia uses against Patriots everywhere: they send cheapo ordnance at the Patriot that force the battery to expend its load on defending itself against cheapo missiles and then it has nothing left when the big iron arrives to wipe it out (or, to wipe out the target it was defending).
There have been ukrainian blogs and videos about mainly Pac-2 but also Pac-3 shooting at Geran, mainly Geran-2 and higher. The newer interceptor drones specialized on Geran-1/2 were praised to end that waste (though they fail on Geran-Seeker and mesh steered groups).
.
And your conduct may be appropriate for a pimp in a slum whorehouse, but definitely not here. If you have references to be worth to be discussed, go ahead. Else shut up and go to people of your lack of manners and education.
there've been LOTS of examples of dumb things being done but PACs are not being shot at Geran except in VERY limited circumstances
if YOU have references, then YOU post them...but you didn't...neither did he; he had bullshit assertions, as you do.
The fkin interceptor drones did not substitute for PACs....you morons don't even know what system Ukanus even has and that "Patriot" is BY NO MEANS their most abundant or primary AD system. Because all the conversation is about Patriot, that's ALL YOU KNOW and ALL YOU THINK EXISTS.
Ukranus got MANPADS and skyranger flak guns and stuff like that LONG BEFORE interceptor drones
Speak only for yourself JoKa, do not take the liberty of speaking for plural others. Especially do not attempt to speak for "we all" on a website like this. Just some friendly advice going forward.
PACs are well known to cost 3 to 10 X the price of their typical Iranian made MRBM targets, even the US government publicly says so. Also, US/Israeli interceptor doctrine is to fire 2 interceptors at each incoming target to give a better success rate.
Coupled with very low US production rates on their more capable AA missiles, it is a perfect storm of fucked.
The whole point of Postol argument is that Patriot DOESN'T work against ballistics. It's works against plane like targets, like planes(duh), drones and cruise missiles.
Considering that Russia and Iran went fully ballistic (pun intended), US right now is at catastrophic disadvantage.
And going ballistic against Russia won't help - S300/350/400 have no problems intercepting ballistic weapons, and S500+ meant to intercept hypersonics, tests already being done (no production data - air defence is most secretive RuMod branch)
That's a really good piece, and I mostly agree with your conclusions. The Patriot is not useless, but it's really not very good compared with leading-edge air defense systems like the S-400/S-500, which are tested under operational conditions against a realistic threat. Testing in the west is expensive, and there is little incentive to have a test result in failure; consequently, the dice are loaded in favour of a successful intercept against a relatively-dumb, non-maneuvering target. But realistic testing against the equipment a peer enemy will be using, when successful, builds confidence in the weapon's capability.
It is important to note that the PAC-3 is a kinetic-kill warhead which must score a direct hit in order to down the target. It cannot afford to miss by even a little, because it does not dispense a cloud of shrapnel like earlier versions.
There is no such thing as 100% intercept rate. When ATACMS and HIMARS data was analysed intercept rate skyrocketed to way over 95% with 2 interceptors. And it's includes S-300/350 and TOR. All slip ins after that was result of hits outside of coverage.
Yes, I will take both RuMOD word for it and from people who work in the area and share bits on specialized military channels on telegram.
as if they would NEVER LIE...wtf....a country that's banning telegram to limit posting of damage videos from AFU strikes...same shit Ukranus did. LOL
but they ALWAYS tell the truth...bc it's what you WANT to believe
Let me clue you in you stupid mfer- RF MOD lies.
I can prove it too- Onyx is claimed BY RF MOD with 1000km range yet it has NEVER, NOT ONE FUCKING TIME, EVER been used on a target in W Ukranus or ANYTHING even at 600km. This is prima facie evidence that it does not have the claimed range. RF lies ALL the fucking time about weapons systems effectiveness and morons like you lap it all up
I've seen it but I'm not convinced. Clearly the US operated Patriots in the middle east have a higher success rate than Ukraine. I think this could be explained by the US having better trained operators, more radars tracking the target and longer distances. But the Patriot system is definitely underperforming. I would like to add the even Russia struggled the most against ballistic missiles like the ATACMS, the shorter distant, which means shorter reaction time, no forwarded radar in Crimea the Russian interception rate was lower against those. Maye now the Russian AD systems are updates and more effective, we can't tell as Ukraine run out of those it seems.
You say "clearly" had a better rate?? Really, based on what? Media reporting?? You people need to admit. We in the US and /or the collective west are the most propagandized population in the history of the world. I read these comments - Well, Ukraine claims they are much better" Are you people serious?? Ukraine and Elensky have been proved to lie about everything. Ukraine's killed in Action total goes down the more Ukraine is destroyed and you think they will tell the truth about air defense.?
Knocking down 25% isn't realistic. *At best* the interception rate is only 3% to 5%. The basic problem is that the Patriot is a really old system with shitty performance. PAC 3 doesn't move that needle anywhere near as much as it has to in order to get more intercepts against modern ballistic missiles.
None of this is anything new, because the physics of the matter haven't changed. Interceptions of ballistic missiles have always been far more difficult and far more costly than building and launching ballistic missiles, and that goes back to the 1950's when the US first started spending endless billions on missiles to intercept inbound ballistic missiles. All of those programs also were miserable failures in all tests that weren't totally rigged with absurdly non-real world circumstances to cover up the truly awful performance in real world situations.
All that, by the way, was at a time when there was nearly infinite money for interceptions because they were trying to intercept inbound nuclear warheads. That despite spending limitless funds they had such near-zero success is not a good sign for relatively funding-limited technology (if you can use that to describe a hand-built $3 million missile) success rates against large numbers of improved, agile ballistic missiles like Iskanders (a truly fine such ballistic missile).
IF you bothered to pay attention, I never mentioned a "percentage" This is what lunatics do, they begin arguing against nobody. My point stands, a 4 million dollar missile that needs a minimum of 2 missiles for a single target, BUT the reality that anyone with eyes has seen Patriot launches of multiple, multiple launches to hit air. The only result is huge profits for MIC and all the corrupt Govt's and their lapdog media who are pushing this fabulous "air defense" Why does Trump and the west tell baldface lies?? Because the citizens believe every lie.
Everybody uses atleast 2 interceptors for a single target. It's pure math, the farther you from 50% and closer to 100% from single interceptor, the better bang second interceptor provides. It's meant to intercept things, after all, not rolling dice
Nope, that claim is part of western made up propaganda about Korea.
Western people are most propagandized, there is logical flaws and contradicting information even in western propaganda and people still buy it how much dumb can you be?!?!?! you dont even need to be in contact with non-western media to see that western media is pure BS.
"We intercept 90% of everything" also "we need to give electricity, fuel, food, weapons to ukraine" why? because you did not intercept a thing maybe?
They are also very old weapons and in some cases they utilize hardware designed in the 60's and continue in use, because it would be too costly and impact the bottom line. There you have it and why the USrael Empire is in the arc of sunset.
Which doesn't explain why interception rates have plummeted as Ukraine has run short of Patriots, nor does it explain why Ukraine is begging for more.
That said, if Ukrainian air defenses are a depleted as claimed, Russia should be using this opportunity to run riot over the entirety of Ukraine, destroying transport and infrastructure at will.
Uhh...Russia is running a pussy riot all over the Banderan territories, on the ground and in the skies. It is also using more hypersonic missiles than before. That's mostly for PR I think. NATO realizes that it will run out of Banderans before Russia runs out of missiles.
Hunting trucks individually with fighters and bombers is a waste of time and resources. Most of the Banderan transport is done by rail. Russia targets the rail hubs.
They are not totaly depleted, they have probably couple of rockets for jucy targer or self-defene; it would be dumb to use aircrafts.
But I would like for usa to give benderists F-35, F-22 and B-2 to flay over Russia with impunity like they are doing over Persia, also parking CBG 5-10 km away from Iran shore opening Hormuz strait while Phalanx CIWS and RIMs take down all threats is so impressive, very powerful and advance.
What explains why Ukraine is begging for more is that the US has nothing better, and nobody else has interceptors in quantity. That doesn't mean Patriot is good, necessarily; it means it is better than nothing, which is what they've got now.
Why would Russia risk manned aircraft when it can achieve the same destructive effect with missiles and drones? Does it need battle-damage assessments? What does it have satellites for?
You report that intercepts of incoming missiles from Russia have 'plummeted'. What support do you have for that? Western media reports directly from the desk of the Ukrainian General Staff? The same individuals who sometimes reported interception rates which exceeded the numbers of missiles and drones fired? So far as I have seen, all the interception stats published in the western media were sourced from the Ukrainians. All. Ukraine regularly claims to have shot down all but an insultingly-tiny proportion of the incoming attack, but then later reports serious battle damage and destructive fires. And I expect you will have noticed that non-combatant casualties as reported by Ukraine have not gone up - in fact, the ratio of one dead person for every thirty missiles and drones fired has been pretty constant, while the damage experienced suggests that Ukraine was not having such stellar success as it claimed all along. It likewise suggests Russia is striking surgically to damage infrastructure and capability rather than to cause massive casualties.
1) aircraft carry FAR MORE destructive firepower than a missile. Are you this effing unaware of the Su34's loadout? No more need for UMPK with air superiority...jfc what a stupid statement, "the same destructive effect."
2) aircraft are a lot CHEAPER to operate than these missiles cost
for the LOVE OF GOD, STUDY the effing AFU's AD portfolio
the patriot is NOT THEIR ONLY SYSTEM. And its ability to shoot shit down does NOT depend on the presence of PAC interceptors! It is part of LAYERED AD which can illuminate and provide guidance to other missile systems!
NASAMS is there in Ukranus and WILL shoot down RF birds - it is their PRIMARY AD system because AIM120s are abundant!
If AIM120s are that abundant, why is Russia not using missile to destroy launchers (since an AIM-120 is of no value against fast missiles), now that Patriots are depleted?
these are very hard to destroy...you're not gonna get them other than with a loitering munition if the opponent doesn't fuck up.
Man, I don't want to be rude here, but do you understand layered AD? The radar need not be next to the launchers...they can be anywhere. Launchers can fire and move. Once the missile is aloft, datalink guides it- you don't even get a spike warning aboard the plane, it's TWS and whatnot.
I mean, man, this is how packs of F35s operate, how everyone operates, how Mig31s took R37M shots from extreme range...one system provides the track, the other takes the shot, pukistan's AWACS was the guidance for every one of their AA missiles in their rafale shootdowns incident
The AN/MPQ-53/65 can be in one place data networking does a handoff to a NASAMS truck, a literal Humvee that can drive to a spot and send up an AIM120...the truck then drives away. The missile is course corrected by the control station or other repeaters to ensure datalink. It's how RF's layered AD works too unde
They never had good intercepted rate, it's pure vomit of numbers to look good. They even claimed they downed Kinzhal and had mayor of Kiev to do a selfie against some weird gizmo-like-missile.
Now they can't lie anymore, because they literally have no missiles to shoot down things - it will be too obvious.
If Patriots were as useless as people here wish, Ukraine, Israel and others would not be begging for them, and Russian missile attacks would not w more effective when Patriots ere depleted.
Theodor Postol was talking about the Patriot 1 thru 3 missiles. He clearly shows with video that the Patriot is not as accurate as the mfg and military is saying. It's a waste of money. Go to You Tube and watch and listen what he has to say. The taxpayer money wasted by the MIC is beyond comprehension.
I really honestly DO NOT CARE what this ONE PERSON says.
There is a MAJOR difference between "not as accurate" and 3-5%. And you people do this shit EVERY TIME when you're called out. I am not going to say the PAC3 is any silver bullet but it is FAR MORE effective when employed properly than 3-5%
In GW1, yes it was pathetic. GW2 likewise. Ukranus has done more to upgrade it than anyone bc they get to shoot at BMs every night basically. Early on they needed the entire magazine to try to hit a Kinzhal; they are much better now due to upgrades in tactics AND software
I didn't come up with the percentage it was a professor at MIT. If you have a television and can assess YouTube look up the video where is shows how he calculated the 3%. I find his information very convincing on his method and his result. I assume a person at MIT has a brain and would be better than any military guy trying to impress the general public on PAC-1,2,3. The government should be embarrassed over this because when the taxpayers understand what it going on, it might create some changes in Washington. So, I strongly suggest you go to the source.
dude. you need to stop following me all over this forum to post responses
call me a clown, you get that type of response. Tell me you were alive when the GW1 happened - 1991 - and then tell me PAC3 missiles existed and all of this...you're an uninformed BUFFOON in that case.
Sure, i misread your earlier comment, somehow substituting 'patriot' for PAC3. My mistake.
However you are a deeply unpleasant idiot who continually wades into topics you don't understand firing off insults left right and centre like it somehow makes you thes big man. It doesn't.
This Patriot "ineffective" rate is for ballistic missiles. Patriots must never have been designed with them in mind, or it is just too difficult mathematically and physically to attack ballistic missiles successfully—they go to fast and now some are maneuverable in flight.
The PATRIOT was originally designed to intercept aircraft, which it is fairly effective at doing. In March, 2003, a PATRIOT destroyed a British Tornado, killing the pilots and an F-18 was destroyed the next month.
I think DR Postol did say the $3,000,000 PATRIOT has a decent record for intercepting $20,000 Gerans.
Since the United States can print unlimited quantities of money and force others to accept it, yes, cost is no object when there is something that the oligarchs want.
We have pretty much hit our limit for unlimited printing and forcing others to accept our cash. Currently, we are propping up the GCC through unlimited credit lines and Japan by selling euros to buy yen. We will probably need to start propping up South Korea with some half-assed legerdemain in a few weeks and the UK and the EU in a couple of months.
Treasury yields are rising. That means bond prices are falling. Bond prices are falling because nations are 1) reluctant to buy US treasuries and 2) Nations are selling US treasuries (specifically Japan).
According to the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, the Patriot PAC-3 is a kinetic-kill warhead similar to the THAAD missile, rather than blast fragmentation like earlier versions. It must score a direct hit on the incoming missile to stop it. The PAC-3 can be quad-packed so that modified launchers can carry 16 rather than 4 older versions, but the PAC-3 is still exorbitantly expensive at $4 Million each.
Hit-to-kill doctrine argues against reducing salvo size to save missiles, as a one-to-one kill ratio is high-risk. The Patriot missile's maximum speed is around Mach 5; the Iskander cruises at Mach 6-Mach 7, and while it slows for the terminal phase it also executes evasive maneuvers. It could still work against a direct closing target, but in a crossing-target scenario Patriot is too slow. The MPQ-65A radar tops out at around Mach 5 for target speed as well.
I would be skeptical of Patriot's reported performance in Ukraine, as I see they are still citing that supposed destruction of an A-50 aircraft over the Sea of Azov with Patriot. The Sea of Azov is the shallowest sea on the planet, with a mean depth of only 23 feet and a maximum depth of 46 feet. The A-50 aircraft stands over 48 feet tall on the runway, and there is nowhere in the Sea of Azov the wreck could lie invisible from the air. But no photograph of the wreck has ever been produced. The west typically just reports whatever it is told by Ukraine.
Ukrainian 'observers' in Israel professed to be appalled at the wastefulness of American crews blowing off a half-dozen interceptors to stop a drone or a relatively unsophisticated, slow missile. And they might have a point if 'Ukrainian doctrine' were different. But that would imply the Patriots in Ukraine are controlled by Ukrainians, and nobody believes that.
I don't know but I'm guessing some of the guys on here bringing the conversation down to schoolyard level are trying to compensate for mostly shooting blanks themselves 🤣
FWIW the WSJ had a cryptic article about Northrop ramping up production for mor AD missiles. It wasn’t clear if it was for THAAD or Patriot. Martin was mentioned. Northrop gets $3B Martin— $35B. 7 years. To make “hundreds of interceptors” a year.
There are more than 2. The article also mentions L3Harris. Given the way defense companies work, I’m sure there is some production in at least 30 states.
And to add insult to injury a substantial setback is waiting for America in Iran as well. President Xi double-crossed our beloved President in America and starts sending major numbers of MANPADS to Iran. This one step almost guarantees a major improvement in Iran’s chances in this war. This is a repetition of Reagan’s act in Afghanistan (Stingers) and it will twist the war in Iran’s favor.
Actually, the US Stinger shipments to Afghanistan mostly cancelled out the Russian superiority enjoyed by using helicopters for transportations there and forced their army to sit in their garrisons. On the positive side Russian soldiers worked out the details of making vodka by using the cooling systems of their trucks, managing staying alive and being happy at the same time. However, they lost the war.
MANPADS are welcome, but what was required, if president Xi was serious about his own communist party ideology, was to do what Mao would have done, i.e. send a whole lot of HQ-XXs with the crews as well as a triple digit number of J-20s to close the sky over Iran. Plus some YJ-20s to send the US carrier groups to the bottom of the Indian Ocean.
Exactly, you little armchair generalissimo. And tell your mommy to make you something good to eat so you’ll have the strength to keep spreading your “wisdom.”
I get the sense the Iranians do not want this 'help' from China or Russia. Sure they will purchase some material but Iran looks to be in the driver's seat so why share that glory with China or Russia. I also think if Iran accepts big hardware from someone they will not have 100% freedom of action, which Iran wants.
The way this is going it will be Russia and China asking to buy drones and ballistic missiles from Iran, not the other way around.
It seems that the Persians are a very proud people and sometimes to their own detriment, but I have great respect for them in spite of that. Sure beats the lying sacks of shit in the USSA and their narcissistic POS leader.
They didn't lose the war. They were able to secure a more stable government and executed a planned and organised exit from the country. It was two or three years later that the government failed and the rest is history.
Western PR convinced everyone that Afghanistan was a disaster for the Russians and a total loss - simply not true. What really happened, unlike America who most often invades and stays, Russia came in to do a job, did it and left.
Yeah, it was a pretty complicated story as I recall. I did not pay too much attention to the details there but I noticed that the Stingers gave a major advantage to Regan’s ‘Freedom Fighters’. I understand it was a difficult war for the Russians at the end just like for the US. No accident they call the place ‘The Cemetery of Empires’.
Until people in the USA reasoned that one day those Stingers - or domestic builds thereof - might be targeted at their own assets, and set about to buy the unused ones back. Which the jihadis had gotten for free, as far as I know.
It's worth noting that the US Government has been trying to buy back the unexpended Stingers since the 1990's. The propellant in all remaining missiles would have expired years ago. So there must be some other feature they figure is still worth protecting.
With historical hindsight and a newly developed understanding of capitalist greed, the stingers were just a way for the MIC to rip off American taxpayers. The movie, “Charlie Wilson’s War “ was produced to promote the narrative that “Russia is evil and must be opposed “.
One would think that after over 100 years of that lie, Americans would begin to “get it”. But perhaps the propaganda remains effective until one reaches 65 and still maintains a reasonable level of mental competence.
Or, perhaps it has something to do with buying into “Capitalism “. Holding diametrically opposed ideas that cannot be reconciled.
I don’t see Xi’s actions as a betrayal of Trump. Rather self-defense.
I can't remember the documentary's name, but it illustrated how different sides learnt the wrong lessons. The Americans learnt that all they had to do was supply weapons to win a war. The Mujahideen learned that infidels could not stand against the righteous. Russian military reports at the time barely mention the stingers, while domestic financial collapse forced the USSR to withdraw.
Correct. The Afghan government of Mohammed Najibullah took over from the Soviets and remained in power through five years of brutal warfare against the Mujahideen. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, they ran out of resources (oil, grain) and could fight no more.
Yep, that's the "stable government" according to communist lovers. And apparently "stable" is something positive - but only when it comes to communists being able to hold on to power.
Perhaps you will be surprised by Russians’ contribution to higher education in Afghanistan during the war. The country had its first cohort of university-trained female medical doctors. The democracy-spreading US had made this fact disappear.
The Soviets also built the Kabul polytechnic university. That was Anathema for western usurers in charge
Um, what? The Soviet Union didn't lose in Afghanistan? LOL It was a military quagmire and the "stable government" they left behind was as "stable" as the one the U.S. installed. It was inevitable that the communist murderers would lose power to the Afghan uprising. The slaves hate communist slave masters. But people like you still dream of being one.
After decades of digging into the depths of horror people call communism I watch armies of people with limited understanding boldly marching toward another chapter of the commie dream-land. I know what did and what will happen to them. In the 21st century those who do not understand commie history are submitting to the global extermination plan. The funny thing is they just keep marching. I am done trying to save them.
I was about to make this very comment. They didn't flee the country and have people hanging on helicopters like America in Vietnam and in Afghanistan is 2021. They left Afghanistan with a government that lasted three years before it fell.
Kon a fair argument can be made that the explosion in Opium and thereafter Heroin production was a huge contributing factor. The $$$ that came rolling in paid for a lot of "off the books" projects and greased useful palms in buying the allegiance of useful Warlords. I even wonder if the decline in production has at all contributed to the growth of Fentanyl on the Street and it's deadly effects.
It is an unfortunate and grudgingly-acknowledged fact that the most effective group at eradicating opium production in Afghanistan was the Taliban, who basically wiped it out in two years. I guess somebody in America didn't like that, although to be fair there was not much to like about the Taliban.
Do you have a link to the US-China agreement that China agrees not to supply Iran with weapons? As far as I know, there is none. Maybe the sales were in response to America selling weapons to Taiwan.
I do not remember any formal agreement and likely there wasn't any. On the other hand I clearly recall Trump quacking about some sort gentlemen's deal concerning the issue. Xi, quiet shamelessly, pulled this off before his US meeting with Trump. Actually, from a geopolitical view Xi's decision is completely logical. It is a critical interest for China and Russia as well not to allow a major Iran failure.
I would be surprised if China didn't supply Iran with weapons. In 2025, the Chinese foreign minister told Kaya Kallas they couldn't allow Russia to lose in Ukraine, because they knew that China would be next. The same logic would apply to Iran. Trump's statements are unreliable.
Iran is pretty independently minded - they refuse external help on a regular basis, though recently they have, as I understand it, relented somewhat. Certainly with the Russians and perhaps even the Chinese in certain areas. I've heard rumours in both ways as to whether Iran accepted air support from China.
China, Russia and North Korea have been cooperating with the Iranian missile program for decades.
The Shahab-3 Medium-Range Ballistic Missile (MRBM) was developed from the North Korean No-dong missile, which was developed from the Soviet Scud missile (which was developed from the German V-2 missile) in the 1990s.
China transferred their HQ-2 Surface to Air Missiles (SAM) to Iran in 1986 and then a technology upgrade, including production lines to turn them into the M-7 Surface to Surface missile.
Iran is now using the Chinese Beidou navigation (and targeting) system.
Russia cooperated with Iran to develop and manufacture the Shaheed/Geran one-way attack drones, now available in huge numbers.
We are really talking the basics of geopolitics there. ‘The enemy of my enemy….’ Russia and China just by visualizing the possibility of an Iran closely managed by the USA, sooner or later start acting out. Every one of these nations stand on thousands of years of political/military traditions and they are thinking 24/7. For China supplying Iran with hardware is an easy act because of their huge economy. By keeping the US out of Iran (just like in North Korea) China can literally avoid a major conflict.
Before we get all excited calculating what 500 Chinese MANPADS could do, please note that the Asia Times "multiple media reports" are actually multiple re-reports of a single Reuters report citing "three sources familiar with the deal".
I also checked the tree sources. The Chinese act is very substantial but if it is true it means most likely the start of major help, a serious commitment to Iran. The possibility of fake news is always there when we are dealing with limited sources at the early stages, but I tend to take this item for real now, until something else comes up. I do agree, the evidence on hand is on the weak side although dozens of publications joined and it is spreading like wildfire. Hard to believe that Reuters would go out on a limb but not impossible. Even the New York Times has picked it up:
I agree that there is evidence, but we cannot allow ourselves to slip from “there are claims that China has agreed to supply Iran with 500 MANPADS” to “China has supplied Iran with 500 MANPADS”.
And we must always remember that multiple repeats of the same claim are not multiple claims.
As the ancient joke goes: ‘We will see, said the blind man.’ Xi is looking at the whole of the US act against Iran as a series of events where the possibility of an accident/mistake that led to the weakening of their energy supplies is nonexistent. I also view things with an understanding that the present consequences were calculated and intentionally triggered. A total destruction of the oil exports of the Arab States would mean a lot to Trump.
Yes, and look what supporting people who shouted "death to America" whilst launching those Stingers got the US. Helping "heroes" like Gulbuddin Hekmatyar might be the single dumbest application of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" in history.
‘might be the single dumbest application of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" in history.’
I thought the first place was supposed to be held by the USA for building up the Chinese economy singlehandedly and keep doing that even after the Soviet collapse of 1991. Think Kissinger-Nixon ping-pong diplomacy.
American politicians don't think that far ahead, and the architect of the whole Stinger operation, the odious Charles Wilson said, "There 58,000 dead in Vietnam and we owe Russia one . . . I have a slight obsession with it, because of Vietnam. I thought the Soviets should get a dose of it . . . I've been of the opinion that this money was better spent to hurt our adversaries than any other money in the Defense Department budget".
Which is exactly the sort of petty-mindedness one should always suspect from American "statecraft".
Fake news. Iran makes their own MANPADS (Misagh) which have already demonstrated their battle effectiveness against a variety of US aircraft. They have a large trove of these scattered around the country, and troops who know how to use them. Why would they import a few hundred unproven MANPADS from China, which requires re-training of Iranians to use them, and risks a PR backlash for China? The story makes no sense at all.
The Chinese MANPADS in question have very high success rates in action. The weak point in the news is the limited dependable sources. The strength is in the logic of geopolitics: China and Russia has a very substantial interest to float Iran and they both demonstrated on numerous occasions they understand this need.
The MANPADS would become game changers for Iran if Orange Man decides to follow up on his favorite psycho-bobble and trigger a land war there. Land war spells lots of landings of planes and helicopters flying around, juicy targets for MANPADS.
With what purpose? I looked at technical details of several MANPADS and they fall short in distance. The speed of the missile also doesn't match those of fighter jets. They can be useful against cruise missiles, helicopters and drones but not fighter jets and bombers.
Iran's passive AD system is very effective against Reaper drones but here also the speed of the missiles is to slow for fighter jets. It is possible with the right angle, but US jets has EW and radars to detect missiles and can evade more easily.
Also hitting a fighter jet with a MANPAD seems difficult. The timeframe is short. Sometimes jets fly over and barely have time to spot them. You hear noise, see something coming and it's gone. I'm not 100% sure but I think MANPADS mostly rely on visual contact. China probably could deliver long range AD and produce enough to frequently replace them. We wil see if they hit the battlefield, if they do, China always is more cautious in those things. The Afghanistan part is true, helicopter are rendered useless against them.
The MANPADS would become game changers for Iran if Orange Man decides to follow up on his favorite psycho-bobble and triggers a land war there. Land war spells lots of landings of planes and helicopters flying around, juicy targets for MANPADS.
At this stage people want the US to invade Iran. We all ask if someone is 'that' stupid. To protect against close air support from helicopters and possible A10's? If the news is true, I expected Iran producing their own. For Iran to support their ground troops wouldn't something like Pantsir give better protection? But I find it hard to believe the US would do a land invasion. We will see, didn't Trump made a new threat today? We will see.
I'm sorry but the US has no chance in this war. War is about logistics. Iran announced from the start of this war that the US would have no staging grounds. Erbil and the GCC countries were all fair game from day 1. How the f#$k is the US going to stage and maintain a ground invasion when nowhere is safe. If Saddam was still alive we could visit him in prison and tell him what an idiot he is for letting the US spend 6 months of sending massive equipment and supplies into Saudi Arabia ensuring his destruction without ever lifting a finger to stop it. Really incredible. Not only does the US have to deal with nowhere being safe but they have to deal with the mountains and terrain of Iran. Can you imagine these idiots trying to take an Island. The cliffs and hills are stuffed with hidden artillery Iran has been placing there for decades. Nobody even talks about that. They just talk about missles and drones. Those islands have thousands of artillery pieces pointed at them. It is literally a suicide mission. Iran has been smartly preparing for this moment for decades. They watched and learned. They know how the US operates in the region. They've had a front row seat for decades
And if they do, the US assets there will be struck as Pakistan will be a participant in the war. Pakistan has ZERO interest in going to war with Iran on the JUSA's behalf.
Amassing that much manpower and materiel *cannot* be hidden.
500 MANPADS are not going to change anything. It's not much more than when germany sent a few helmets to Ukraine in the first stages of the war, back when they still feared Russia.
If everything stays floating with this news item Xi actually gave an informal indication of staying out of the Iran war, giving no help. Now, when Iran looks better and keeps up the fight, Xi commits to substantial help. Trump is following very similar tactics against Russia by arming Ukraine. It sounds like a ‘double-cross’.
Haha, funny! In reality it's the second or third most accurate assessment I have found. Most of the flaws of this analysis was corrected a couple years ago. I made similar mistakes, but good information on the state of Russian technology is hard to find.
Take the Orion system, solid heavy drone, tons of potential, but I thought it had achieved mass production 4-5 years ago, when in reality we've only had prototypes until mid 2025. Similar with the low orbit Russian satellite constellation. Part of the problem, for me anyways, was not fully understanding the capability of existing Russian military satellites and how important Starlink, chief amongst Western ISR assets, was for keeping Ukraine from crumbling.
In short, the Russian military was in worse shape in 2014 then the data I plugged into the algorithms. They've come a long way since, but plenty of mistakes along the way. Our Al Queda proxies in Syria along with the Turkish proxies demonstrated early on the importance of drones and the ineffectiveness of Pantsir systems in dealing with large drone numbers. It looks to me like the Russian general staff was somewhat asleep at the wheel. Had they been forward thinking, resources would have been poured into drone/counterdrone as early as 2013. Had they done so, Russian military objectives might have already been reached, instead they are still a couple years away.
Thanks for the riviting analysis, it really got me thinking.
Not much really. I use 25 year old SSDS data analysis software on a 20 year old G5 and build algorithms for this and that and see how predictive it is. Military analysis is one use, who is the greatest basketball player ever is another. It's a weird hobby.
One result I got back in 2023 was Russia would finish the war by 1st qtr 2026. Got a lot of flak from both ProRussian and ProUkrainian for that prediction. It was wrong, obviously, so need to tweak some things. Not knowing how far along various military technologies are is a weak spot for sure.
There was no real preparation for war between 2014 and 2022.
Even though they should have already been on a wartime footing after 2001, 2005 the latest.
The military budget in fact went down after 2016. There was a bump because of Syria, and the military actually wanted to go in there seriously, with large amount of armor, much more aviation, etc., but Putin vetoed it, so if it had been up to the military, the budget would have been increased much more. Then it went back down and Putin was very publicly proud of and bragging about that.
Compare and contrast to what Stalin did starting in the late 1920s...
Also, hardware is where the malignant effect of Putin's tolerance towards the continued existence of the Russian oligarchy is most directly evident.
Because a half-a-billion megayacht for a Russian oligarch directly translates into one less submarine being built. And there are many dozens of megayachts that the Russian oligarchs bought in the last 15 years.
Same thing with aviation -- Usmanov's private A340 cost half a billion. Meanwhile drones fly all the way to Chelyabinsk and now even further because there is no continuous AWACS coverage over the country to detect them.
How many A-50s could have been procured with the money the Russian oligarchy spent on private jets?
How many more strategic bombers, Su-57s, etc. etc. etc.?
I think Putin was mesemrized by the western orderly appearence with their ”rule based order” and seemingly endless resources and commodity to feed their materialistic peoples lusts. The Olicharky in Russia was even more greedy and lustful than their western and african counterpart although it seems that the ”disease” is the same in every nation.
Putin fell(?) for the US/NATO scaring of the Russian threat with strategic aircrafts and missiles. The truth is that the brunt of work has been done with about 40 old TU-95, Bears and TU-160 Blackjack of which they only have 15.
The likewise old TU-22 Backfire is down to 10 planes. The truth is that Russia doesnt have any strategic airforce to talk about and they trusted the ”Nukes” to much to have a calmkng effect on the western warmongers.
>The truth is that the brunt of work has been done with about 40 old TU-95, Bears and TU-160 Blackjack of which they only have 15.
And the neglect of the strategic bomber fleet is not even the real problem. Strategic bombers were mostly obsolete before Starlink (with Starlink they become useful again as a launch platform for ultra-long range air-to-air missiles of the kind the US will be developing now; ultra-long-range as in thousands of kilometers, not hundreds, for which you need a satellite constellation to track the targets that are currently safe deep in the other side's airspace).
The real problem was the INF treaty.
Which the US pulled out of in 2018. That is four years before the SMO.
So Putin had plenty of time to let Votkinsk loose on pumping up MRBMs and IRBMs at maximum production rates.
Same with the various other factories producing GLCMs.
Hasnt Putin pumped up MRBMs and IRBMs? All those Satan and Sarmats does no good if not used….
Strategic airforce may be obsolete in the future but they have proved to enable launching points nearer Ukraine than those launched from fixed or mobile launchers.
And yes, the INF treaty that Trumpie abandoned was a clear signal and notice not taken by smiling Putin.
>Hasnt Putin pumped up MRBMs and IRBMs? All those Satan and Sarmats does no good if not used….
Sarmats are ICBMs.
The Oreshnik is an IRBM.
But the problem is there was no lighter tactical ground launched missile in the 1000-2000km range that is cheap and mass produced. The Iranians have that, Russia doesn't.
There still isn't one -- there was supposedly a test of an Iskander-1000 to western Ukraine at one point, but that was nearly a year ago.
The Zircon performs that function now, but it is not exactly cheap. And they only started scaling production once the SMO started.
They can't generate a truly massive salvo.
>Strategic airforce may be obsolete in the future but they have proved to enable launching points nearer Ukraine than those launched from fixed or mobile launchers.
The problem with the airforce is that it is visible to everyone the moment it takes off.
What you need is the capability to launch very large salvos (as in hundreds and even thousands of missiles) with no warning, from ground launchers.
That means concealable TELs and ground-based VLS cells or silos.
**In mass numbers**
The INF treaty had made all that impossible, and the genius Putin stuck to it for half a decade after the US pulled out instead of unleashing the shackled for 30+ years Russian missile factories.
"I think Putin...." - always fun to hear from yet another Western Putin-fersteher. I know Putin-fersteher really means different thing, but this name still suits you :)
Saab340, GlobalEye type shit is the future. Nobody is building the rotating dome crap anymore. But RF doesn't seem to even grasp this.
they HAVE airframes...SJ100s etc., that could embark this thing. They HAVE flat panel phased array AESA radars...they should have the DSP stuff. For fuck's sake they could have put their Irbis shit into the cargo hold of a SJ100 and fiberglassed the panel and flown in one direction in overlapping routes with a fleet of half a dozen planes...CHEAP AF interim solution, augment with a 2nd set in the front, and had VASTLY better, unavoidable coverage than they have now.
Instead they did fuckall. They saw the materiel coming over from Rezsow....df did they do? All hands on deck for 1000km missile? Shit boss we can't build one buy from PRK or Iran? NO. They did with the Shahed but NOT a fucking missile that could reliably hit the border?
These failures are literally so asinine that they justify treason charges
I mentioned the A-50s because it is the one AWACS they did have already designed and produced.
Sure you can go into more modern solutions, that goes without saying.
Doesn't even have to be manned, in fact it would be better if it wasn't, both for scaling up production and operation.
>Instead they did fuckall. They saw the materiel coming over from Rezsow....df did they do? All hands on deck for 1000km missile? Shit boss we can't build one buy from PRK or Iran? NO. They did with the Shahed but NOT a fucking missile that could reliably hit the border?
What exactly are you going to hit? If it's just making holes into roads, Kh-22/32s would have done the job just as well. But it was never even tried.
Nukes are the only way to reliably seal the border anyway
Zircon and KH32 are listed as up to 1000km but they've never, ever been used in a strike at that distance....from which one can infer they cannot hit that far out.
You're going to hit border crossings and materiel. The port wasn't sealed off by nuking it; it was by interdicting ships
if that meant hitting cargo in Poland, so be it. The point of this is a PROMPT strike in response to space ISR- shortened kill chain
even if you could significantly *reduce* the flow, you'd be way ahead of the game. Imagine the 2023 offensive if Ukranus had *half* of the armor
The 2023 offensive was never meant to succeed. The goal was to normalize NATO's direct involvement, and that goal was achieved.
But for that the offensive itself had to fail.
If it was to succeed, then the frog would have jumped out of the slowly boiling pot, and that was not part of the plan.
Regarding range -- it is 1000 km from Kharkov to Lvov, but it is just 650 from Bryansk to the border.
Plenty of Kinzhals have been used to strike at Lvov, but no further. So my assumption has always been that there is a veto on ballistic and hypersonic strikes very close to the border, in order to not "escalate" too much. In fact cruise missiles have not hit within 30-50 km of the border either, with a few exceptions around Uzhgorod.
For some reason there is no such veto for Romania on the Danube -- strikes have been carried out right at the border there.
But that there is one for Poland seems the most likely explanation for why one of the most obvious target for conventional strikes -- the railway gauge changing stations -- has never been touched. Destroying those would halt rail traffic completely. For some time, yes, but then of course you hit it again once they build new ones.
I agree with your analysis with all the hindsight that has piled up since 2014.
Starlink was effective already in 2022 and Ukraine was well prepared with ISR and real-time battlefield communication and assessments. So if Rassvets is a successful counterproduct one can ask why Russia didnt put up their own LEO-satellites sooner. Geostationary satellites parked over the equator could not be used in the way low-orbit satellites can.
You don't counter it by putting something just like it but inferior in numbers.
Because that doesn't take away the enemy's first strike capability, which derives from both having Starlink and having encircled you physically. You have not similarly encircled the enemy so you have no strike assets positioned to take advantage of having your own Starlink
The only solution to the Starlink problem is to physically destroy it.
And that is not my radical opinion. Read Rogozin's numerous posts on the subject. He should know -- he was the head of Roscosmos and sounded the alarm about Starlink the moment Starlink was announced as intention, and he is the one battling the Starlink-guided drones out in the field today.
Exactly, you little armchair generalissimo. And tell your mommy to make you something good to eat so you’ll have the strength to keep spreading your “wisdom.”
>Part of the problem, for me anyways, was not fully understanding the capability of existing Russian military satellites and how important Starlink, chief amongst Western ISR assets, was for keeping Ukraine from crumbling.
ppl say this is a drone war.
ppl are stupid.
this is an internet/network war.
drone tech exists for decades but until recently they couldn't be reliably remotely controlled.
If the Pantsir, that I took to be Russia's primary short range AD system, is ineffective what is achieving the high intercept rates of Ukrainian drones?
However, its detection coverage is shitty compared to AWACS.
HAD RF made ANY inroads into AWACS they'd not be having the problems they are having but this is chalked up to leadership incompetence more than anything else
You are far too enamored with USA propaganda but you don't even realize it. You are convinced that the Nazi program was entirely and only focused on Jews. You have no idea that Nazis also hated Russians, Slavs, gypsies, etc. You only think that Nazis hated Jews. You are a very good little boy by focusing all of your attention on Jews, and only Jews.
If only Zelensky would not change the minister of defence and chief of army, surely he would win this campaign and also heavy influence Iran war with dron specialists.
This 40 days campaing was planned just before the September general elections in Russia, kind of electoral influence.
The next step would be some terrorist bombing campaign weekend before elections so on 10th September. Possibly Moscov and Petersburg metro trasport systems.
And at the same time false flag operation against NATO facilities on eastern flank, likely in Poland, a serious of bombings.
The last elections in Russia was Crocus City Hall terrorist attack with 149 dead and 500 injured. That was proved to be Ukrainian job. But the CIA knew well in advance about planns and warned American citizens living in Moscow
Russia will not denazify Ukraine, not demilitarize it, not change anti-Russian laws, and not stop NATO's eastward expansion. It has allowed the west to "normalize" bombing Russian cities and remove all the terror from the prospect of waging direct war with it. The SMO has failed in every important way. Judge Putin's "success" by measuring outcome against stated objectives.
Looks like it and many of us has asked the question of exatly HOW will Russia achieve those objectives when all we see is trenchwarfare in the Donbass and reactive strategic bombing of Ukrainian resources (arriving from Western factories and warehouses).
But, the Hebrew language did not exist 3500 years ago and the oldest known writings related to the old testament only date back to c. 2650 years ago, so your interpretations prove nothing.
Let's assume, as a concession, that you are correct.
Even so, we now have a document, 650 years before the event it speaks of, prophesying the death of the Son of God on a cross.
Let us further, look at the names of the ten patriarchs from Adam to Noah.
As well as individual Hebrew letters having meaning, the names have meaning too.
So chronologically, these names spell ot the sentence, "Man created mortal sorrow; the Blessed God shall come down teaching; His death shall bring the despairing rest and comfort."
These meanings exist - but they are also individually prophetic.
The individual whose name is translated as "His death shall bring" we know as Methuselah, who died in the year the Flood was sent.
So you are at liberty to argue over how long ago any of these things happened, but what you cannot argue about is what is encoded in the message - and God Himself clearly states that this is how we can tell that He is the One True God.
"Remember now the things of old, for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done."
What is flawed is your claim that the interpretation of a religious text written perhaps a thousand or more years later proves that the religion existed then.
So, a human being writes a coded message that states that the coded message itself proves that the subject of the message, God, is, in fact, the One True God. Sounds like circular reasoning to me. It also implies, if we accept the claim, that there must be other, untrue, Gods. Likewise, the commandment, "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me, " clearly contradicts the claim, "there is none else."
Well, I am sure you will have some tortuous, self-satisfying, explanation because, of course, it is only Islam's holy book that contradicts itself on every page.
Every religion has been weaponized by Imperialism.
Brits did it in India to put Hindus against Muslims (Pakistan), and even Muslims against each other (Sunni vs Shia), they also created the ethno-supremacist ideology called Zionism and founded their colony called Israel to put Jews against Arabs.
"Israel is a tool of Western imperialism. It was placed strategically in the Middle East to keep the Arab world fragmented and weak."
America's support for Israel is based on oil, not on any moral or humanitarian concern. The oil resources of the Arab world are vast, and the West wants to dominate them."
Not so - do you think the Brits weaponized religion so they could divide India?
Why would they do that?
It would be in their obvious interest to keep India united and under British control, which would mean minimizing any religious antagonisms - not exacerbating them.
And how could they do that?
The Brits had no influence on what each religion either believed or did.
If they wanted to play on religious antagonisms, they would supply one side or the other with arms and money to precipitate a civil war - which obviously, they never did.
They divided India because existing Hindu / moslem hatreds made a unified nation under the Hindu Gandhi impossible.
Still less would they divide Sunni and Shia sects - they already hate each other enough so that nobody needs to do anything to make them hate each other even more.
Your analysis is naive in the extreme, and very cliche'd.
Western imperialism did not create Israel - the Rothschilds did; as quid pro quo for supporting the British Crown; eg in buying the Suez Canal for £4 million, and for bringing the US into WW1, when Britain was a few weeks at best from starvation and capitulation.
The "ethno-supremacist ideology called zionism" has nothing to do with the Brits - rather, it is a direct expression of jewish ethno-supremacist thought, as expressed in the jews' "Talmud," where it states explicitly that "Even the best of the Gentiles must be killed, as even the best of snakes must be killed."
What keeps the Arab world weak is jewish money and intrigue via Mossad; which seeks to divide and conquer all Arab lands, and to use US military force in pursuance of that, so Israel can expand into the vacuum as part of their Greater Israel project, which surely even you must have heard about by now.
The British played the decisive role in the partition of India, which created Pakistan. As the ruling colonial power, they controlled the timeline and mechanism of separation.
Policy of "Divide and Rule" – British administration historically exacerbated Hindu-Muslim divisions (separate electorates in 1909, communal representation) which strengthened the Muslim League's demand for a separate state.
***
Failure of the Cabinet Mission (1946) – The British proposed autonomy for Muslim-majority provinces.
Radcliffe Line – The boundary was drawn by a British lawyer who had never been to India, with minimal consultation of local demographics. Its flaws (e.g., dividing Bengal and Punjab) caused massive displacement and bloodshed.
***
In short, the British did not merely "allow" partition—they actively engineered it.
but of course.. Rothschilds acted alone.. right..?
***
The most vigorous Zio engineers in the UK: Winston Churchill, Lloyd George, Lord Balfour, Mark Sykes. Serving Alfred Milner’s Round Table system. Liaison agent: Chaim Weizmann.
David Lloyd George, the UK Prime Minister from 1916 to 1922, was one of the 20th century's most pivotal Christian Zionists. His alignment with Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann is widely recognized by historians as the critical "sine qua non" period for the foundation of Israel.
***
Theodor Herzl, the founder of Zionism, began a series of diplomatic initiatives to build support for a Jewish state, appealing unsuccessfully to German emperor Wilhelm II and Ottoman sultan Abdul Hamid II. And only at the Sixth Zionist Congress in 1903, Herzl presented the Uganda Scheme, endorsed by Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain on behalf of the British government.
The Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British Government in 1917 during the WW1 announcing its support for the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine, then an Ottoman region with a small minority Jewish population.
Pax Britannia became Pax Americana after WW2. It is all part of globalism (Imperialism) that was carried out by the fascists of the 19th-21st Centuries.
U.S. Sen. Scoop Jackson started the project after 1967 to use Israel as a major U.S. proxy in the Middle East.
***
British and US establishments are closely intertwined, they're basically one and the same
Simply speaking, Brits are the wicked brain (Intelligence services/spy networks - colonial legacy) and the slush fund, and the U.S. is the brawn of the Global (Imperialist) Oligarchy.
CFR in the US and Chatham House in the UK. They are one and the same entity.
MI6 is part of "Five eyes". UK is a founding member of NATO.
Britain exerts influence through partial ownership of the FED. City of London is the headquarter of the global banking cartel. Besides, City of London basically runs all the main offshore funds:
What more is there to say when we have already covered the details repeatedly for several years now. All that needed to be said has already been said. But the conflict has lasted so long that communications in this comment section swirls into a kind of repetitive trap and redundant cognitive fixation like in the movie Groundhog Day. No opinions change, everyone digs in with their viewpoint, rinse and repeat as the conflict never ends. My comment above was my attempt to break out from this trap, but I still ended up with the same message said differently. 😂
Your well reasoned pragmatic thoughts remain appreciated, Mikey.
Yeah, why not scribble a MoU (let's call it Minsk 3), giving that most trustworthy nation the USA the opportunity to re-arm while it works out new ways to kill your children.
Russia gave peace a chance multiple times, and was consequently pissed on multiple times by the West's cretinous leadership.
That idea typifies where the expression 'throwing good money after bad' came from.
Russia won a great victory. Before the war Russia leased Sevastopol. The whole point of the war was to kick Russia out of Sevastopol. To bottle it up on the Eaat coast of the black sea. Make Crimea a NATO base. Block Russian shipping and trade into the Mediterranean and reduce Russian influence in Africa. This is per Rand policy papers and Brezinski's Grand Chessboard. It is why the West refused Minsk 1, Minsk 2, Istanbul, and planned the 2023 counteroffensive to break the "landbridge". This was a US war to break Russia ad bring back the Yeltsin years. Now Russia controls all of Crimea, the entire Azov coastline and is 2 cities away from taking over the donbas. If the war ended today it is a clear Russian strategic victory over the US and NATO
Fair points. But you must know that one side does not want peace at all. They want the utter destruction of Russia. That's why it is tiresome seeing so many comments by Russian officials and pro Russian alt media types about the smo and what it has achieved. We will only know if this war was worth it for Russia when it ends. Clearly, an escalation is what many in western elite want because it would justify some of the things they want to do domestically and internationally. People are too stupid in the west to realize this. They will fall for it hook line and sinker.
That's what happens when 50+ countries pour weapons, intel, satellites, money, mercs, command & control, diplomatic and PR support. Weapons alone amounted to 3x Ukraine's GDP.
I don't think there was precedent for such sock puppet like Ukraine in history. "Ukraine" is not a country at this point, it's UN-recognized PMC and concentration camp.
>The 250 number was given by Serhiy Flash as requisite for having 24/7 coverage. If Russia reaches that by 2027 as some estimate, then Russia will have its very own fully native “Starlink” system to control drones of any kind at all distances, without requiring Belarusian “relays”, repeater tricks, mesh networks, etc. That’s not to even mention the revolution it would have on simple Russian battlefield networked communications and integrated battlefield management systems.
Which will make what difference exactly?
The goal should be to shut down the Polish border.
Does Russia have the military-technical capability to shut down the Polish border now? Yes, it does. Has it done it? No, because of political reasons.
If it gains the capability to do it with long-range drones, will those political reasons go away? Not really.
So what difference will it make?
What difference has the little bit of loosening of restraints done so far in the last month? The record for drones fired into Russia within a single day was just broken again the other day. That number should be going down if what Russia is doing is effective, not going up. But it keeps going up.
There is a bit of an increase in the pace of territorial progress, but that is just compensating for the slowdown in the first half of the year. Taking 750 km2 in a month continues to mean an effective stalemate. And the bulk of that came from northeastern Kharkov, which is the least important area of the frontline.
Also, how will Rassvet-guided drones shut down the Polish border exactly? How will they reach there in the required numbers? Russian drone numbers have been at best at a plateau, if not decreasing; certainly they are not increasing. And they are not going to be firing them from Brest, because Lukashenko wants no part of this oligarch-kneecapped shitshow. So we will need high triple-digit drones to get all across Ukraine to get to the Polish border and strike trucks and trains there. Does that sound realistic?
It sounds to me more and more that you are part of Elenski's PR-campaign. Only that you passed the 400 day mark already, I give you that.
3 dead on a beach in Russia, tragic and an act of terror on civilians for sure but here we have more people dead in traffic accidents for comparison.
Your data about RF's drone numbers and abilities are interesting just based on what exactly? To me it's incredible how you always know the right way, never a shred of self doubt or consideration of what it means to run a country the size of Russia with 140 plus million citizens. To run an SMO over years and at the same time increasing the standard of living in your country is an unprecedented achievement by itself. Just so as thought.
Putin is again not a tsar, he doesn't do the work alone and so far there are discussions but obviously there is no better solution - like yours suggested - deemed worth to put into reality. Might there be reason for that, other than the oligarchs in Russia that are hold by an increasingly short leash, like in China?
>3 dead on a beach in Russia, tragic and an act of terror on civilians for sure but here we have more people dead in traffic accidents for comparison.
Yes, 3 dead on a beach in Russia. And many others dead elsewhere. Every single day.
This is complete dereliction of duty, outright treason in fact.
Because while Russian civilians have no physical security anymore, and not just Russian civilians, but as it turns out, key General Staff figures too, the enemy has ironclad guarantees from the Kremlin that there will be no missiles landing on their heads.
Make that make sense other than as Putin being a traitor?
You make sure that no drones fall on beaches in Russia by immediately sending a Zircon to wherever Zelensky is after that. Then whoever replaces Zelensky will have the choice of either not doing that anymore or testing Putin's patience again. If the latter, another Zircon flies to the right place (no matter where that palce is), and you rinse and repeat until there is nobody brave enough to kill Russian civilians.
That is what you are supposed to do as the Russian president with the *power* in your hands and the *duty* to protect the lives and wellbeing of your citizens.
Scott Ritter explained the agenda the other day; which revolves around an MI6 / CIA psyop designed to reduce Russia's internal resilience, as it cannot be reduced externally on the battlefield.
He cites Gilbert Doctorrow as being a prime mover in the plot.
So, individuals like Denis and GM "Work, brothers!" to undermine the state from within, by constantly sniping at decision-making about which they have no real clue.
We already know that GM seeks a restoration of the USSR, and if that comes, he will be well-placed to become the new head of the NKVD as his reward for services rendered.
One just wonders how are they supposed to undermine the Rus state from within writing essay comments on an English language blog, in English. A little bit silly.
Moreover, some of them are hypersensitive and quick to ban people. ;)
Anyway, here is an interesting Ukie paper about cognitive warfare:
the final goal being pushing Russia AND Europe to mutual destruction for the good of the anglosaxon maritime empire. GM is an embeded agent provocateur and everyone here knows it. But he is not the only one. They work in teams.
Substantial claims and arguments is just what I miss. All I see is lamenting and arguing for a total devastation of Europe & Russia.
While his words talk to the emotions very well, his suggestions all end in total war and even the use of nukes.
I translated a few of his arguments to my 89 year old father who was a kid when the boms fell on Berlin. He was terrified and appaled that people even dare to argue for a repetition of that horror.
Neither you or GM knows what war really means to normal people. You're disgusting creatures who offer other people of course, not yourself, to the horror of war - even if is by words only.
It is pointless attempting a counter argument, as he has no argument in the first place. It is not possible to reason someone out of a position that is not reasonable. He simply advocates extreme violence as the solution to everything. That is childish and simplistic and ignores reality.
Could you please elaborate how Russia can shut down the Polish border through air power alone? The Americans failed to stop the Ho Chi Minh trail despite having troops and the South Vietnamese army, they failed to close Taliban shipments over the Pakistani border. Israel struggles to stop arms reaching Hamas. What secret methods does Russia have? Please don't answer threaten Poland with nuclear missiles.
Obviously threatening Poland with nukes is one way to do it.
The other is to hit the railways and roads with 75-kt bunker buster missiles that will bury deep into the ground and then explode. Kinzhals and Zircons will do the job marvelously.
The Americans dropped 3million tons of bombs on the Ho Chi Minh trail, without effect. Vietnam is 50km wide at its narrowest, unlike the 535km of the Polish border.
Initially Russia did attack railway tracks, but it isn't cost effective. The tracks were repaired in 2 hours, and Kinzhals cost 10million, which is why they are used on high value targets. Dirt roads through forests are harder to monitor and disrupt.
I noticed the crater image you posted is from a nuclear test, not a conventional missile.
>I noticed the crater image you posted is from a nuclear test, not a conventional missile.
Did you even read what I posted? I explicitly mentioned "75-kt bunker buster missiles"
Of course there is no way to seal the border without nukes.
In fact you may have to use several hundred of them and dig a continuous moat along the whole border if they try to move stuff through dirt roads
That is still preferrable to the current catastrophe
P.S. The comparison with Vietnam is just assinine. The US wasn't trying to stop attacks on its own mainland and recover what is rightfully its own historic land inhabitted by its own people, it was the imperialist aggressor on the literla other side of the globe. When you are subject to a 24/7 strategic bombing campaign all tools should be used to stop. Including the nukes.
I'm sorry - you must have missed the part where I asked you not to say nuclear weapons are the solution.
Realistically, nuclear weapons against Ukraine hitting civilian railways and roads, would be met by total condemnation. Every country, including China would sanction Russia, and Russia would go down. Nuclear weapons would be provided within a month to Ukraine for retaliation. Nuclear fallout over Europe would unite everyone against Russia.
My comparison with Vietnam was to prove it is impossible to close the border using conventional weapons.
do you people not know what a range circle is? How about this- you go and MAP OUT each bridge and a range circle for RF weapons LIKELY to achieve a hit and then cross analyze against the odds that the structure can be disabled or destroyed and/or replaced/augmented with temporary bridges?
FFS I am TIRED of hearing over and over how this or that thing can just be done like a wave of the gd hand when to do this thing you need the TOOLS to do so and you lack them.
Triple tap...with WHAT? You understand that cruise missile survivability in Ukranus is LOW, right? You need to study transit times of munitions, dude.
It, Rassvat, will only enable Russian frontforces to work effectively at the front and deeper into the Ukraine defense, maybe killing a few more Ukis and save some Russian souls.
I laughed hard when I saw the territory gain table. 750 square kilometers on a 1000+ km frontline equals only 750 meters gain on average which is 25 meters/day. I know that those ”gains” are concentrated to the holy grail of Donbass (and Charkov) but not putting those numbers into perspective is self-delusional.
>I know that those ”gains” are concentrated to the holy grail of Donbass (and Charkov)
Most of the gains are from Kharkov where the AFU finally is collapsing locally.
But that is the least important sector of the frontline, and it's also literally the most remote from Ukrainian point of view area
>numbers into perspective
The most important perspective is the ratio between remaining territory under Ukro-NATO-Nazi control and monthly Russian gains.
Currently that ratio is such that the proxy will be eliminated in the early 22nd century.
Yes, war of attrition is nonlinear, etc. We know that.
But that doesn't change the fact that the *current* rate of advance is very slow, and that the expansion of the strikes into the deep Russian rear has vastly outpaced the Russian advances in the other direction. Which is the most important parameter of the war.
You cannot claim that territorial gains are "The most important perspective" and then state there is no correlation in a war of attrition, and then further state that Ukraine's strike depth into Russia is "the most important parameter."
The most important parameter, by far, is the relative rates of attrition, particularly in regard to manpower where, even in the worst case scenario of Russian losses, the numbers are heavily in Russia's favour.
I had not but have just read his wiki page. Seems he might have agreed with me.
Perhaps I should have made clear that the relative rate I refer to is in relation to total available resources, i.e. including reserves. So, Russia worst case an unlikely c. 1.5million lost is only c.25% of total whereas Ukraine's conservative 1.5milion losses is probably more than 50%. (Very rough, ball-park figures)
Finally an honest discussion with facts. Yes, I agree with you that Russia wouldnt have any problem to outlast Ukraine when it comes to soldiers.
What I dislike with that strategy and Falkenhayns is that killing people on mathematical terms is a mortal sin. Lets say that Russia already has lost 600 000 men and Ukraine 1,5 million. If 400 000 more Russian dead would mean another 1 million killed Ukrainians and their back broken two years from now, I wouldnt support it. Its an abonimation.
True, I've fallen into that trap myself in the past but I have learned to be patient. However, it does now seem that Russia has decided to get it over with - no more talk, just total destruction of the Ukrainian state militarily and economically - "Work, brothers."
We've heard that "Russia is finally taking the gloves off, no for real this time really!" how many times over the last four and a half years?
It is abundantly obvious that:
1. The Russian populace is in favor of the war, but only if they are not too personally inconvenienced. Mostly, they just want to get back to their social media feeds, celebrity gossip, and similar burning issues.
2. The Russian leadership do not want to fight the West. They want to join it.
3. There is no 11-D chess, no master plan.
These things make Russia prey for the West. The sociopaths who rule the West see Russian dithering and indecision, not as reasonableness or humanitarianism, but as contemptible weakness.
RF does *not* have the military technical means *outside of use of nuclear weapons* at present to close the Polish border.
Russia COULD HAVE and SHOULD HAVE already developed said means. We've been waiting for Iskander-1000 for YEARS NOW.
Missiles of this class are in ABUNDANCE in PRK and Iran and could have been acquired and licensed for local production as Shahed was.
Seriously, STFU about nuclear weapons to close the border and advocate for development of a conventional solution. Use of nuclear weapons would force the abandonment of Russia by ANY ally they presently have. And it would legitimize their use by the JUSA and Israel.
Soviets/Russians did not lose any war in the last 100 years, USA/NATO did almost all and it usually was against guys in sandals wit AKs; so those guys are doing everything that SHOULD be done with a means that they have, USA/NATO losing every war with 1000x more resources is disgrace. baneristan war is proxy war of 70+ countries against Russia + minor support from Korea; so they are doing good job and by listening to your BS Russia would be balkanized in '22-'23 as west palned.
tell me einstein how many years? and how many years to develop, test and procure new IRBM? so that we can learn something from a genious like you...
-
It is very relevant, one side is wining, other side is lossing and you dumb fuck have great idea for a winning side to waste resources on stupid crap, you must be amerikan...
Re sanction: yes, the European elites are reaching such a dead-end that Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni refused to impose sanctions on Russian fur coats; surely, they are worried about their own people! (Of course, I am being sarcastic here).
Re Starmer: his replacement has not changed foreign policy, so there is nothing to rejoice! In the end, Presidents, Prime Ministers, etc. are just puppets, especially when it comes to foreign policy, which is decided by other people behind the scene!
Economics, not puppet leaders, will decide the end. And medium term, it does not look good for the EU and UK. Nor does it look good for the US as their country falls deeper and deeper into systemic corruption and Jewish control.
I definitely read that either on the very day he entered politics, or declared his intention to stand in the by-election and enter parliament so as to assume leadership of the LP, he joined the "Friends of Israel" group.
NOBODY gets anywhere in the UK except by kissing the ring.
If they are a spineless colourless sodomite with an unnatural interest in Ukrainian rent boys in addition, then so much the better.
Guess what Burnham did once he became Prime Minister! He appointed the former Defense Minister, John Healey, as the new Chancellor of the Exchequer (i.e. the British equivalent of the Minister of Finance). And John Healy resigned from his previous role because he was not getting enough money in his ministry from Starmer, triggering the latter's resignation. Can you see the plot? ;)
So, it seems that Ukie PR machinery started to push highest KIA rates ever (41-42k in July), because of the increased territorial loses.
A while ago Rus stated they would systematically degrade everything and now people are surprised.
I remember well all those critical thinkers that bring added value to our lives here, according to one of them, how they were hysterical that nothing ever happens.
Firstly, I am talking abut monthly "score" Ukies claim. And it fits nicely not only into their PR efforts to deflect the facts on the ground, but also into their ideas of killing 50k a month. And here they do not talk about Rus troops, but Russians.
Secondly, you are very confident about this number. Where does it come from?
As usual, Ukro-nazi talmudist lies are simple. In this case they take the figures of other organizations, such as the Pussy-Riot affiliate, Media zona, who strangely do a fairly accurate count - and simply reverse them. There are many other signs such as the corpse exchanges which show an average kill ratio of about 30 (recently over 50) to 1 in favor of Russia. Lots more where that came from. Check it out yourself and remember that Zelensky and his band of 300 Jewtans (see the movie starring him) are children of Satan like NATO and USA - liars .
I have a feeling that Frenchies will do what they do best: left will engage in their classic infighting, sabotaging themselves, and people will vote against somebody again. Usually that somebody is Le Pen, due to the fearmongering.
The smart money is on Brigitte Macron emerging and taking over control of the whole of Europe.
She has already shown she can outwit her husband with a smart blow to the face, such that he needs to wear sunglasses for a few days to hide what she did.
Candace Owens had better watch out - she will be first on the extradition list.
"As time goes by, it seems more and more that Putin’s strategic patience may be paying off, as the old hostile European structures slowly collapse like an iceberg calving into the sea."
Perhaps that will be the case, in which case those of us that were suspicious of the go slow approach will be proven wrong.
Interesting as to weapons, both drones, starlink and real time battlefield viewing have proven substantial advantages. Drones were emerging anyway, however Ukraine taught Russia how vital they were, the other two were US advantages that they have now shown to any adversary that they need be neutralized or at least equaled. Iran too has seen the need to get off GPS, yet the US went to war there ignoring the drone threat Ukraine had revealed.
у этого пидора Зеленского и его кураторов все пошло по пизде и они начали как сучки скулить о перемириях , надеюсь ВВП дожмет этих пидоров , думаю Краматорск скоро сольют там сейчас очень тяжело для ВСУ , всем добра ! победа будет за нами !
I am not a fan of getting personal but it's quite annoying to see you put this comment section to an all time low with your 'lol' without an argument. This is however exposing your western arrogant mindset to ridicule all you do not agree with or don't understand. I see that daily with my teenagers who are ignorant and insecure.
Your behavior against a fellow commentator should reach the level of an adult, as I see it.
" ... everything went to hell for this fagot Zelensky and his curators and they started whining like bitches about truces, I hope the GDP will put the squeeze on these fags, I think Kramatorsk will soon be merged there now it’s very difficult for the Armed Forces of Ukraine, good for everyone! victory will be ours!
Я не Бэм , по вашему хуй пойми что Вы имели ввиду ... если Вам что то не понятно спрашивайте разберёмся , Краматорск падает это факт сколько осталось хуй его знает Я думаю до сентября , всем добра будьте здоровы живите богато !
The future of financial innovation is next phase: Integration.
Next phase of finance is no to say no to TradFi and no to want to go back in time and keep everything as is. It's about creating a free, safe platform enabling both ecosystem to thrive together.
Expanding tokenized assets, programmable payments, instant settlement, AI enabled risk management, decentralized technologies, and legally compliant digital identity-all interconnected via trusted financial networks-these are the best opportunities. The industry should leverage the proven stability and governance from traditional financial institutions and digital asset technology innovation and efficiency, to make cross-border payments, capital markets, trade finance and financial inclusion better.
The victory will be determined by shared technical standards, cybersecurity, interoperability, open and transparent governance, and collaboration between banks,fintechs, regulatorsand technology providers. Those institutions that over engineers these bridges will be more likely to overcome friction, drive up resilienceand access new streams ofeconomic value.
Ultimately, the future does not favor separate financial ecosystems; it favors interconnected financial ecosystems. The true mass of innovation is only achieved where trust, technology, and collaboration jointly thrive-bridges always deliver greater value than islands.
The industry should leverage the proven stability and governance from traditional financial institutions and digital asset technology innovation and efficiency, to make cross-border payments, capital markets, trade finance and financial inclusion better.
Since when is are privatized banking sector to be trusted or stable for that matter?
There are no open and free capital markets. There are oligarchs, banks, hedgefonds, monopolies and insurance companies playing a rigged game together with corrupt and changeable political figures who provide a so called legislation to make theft and manipulation legal.
I think he is taking a long-term view here on a global basis. If you look around, you see more and more developing countries signing up to the Russian/Chinese alternatives to one degree or another. The West as we know it is full of mismanaged and corrupt oligarchs, international corporations and investment bankers who can never be relied upon to provide trusted and free markets. However, the evolution occurring in the East and South definitely favours a new world order composed of a multi-nodal structure.
Juicy.
Congratulations Frantic, first again. It seems as though the Russian game plan is finally becoming clear. Belusov as Minister seems to be paying off. Even with Ukraine's attempt to hit their economy hard and destabilise the people the Russians seem to be steaming ahead with their stand off weaponry development. Every month seems to be a new system coming into production. I wonder when the US will finalise their hypersonic missile? It's been a long time coming.
when. if.
I don't think they have the 'earth metals' to build much.
Thank you. I seem to have consistently been at the right place and at the right time, when these last few new Simplicius' issues were released.
Belusov's nomination finally paying off sounds like a long-yield investment by now. In fact, I currently barely remember the name of Shoigu, the inner member of Putin's circle former defence minister, if it had not been uttered many times in contempt in Prigozhin's memorable old rants.
Indeed the Banderol appears to be a good no-frills cheap soviet-style missile for the sake of a swarming stand-off attack.
The US need to solve the problem of finding out the correct ablative materials to protect the surface of the missile from hypervelocity atmospheric friction, in order to develop their hypersonic non-ballistic missile.
It's been a lifetime they are trying without any success though, so I wouldn't hold my breath for their women and chino-indian scientists to succeed in some breakthrough any time soon. I wonder though why is it they have by this day consistently failed to steal the Russian technology for that, as I reckon theft is their best option.
@Frantic
(Quote)
The US need to solve the problem of finding out the correct ablative materials to protect the surface of the missile from hypervelocity atmospheric friction
----------
Or figure out how to use the energy of the plasma field formed around a hypersonic vehicle to both power and implement an ionic repulsion & steering system, mostly or totally keeping the atmosphere from even contacting/heating the vehicle.
Both the RF and Chinese regularly allude to some "new physics" of their weapons, rather than "new materials science" when touting these new hypersonic, high accuracy and maneuverable re-entry vehicle systems.
and why can't the Indian, Chinese and women rocket scientists employed at NASA, Northrop-Grumman, Lockheed-Martin or McDonnell-Douglas-Boeing come up with some reverse engineering of these Soviet "new physics"? It's not like they haven't had enough time.
Why didn't Raytheon, Lockheed-Martin & General Dynamics make supercavitating rocket torpedoes? They certainly had the l time…
Also, why bring ethnicity and sex into weapons engineering & development? Are you some kind of misogynistic racist?!
I am impressed.
ChatGPT tells me these Soviet supercavitation torpedoes were deafeningly loud, but does not say whether this drawback limited the torpedo effectiveness, ie it's easily detectable even by ear but is the ship capable of neutralising it then or is it a sitting duck by that point. This from the defensive side of things. From the offensive side, the loudness did indeed mess with the torpedo's own sonar, but we are not in the 1970s anymore so contemporary more advanced pathfinding technologies have probably solved the issue.
Anyways, who needs easily detectable torpedoes today, when other means of strike warfare (ballistic missiles, hypersonic cruise missiles, drones) can easily obliterate a naval task force of surface vessels? Oh I get it, submarines!
Belousov was a brilliant pick, an unimpeachable and analytical gigabrain is just what was needed. The type of men he will advance within the apparatus will and have transformed the VS.
Belousov is the pampered son of a Soviet communist economist apparatchik.
Curiously his father name was 'Rem' which is actually an acronym, for Revolution Engels Marx. Just imagine the trajectory of your life if you yourself were named like that, it's bewildering
Lem Belousov was a brilliant economist. He analyzed the USSR as not a socialist state, but a warped market economy captured by the design bureaus. “Pampered” would apply to all of your bosses
Belousov gives the impression of being haughty and po-faced. Most people infer from his mannerisms that he must be competent. People get subliminally convinced of this, because he projects the image of the minister of defence you'd see in a Hollywood movie.
And I bet he really is like that. He really sees himself as this cold and calculating technocrat. It's like boys when they sign up to university and imagine their future adult selves at work, and this image they concoct is invariably so stereotyped.
But this adolescent bubble, Belousov never had it burst by contact with harsh reality as most people do. Being the son of his father, he learned economics by osmosis. He also definitely took advantage of his father's connections since before starting his career.
Thus you will excuse me if I remain of my opinion that Belousov is in fact quiet the pampered character. Contrary to Putin and most of the inner circle, his life trajectory from cradle to grave has elapsed, and will continue to elapse (we can be sure) in total detachment from that of the common man in Russia.
This 40 days campaing was planned just before the September general elections in Russia, kind of electoral influence.
The next step would be some terrorist bombing campaign weekend before elections so on 10th September. Possibly Moscov and Petersburg metro trasport systems.
And at the same time false flag operation against NATO facilities on eastern flank, likely in Poland, a serious of bombings.
The last elections in Russia was Crocus City Hall terrorist attack with 149 dead and 500 injured. That was proved to be Ukrainian job. But the CIA knew well in advance about planns and warned American citizens living in Moscow
YAY!! Over 800 posts now. This is a very good one.
It's about time that every construction worker refuses to get out of bed at 5:00 in the morning and rebuild all that's destroyed by the will of those who live in the mansions. When is the world ready to shed those parasites?
Long since overdue.
I just want to talk about the Patriot Missiles. According to MIT professor Theodore Postol the Patriot missiles are not very effective in intercepting incoming missiles. In fact the PAC-3 is no better than the previous versions. In fact Dr. Postol has shown where the intercepting rate is less then 3%.
Theodore Postol, an MIT professor, has critically analyzed the success rate of the Patriot missile system, particularly during the Gulf War, estimating its effectiveness at only 2-3% against modern ballistic threats
.
Insights on Patriot Missile Success Rate
Yes, Postol estimates the older Patriot interceptor rates in the Gulf War was between 0 and 3%. Could not confirm that any were successful. But Congress is only shown corporate propaganda for more orders, as the Pentagon is not fessing up as to the costs vs. uselessness of these Patriots. Top Pentagon generals have one foot on the MIC boards in any event. Utter corruption.
I too have seen the Postol analysis. I've seen different showings by him, to Deepdive, Larry Johnson et al, giving many different points of view to back up his thinking. He makes a very good argument.
Even if he is only partially correct, and for Gulf War 1, the US Congress accepted a mere 3% success rate, then it is a damning indictment of, firstly, the product itself; and, secondly, the American military that they can be so bamboozled. Or, that the military hierarchy is so corrupt.
It is well known that the only effective weapons of the military-industrial complex are the corruption of Congress, political parties, and the administration. A 100% success rate.
This Patriot missile is as effective as US congress is patriotic
👍
He also shows on YouTube that the latest PAC-3's are no better. If you haven't seen this it is explained through video's of incoming Iranian missiles that are coming in on Tel Aviv. He details what a person is seeing and explains when a Incoming missile is hit by a outgoing interceptor. It doesn't take 10 years of college to understand and see there are very few incoming missiles being hit and destroyed. In fact the video he showed there was 1 intercept and many misses. This is not rocket science. Each PAC-3 costs the taxpayers $4 million dollars and when they don't intercept more than 3% of the time the taxpayers should understand we have a no nothing burger interceptor and based on how much they cost we are losing not only in what they are designed to do but the manufactures are making tons of taxpayer money and the taxpayers get an additional cost and that is called inflation.
Exactly, we are being ripped off by Congress, whose members are awarded large campaign contributions by the companies who make these self evidently ineffective weapons, the Pentagon which is either completely corrupt, incompetent or probably both, and our national security is severely compromised due to starting and maintaining multiple ongoing wars with no viable means to win or end them. I am led to understand the Patriots are closer to $6 Million each. The only motives for these wars is to A) create massive profits for the MIC, politicians and generals and B) to serve the interests of a foreign entities' criminal, terror regime in Tel Aviv/Jerusalem.
In short, the Patriot missiles are an extremely expensive PR production, and they are now at the point of obsolescence.....
Those who know about these things state, on condition of anonymity, that the Iskanders being "intercepted by UAF forces" are actually being taken down by random collisions with seagulls.
And thus why the vast majority get through.
That points to a solution for Ukraine: stop begging for Patriots, start training kamikaze seagulls.
I shouldn't really tell you this - but that is precisely what they are doing, as supplies are relatively inexhaustible.
As you know, juvenile seagulls are instinctively drawn to peck at the yellow spot on the parental beak so as to induce the vomiting-up of fish; so when the adult sees the Red Star painted on the nose of the Iskanders, they automatically peck at it - with unfortunate results for them, but salutary results for any Ukrainians who happen to be on the ground below.
If only you knew how close you were to the truth... Its pigeons, not seagulls!
https://www.warhistoryonline.com/world-war-ii/project-pigeon-wwii-skinner-missile.html
Pigeons are the last line of defence.
Seagulls do the heavy lifting, though.
If a missile gets through the seagull line, a handfull of crumbs is thrown into the expected area of missile arrival, and the pigeons rise together in a cloud.
We can draw a veil over what happens next.
🤣👍
🤣👍
I very much doubt that a collision with any bird would stop or deflect a ballistic missile. Airbreathing jets can malfunction after a collision with birds, the re-entry vehicle with the warhead is a different matter.
And I very much doubt that you are familiar with the concept of deepest irony, even though it was so deep that you could build a skyscraper on it.
🤣
Most 60's era technologies are..........obsolete.
@Cosmo T Kat
"Most 60's era technologies are..........obsolete."
----------
Do you remember all the attempts to replace the several AR15/M16 variant weapon systems fielded by the US military?! Each of which spent millions in development and trials, then was not implemented since replacing all that would be "too expensive".
As of 2026, the oldest Minuteman III (LGM-30G) missiles still in active silos are roughly 56 years old. The first ones were deployed in 1970, they are still out there. Yes, they have had some upgrades. But STILL.
Somehow in Ukraine, according to 404 people, they performed much better.
Exactly. I'm not sure Postols prognosis is believable. Both Iran and Ukraine call it into question.
Or maybe Ukies are lying. There is 5.7% (2/35) success rate in the article, but does not explain what kind of missiles.
All this with barely any PACs.
But the Ukrainians are frantically begging for more. It's not as if you can just sell a Patriot.
the PAC-3 is certainly not useless, with the Banderites and Zionist clamoring for me. But it takes 6+ interceptors to take on a single IRBM. It is no S-400
Or maybe this is great source of corruption for both Ukraine and US handlers. So far Patriots were notorious of successfully intercepting apartment buildings in Kiev when launched at steep angles
Regardless, you can't sell them. The apartments, IIRC, were mostly destroyed by old Soviet AD missiles that went astray.
Please supply something, anything that backs up your assertion.
The propaganda calls it in to question, not the reality.
Well, I find Postol accurate. His analysis on the different podcasts is loaded with PowerPoint slides.
His predictions have been confirmed repeatedly.
But I acknowledge that I oppose US actions around the world. Maybe too much Berletic?
I find it strange that many, if not most, of the pundits I agree with used to be regulars on Fox. Like Tucker though they tell a very different story than the did then.
Likewise, I find myself very jaded with the so-called “progressives “ I admired years ago. Rachael Maddow for instance. I’m sure many of you never heard her until she moved to MSNBC and morphed into the shill she is now.
My brother in law subscribes to the WSJ. I’m visiting. Interesting perspectives on current events. They almost sound reasonable. 😀
Maddow's endless promoting of anti Russian propaganda allowed me to see past her polished political analysis performances .
In retrospect it looks like she knew all along that the allegations and stories were invented .
"Polished" like a sledgehammer.
I have always taken what Colonel Douglas Mc Gregor says is factual and he always explains specifics of his facts he presents. He has appeared on Fox News but just as a guest.
According to people whispering in military RU channels who work in the area, Ukraine never ever ever shot down single Iskander, not to mention any hypersonics. They outright lying. Only things they sometimes shot down were slower cruise missiles like X-101, which is actually doable target for Patriot.
According to people whispering in military RU channels who work in the area, Ukraine never ever ever shot down single Iskander, not to mention any hypersonics. They outright lying. Only things they sometimes shot down were slower cruise missiles like X-101, which is actually doable target for Patriot.
Even disregarding the obvious exaggeration by Ukraine in everything they do, the Patriot situation in Ukraine is different than Israel or US bases in the ME.
Postol has talked about this. If you are targeting the Patriot system itself, the capability for Patriot PAC3s to intercept even hypersonic missiles is significant to high.
The reason for this is because the speed of the missile is not actually the governing factor - what matters is the angle and distance the interceptor has to go in order to intercept, which in turn is expressed as the amount of lateral force required for an interception which an interceptor in turn must tolerate. In more simple terms: the further away the target for an incoming missile from the Patriot system, the harder it is for a Patriot to intercept it. Incidentally, this is very likely why the Kinzhal, for example, does a climb and dive onto the target - it doesn't just increase penetration but also makes interception much, much harder if the target is a defense battery.
In Ukraine, Russia consistently takes shots at the Patriot systems - having destroyed launchers and radars on multiple occasions. So from the above, it is likely that said Patriots successfully intercept incoming missiles even if hypersonic.
But in Israel, Iranian missiles were rarely, if ever, targeting the Patriot (or David's Sling, or Arrow, or whatever) defenses - they were targeting specific strategic assets. So interception rates are likely much, much lower.
Iran has also gone a different route than Russia in terms of making its ballistic missiles harder to stop. Russia went with hypersonic or short range ballistic, but Iran instead built in a variety of anti-defense capabilities into their missiles. We have seen these ranging from showers of flare-like submunitions to engines built into the warhead itself (with fins on the warhead) to both accelerate after booster separation and to maneuver. Postol has shown pictures of these Iranian warhead + booster engine setups, and also video where later generation Iranian missile warheads are actually circling around a target vector. Postol has also said that this circling capability alone makes interception impossible with any present known systems.
this is PRECISELY how Patriot is SUPPOSED TO BE deployed!
as a POINT DEFENSE system ON THE target. That's the theory of ops of the system.
Your powers of reading comprehension continue to fail you.
What I wrote above is that PATRIOT SYSTEMS SUCK AT ANYTHING BUT DEFENDING THEMSELVES, as far as ballistic missiles are concerned.
They do great against drones and aircraft.
Hopefully this is simple enough for you to understand.
hopefully you can understand how stupid you are....the PATRIOTS DO NOT DEFEND THEMSELVES, they defend a COLOCATED POINT TARGET of the missiles! Your statement of "themselves" is inaccurate and needed clarification. If you do not desire your statements to be clarified then try being more precise!
JFC. Hopefully you are capable of understanding this.
Huh?😳
It would be laughable, if it were not so sad, just how dumb you are.
Especially given the freely accessible video of multiple Pac2s and Pac3s missing incoming Iranian missiles, hitting the US base that said Patriot batteries were protecting.
But sure, keep on believing the bullshit.
The real Question is, were these systems ever supposed to be defensive?? Or was that just a smoke screen to put them allover the planet for the Empire
The Patriot system was originally developed to provide air defense against aircraft. It still does so just fine both operationally and economically.
And it works fine operationally against drones although the economics of spending $2M to $3M missiles to destroy $20K drones is dubious.
The drone equation also applies for most cruise missiles.
The problem is that the attempt to up-engineer the system to work against ballistic missiles has clearly failed both operationally and economically.
As for putting them everywhere: that's just the MIC at work. It is like the pharma industry - they overcharge domestically to pay for what development costs there are but make pure profit overseas.
Great points, thank you
Is it thinly veiled ironic post about Patriots are excellent in intercepting hypersonic missiles with their fat and expensive body?
Russia widely uses flares-like thingies and pretty much all their ballistics are quasi-ballistics, which mean they maneuver in terminal stage
It isn't just that.
The problem is that Pac3s are slower than the Iranian and Russian ballistic missiles that they target.
Being slower doesn't mean you cannot intercept, but it does mean that there is no margin for error. Iron dome, for example, you can see in videos where they miss drones but can catch them from behind.
This obviously will never happen with Pac3s - and the additional problem is the targeting. Postol talks about this as well. If you are shooting at a ballistic missile just entering atmosphere - it takes 50 seconds for a THAAD or Pac3 to reach the rough intercept zone. 50 seconds is a long time - a non-purely ballistic target can easily maneuver (deliberately or no) outside of the narrow window where the THAAD or Pac3 onboard targeting and final approach system can be successful.
Hahaha...
A Pac 3 missile will cost $3.7 million with a 38 month lead time. While a Shahed or Geran can cost $50k which can made by the hundreds every day. Game over
Shaheds can be shot down more easily with cheaper weapons. PACs aren't used against shaheds or Gerans. PACs are used against ballistic missiles.
But your point is basically right, PACs probably cost more than the ballistic missiles they fail to shoot down.
" PACs aren't used against shaheds or Gerans. PACs are used against ballistic missiles." Not exactly. That they cost less, fly subsonic and carry a smaller warhead doesn't mean that they can't kill a Patriot control trailer and the guys sitting in it.
That's the reason when drones like Gerans are inbound toward a site defended by a Patriot the Patriot shoots, because it doesn't know if the Geran isn't going to peel off to dive into the Patriot. The guys sitting in that control trailer don't want to get killed, and they don't give a shit if they have to shoot off million dollar missiles to save their own asses. I'd do the same and I bet you would too.
Look at the famous video of the Patriot battery being killed by low-cost drones: the most gripping part of the video is how the Patriot shoots off all its missiles in a desperate attempt to defend itself. But it gets overwhelmed. That's the same strategy Russia uses against Patriots everywhere: they send cheapo ordnance at the Patriot that force the battery to expend its load on defending itself against cheapo missiles and then it has nothing left when the big iron arrives to wipe it out (or, to wipe out the target it was defending).
this isn't how it works...there is literally NOTHING on this subject that you know anything about
the patriot DOES NOT SHOOT PACs at Shaheds, you IDIOT
Shaheds do not get to just OVERFLY Patriot sites at will...the video you speak of does not exist and never has
There have been ukrainian blogs and videos about mainly Pac-2 but also Pac-3 shooting at Geran, mainly Geran-2 and higher. The newer interceptor drones specialized on Geran-1/2 were praised to end that waste (though they fail on Geran-Seeker and mesh steered groups).
.
And your conduct may be appropriate for a pimp in a slum whorehouse, but definitely not here. If you have references to be worth to be discussed, go ahead. Else shut up and go to people of your lack of manners and education.
GFY man, this guy is an idiot
there've been LOTS of examples of dumb things being done but PACs are not being shot at Geran except in VERY limited circumstances
if YOU have references, then YOU post them...but you didn't...neither did he; he had bullshit assertions, as you do.
The fkin interceptor drones did not substitute for PACs....you morons don't even know what system Ukanus even has and that "Patriot" is BY NO MEANS their most abundant or primary AD system. Because all the conversation is about Patriot, that's ALL YOU KNOW and ALL YOU THINK EXISTS.
Ukranus got MANPADS and skyranger flak guns and stuff like that LONG BEFORE interceptor drones
I wish Simplicius would ban people who are uncivil.
Hey TJ we all worry about your blood pressure. Take care.
good to know...I've suspected a good bit ago that you are mostly all idiots...thx for the confimation
Speak only for yourself JoKa, do not take the liberty of speaking for plural others. Especially do not attempt to speak for "we all" on a website like this. Just some friendly advice going forward.
PACs cost 4 million each.
PACs are well known to cost 3 to 10 X the price of their typical Iranian made MRBM targets, even the US government publicly says so. Also, US/Israeli interceptor doctrine is to fire 2 interceptors at each incoming target to give a better success rate.
Coupled with very low US production rates on their more capable AA missiles, it is a perfect storm of fucked.
The whole point of Postol argument is that Patriot DOESN'T work against ballistics. It's works against plane like targets, like planes(duh), drones and cruise missiles.
Considering that Russia and Iran went fully ballistic (pun intended), US right now is at catastrophic disadvantage.
And going ballistic against Russia won't help - S300/350/400 have no problems intercepting ballistic weapons, and S500+ meant to intercept hypersonics, tests already being done (no production data - air defence is most secretive RuMod branch)
Wilkerson mentions this as well in a much larger, excellent interview w/Nima (transcribed; HT McCroskey) - https://kathleenmccroskey.substack.com/p/wilkersons-great-analysis
I did a piece on this: https://dearscotland.substack.com/p/the-patriot-missile-defence-scam
That's a really good piece, and I mostly agree with your conclusions. The Patriot is not useless, but it's really not very good compared with leading-edge air defense systems like the S-400/S-500, which are tested under operational conditions against a realistic threat. Testing in the west is expensive, and there is little incentive to have a test result in failure; consequently, the dice are loaded in favour of a successful intercept against a relatively-dumb, non-maneuvering target. But realistic testing against the equipment a peer enemy will be using, when successful, builds confidence in the weapon's capability.
It is important to note that the PAC-3 is a kinetic-kill warhead which must score a direct hit in order to down the target. It cannot afford to miss by even a little, because it does not dispense a cloud of shrapnel like earlier versions.
this is the most absurd shit ever-
WHERE has S500 been tested in REAL COMBAT against missiles? NEVER ANYWHERE.
The interception rate of SHIT like ATACMS and HIMARS was not even 100% by S400s. And these missiles are of pathetic capability compared to a MRBM
have you PERSONALLY witnessed the tests against real targets? NO, you take the RF MOD's word for it.
There is no such thing as 100% intercept rate. When ATACMS and HIMARS data was analysed intercept rate skyrocketed to way over 95% with 2 interceptors. And it's includes S-300/350 and TOR. All slip ins after that was result of hits outside of coverage.
Yes, I will take both RuMOD word for it and from people who work in the area and share bits on specialized military channels on telegram.
Not yours
YES you will take RF's MOD word for it...LOL
as if they would NEVER LIE...wtf....a country that's banning telegram to limit posting of damage videos from AFU strikes...same shit Ukranus did. LOL
but they ALWAYS tell the truth...bc it's what you WANT to believe
Let me clue you in you stupid mfer- RF MOD lies.
I can prove it too- Onyx is claimed BY RF MOD with 1000km range yet it has NEVER, NOT ONE FUCKING TIME, EVER been used on a target in W Ukranus or ANYTHING even at 600km. This is prima facie evidence that it does not have the claimed range. RF lies ALL the fucking time about weapons systems effectiveness and morons like you lap it all up
I've seen it but I'm not convinced. Clearly the US operated Patriots in the middle east have a higher success rate than Ukraine. I think this could be explained by the US having better trained operators, more radars tracking the target and longer distances. But the Patriot system is definitely underperforming. I would like to add the even Russia struggled the most against ballistic missiles like the ATACMS, the shorter distant, which means shorter reaction time, no forwarded radar in Crimea the Russian interception rate was lower against those. Maye now the Russian AD systems are updates and more effective, we can't tell as Ukraine run out of those it seems.
You say "clearly" had a better rate?? Really, based on what? Media reporting?? You people need to admit. We in the US and /or the collective west are the most propagandized population in the history of the world. I read these comments - Well, Ukraine claims they are much better" Are you people serious?? Ukraine and Elensky have been proved to lie about everything. Ukraine's killed in Action total goes down the more Ukraine is destroyed and you think they will tell the truth about air defense.?
Even Martiaonv spekas from an intercetpton rate of about 25% of ballistic missiles with PAC 3 missiles. But 75% is getting through.
Knocking down 25% isn't realistic. *At best* the interception rate is only 3% to 5%. The basic problem is that the Patriot is a really old system with shitty performance. PAC 3 doesn't move that needle anywhere near as much as it has to in order to get more intercepts against modern ballistic missiles.
None of this is anything new, because the physics of the matter haven't changed. Interceptions of ballistic missiles have always been far more difficult and far more costly than building and launching ballistic missiles, and that goes back to the 1950's when the US first started spending endless billions on missiles to intercept inbound ballistic missiles. All of those programs also were miserable failures in all tests that weren't totally rigged with absurdly non-real world circumstances to cover up the truly awful performance in real world situations.
All that, by the way, was at a time when there was nearly infinite money for interceptions because they were trying to intercept inbound nuclear warheads. That despite spending limitless funds they had such near-zero success is not a good sign for relatively funding-limited technology (if you can use that to describe a hand-built $3 million missile) success rates against large numbers of improved, agile ballistic missiles like Iskanders (a truly fine such ballistic missile).
you are effing stupid dude
How's the blood pressure doing today?
🖕🏿
Your worse than the "Little Green Defecation" that leads THE UKROPS AND PEOPLE JUST LIKE YOU to their appropriate deaths.
But at least not worse than the ZIO-KIKES!
IF you bothered to pay attention, I never mentioned a "percentage" This is what lunatics do, they begin arguing against nobody. My point stands, a 4 million dollar missile that needs a minimum of 2 missiles for a single target, BUT the reality that anyone with eyes has seen Patriot launches of multiple, multiple launches to hit air. The only result is huge profits for MIC and all the corrupt Govt's and their lapdog media who are pushing this fabulous "air defense" Why does Trump and the west tell baldface lies?? Because the citizens believe every lie.
Everybody uses atleast 2 interceptors for a single target. It's pure math, the farther you from 50% and closer to 100% from single interceptor, the better bang second interceptor provides. It's meant to intercept things, after all, not rolling dice
I suspect North Korea may take the crown for the most propagandized population....
Nope, that claim is part of western made up propaganda about Korea.
Western people are most propagandized, there is logical flaws and contradicting information even in western propaganda and people still buy it how much dumb can you be?!?!?! you dont even need to be in contact with non-western media to see that western media is pure BS.
"We intercept 90% of everything" also "we need to give electricity, fuel, food, weapons to ukraine" why? because you did not intercept a thing maybe?
They are also very old weapons and in some cases they utilize hardware designed in the 60's and continue in use, because it would be too costly and impact the bottom line. There you have it and why the USrael Empire is in the arc of sunset.
Which doesn't explain why interception rates have plummeted as Ukraine has run short of Patriots, nor does it explain why Ukraine is begging for more.
That said, if Ukrainian air defenses are a depleted as claimed, Russia should be using this opportunity to run riot over the entirety of Ukraine, destroying transport and infrastructure at will.
Yeah. I suppose twice a some-arbitrary-time-period - like a broken clock - I have to agree with the Finster.
🤣
Uhh...Russia is running a pussy riot all over the Banderan territories, on the ground and in the skies. It is also using more hypersonic missiles than before. That's mostly for PR I think. NATO realizes that it will run out of Banderans before Russia runs out of missiles.
If Ukrainian air defenses were depleted, there would be no need for hypersonics.
When was the last time Russian aircraft flew over Kiev?
What does Russian aircraft not flying over Kiev have to do with no Banderan PATRIOT defense of Kiev against ballistic missiles?
*If* Ukrainian air defenses were in fact depleted, Russia could do this with impunity, looking for transport to kill. AKA "truck-hunting".
Hunting trucks individually with fighters and bombers is a waste of time and resources. Most of the Banderan transport is done by rail. Russia targets the rail hubs.
They are not totaly depleted, they have probably couple of rockets for jucy targer or self-defene; it would be dumb to use aircrafts.
But I would like for usa to give benderists F-35, F-22 and B-2 to flay over Russia with impunity like they are doing over Persia, also parking CBG 5-10 km away from Iran shore opening Hormuz strait while Phalanx CIWS and RIMs take down all threats is so impressive, very powerful and advance.
"They are not totaly depleted, they have probably couple of rockets for jucy targer or self-defene; it would be dumb to use aircrafts."
.
Because Russia is ignorant of SEAD.
What explains why Ukraine is begging for more is that the US has nothing better, and nobody else has interceptors in quantity. That doesn't mean Patriot is good, necessarily; it means it is better than nothing, which is what they've got now.
If Patriot were as useless as claimed here, it wouldn't matter and Russian missiles should be hitting targets at will.
Even if it were "better than nothing" it is gone now and Russian aircraft should be able to roam Ukraine at will.
Why would Russia risk manned aircraft when it can achieve the same destructive effect with missiles and drones? Does it need battle-damage assessments? What does it have satellites for?
You report that intercepts of incoming missiles from Russia have 'plummeted'. What support do you have for that? Western media reports directly from the desk of the Ukrainian General Staff? The same individuals who sometimes reported interception rates which exceeded the numbers of missiles and drones fired? So far as I have seen, all the interception stats published in the western media were sourced from the Ukrainians. All. Ukraine regularly claims to have shot down all but an insultingly-tiny proportion of the incoming attack, but then later reports serious battle damage and destructive fires. And I expect you will have noticed that non-combatant casualties as reported by Ukraine have not gone up - in fact, the ratio of one dead person for every thirty missiles and drones fired has been pretty constant, while the damage experienced suggests that Ukraine was not having such stellar success as it claimed all along. It likewise suggests Russia is striking surgically to damage infrastructure and capability rather than to cause massive casualties.
are you really this dumb?
1) aircraft carry FAR MORE destructive firepower than a missile. Are you this effing unaware of the Su34's loadout? No more need for UMPK with air superiority...jfc what a stupid statement, "the same destructive effect."
2) aircraft are a lot CHEAPER to operate than these missiles cost
3) aircraft with bombs are MORE ABUNDANT DAMAGE
good lord, you people need seriously to STFU
WRONG
for the LOVE OF GOD, STUDY the effing AFU's AD portfolio
the patriot is NOT THEIR ONLY SYSTEM. And its ability to shoot shit down does NOT depend on the presence of PAC interceptors! It is part of LAYERED AD which can illuminate and provide guidance to other missile systems!
NASAMS is there in Ukranus and WILL shoot down RF birds - it is their PRIMARY AD system because AIM120s are abundant!
If AIM120s are that abundant, why is Russia not using missile to destroy launchers (since an AIM-120 is of no value against fast missiles), now that Patriots are depleted?
plz go look up NASAMS and learn about it
these are very hard to destroy...you're not gonna get them other than with a loitering munition if the opponent doesn't fuck up.
Man, I don't want to be rude here, but do you understand layered AD? The radar need not be next to the launchers...they can be anywhere. Launchers can fire and move. Once the missile is aloft, datalink guides it- you don't even get a spike warning aboard the plane, it's TWS and whatnot.
I mean, man, this is how packs of F35s operate, how everyone operates, how Mig31s took R37M shots from extreme range...one system provides the track, the other takes the shot, pukistan's AWACS was the guidance for every one of their AA missiles in their rafale shootdowns incident
The AN/MPQ-53/65 can be in one place data networking does a handoff to a NASAMS truck, a literal Humvee that can drive to a spot and send up an AIM120...the truck then drives away. The missile is course corrected by the control station or other repeaters to ensure datalink. It's how RF's layered AD works too unde
They never had good intercepted rate, it's pure vomit of numbers to look good. They even claimed they downed Kinzhal and had mayor of Kiev to do a selfie against some weird gizmo-like-missile.
Now they can't lie anymore, because they literally have no missiles to shoot down things - it will be too obvious.
If Patriots were as useless as people here wish, Ukraine, Israel and others would not be begging for them, and Russian missile attacks would not w more effective when Patriots ere depleted.
People here rely so much on wishful thinking.
PAC3s were not around in GW1. WTF are you talking about?
Theodor Postol was talking about the Patriot 1 thru 3 missiles. He clearly shows with video that the Patriot is not as accurate as the mfg and military is saying. It's a waste of money. Go to You Tube and watch and listen what he has to say. The taxpayer money wasted by the MIC is beyond comprehension.
I really honestly DO NOT CARE what this ONE PERSON says.
There is a MAJOR difference between "not as accurate" and 3-5%. And you people do this shit EVERY TIME when you're called out. I am not going to say the PAC3 is any silver bullet but it is FAR MORE effective when employed properly than 3-5%
In GW1, yes it was pathetic. GW2 likewise. Ukranus has done more to upgrade it than anyone bc they get to shoot at BMs every night basically. Early on they needed the entire magazine to try to hit a Kinzhal; they are much better now due to upgrades in tactics AND software
I didn't come up with the percentage it was a professor at MIT. If you have a television and can assess YouTube look up the video where is shows how he calculated the 3%. I find his information very convincing on his method and his result. I assume a person at MIT has a brain and would be better than any military guy trying to impress the general public on PAC-1,2,3. The government should be embarrassed over this because when the taxpayers understand what it going on, it might create some changes in Washington. So, I strongly suggest you go to the source.
Here is the narrative from Professor Postol
https://singjupost.com/transcript-theodore-postol-interview-evidence-of-patriot-pac-3s-near-zero-interception-rate/
do you understand yet that I DO NOT CARE to listen to this guy- I already KNOW THIS information!
I have been a detractor of this AD system since its INCEPTION!
GW1's tales of systems effectiveness were EXAGGERATED across the board!
Yes they were, you utter clown.
People in this forum were alive at the time you know.
The whole system was modified to be able to target ballistic missiles and rushed into service complete with critical software bugs.
ok. full stop.
you mfing idiot.
the PAC3 missiles came into being in 1995. PAC3 MSEs did not come to be till after 2005.
YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE FUCK YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.
SHUT THE FUCK UP ALREADY
Dude. You need to calm down and relax and have a cold🍹
dude. you need to stop following me all over this forum to post responses
call me a clown, you get that type of response. Tell me you were alive when the GW1 happened - 1991 - and then tell me PAC3 missiles existed and all of this...you're an uninformed BUFFOON in that case.
Sure, i misread your earlier comment, somehow substituting 'patriot' for PAC3. My mistake.
However you are a deeply unpleasant idiot who continually wades into topics you don't understand firing off insults left right and centre like it somehow makes you thes big man. It doesn't.
So let's just agree to leave each other alone...
You’re a clown 🤷🏻♂️
PAC2s were. They also sucked against BMs.
This Patriot "ineffective" rate is for ballistic missiles. Patriots must never have been designed with them in mind, or it is just too difficult mathematically and physically to attack ballistic missiles successfully—they go to fast and now some are maneuverable in flight.
The PATRIOT was originally designed to intercept aircraft, which it is fairly effective at doing. In March, 2003, a PATRIOT destroyed a British Tornado, killing the pilots and an F-18 was destroyed the next month.
I think DR Postol did say the $3,000,000 PATRIOT has a decent record for intercepting $20,000 Gerans.
Winning!
Since the United States can print unlimited quantities of money and force others to accept it, yes, cost is no object when there is something that the oligarchs want.
We have pretty much hit our limit for unlimited printing and forcing others to accept our cash. Currently, we are propping up the GCC through unlimited credit lines and Japan by selling euros to buy yen. We will probably need to start propping up South Korea with some half-assed legerdemain in a few weeks and the UK and the EU in a couple of months.
Look at treasury yields. They signal nothing like what you speak of.
Treasury yields are rising. That means bond prices are falling. Bond prices are falling because nations are 1) reluctant to buy US treasuries and 2) Nations are selling US treasuries (specifically Japan).
Yes, yields are rising, but they would have to rise much more to indicate anything like
what you are speaking of.
Look at Argentina, pre-default if you want an example.
According to the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, the Patriot PAC-3 is a kinetic-kill warhead similar to the THAAD missile, rather than blast fragmentation like earlier versions. It must score a direct hit on the incoming missile to stop it. The PAC-3 can be quad-packed so that modified launchers can carry 16 rather than 4 older versions, but the PAC-3 is still exorbitantly expensive at $4 Million each.
https://www.missiledefenseadvocacy.org/defense-systems/patriot-missile-defense-system/
Hit-to-kill doctrine argues against reducing salvo size to save missiles, as a one-to-one kill ratio is high-risk. The Patriot missile's maximum speed is around Mach 5; the Iskander cruises at Mach 6-Mach 7, and while it slows for the terminal phase it also executes evasive maneuvers. It could still work against a direct closing target, but in a crossing-target scenario Patriot is too slow. The MPQ-65A radar tops out at around Mach 5 for target speed as well.
https://norskluftvern.com/2025/06/28/patriot-missile-systems-empirical-performance-data-2020-2025/
I would be skeptical of Patriot's reported performance in Ukraine, as I see they are still citing that supposed destruction of an A-50 aircraft over the Sea of Azov with Patriot. The Sea of Azov is the shallowest sea on the planet, with a mean depth of only 23 feet and a maximum depth of 46 feet. The A-50 aircraft stands over 48 feet tall on the runway, and there is nowhere in the Sea of Azov the wreck could lie invisible from the air. But no photograph of the wreck has ever been produced. The west typically just reports whatever it is told by Ukraine.
Ukrainian 'observers' in Israel professed to be appalled at the wastefulness of American crews blowing off a half-dozen interceptors to stop a drone or a relatively unsophisticated, slow missile. And they might have a point if 'Ukrainian doctrine' were different. But that would imply the Patriots in Ukraine are controlled by Ukrainians, and nobody believes that.
I don't know but I'm guessing some of the guys on here bringing the conversation down to schoolyard level are trying to compensate for mostly shooting blanks themselves 🤣
FWIW the WSJ had a cryptic article about Northrop ramping up production for mor AD missiles. It wasn’t clear if it was for THAAD or Patriot. Martin was mentioned. Northrop gets $3B Martin— $35B. 7 years. To make “hundreds of interceptors” a year.
Just another scam.
My understanding is the PAC-3 missiles are being made by two companies. Then are put together.
There are more than 2. The article also mentions L3Harris. Given the way defense companies work, I’m sure there is some production in at least 30 states.
And to add insult to injury a substantial setback is waiting for America in Iran as well. President Xi double-crossed our beloved President in America and starts sending major numbers of MANPADS to Iran. This one step almost guarantees a major improvement in Iran’s chances in this war. This is a repetition of Reagan’s act in Afghanistan (Stingers) and it will twist the war in Iran’s favor.
https://asiatimes.com/2026/08/chinas-manpads-for-iran-could-cost-us-airpower-dearly/
Actually, the US Stinger shipments to Afghanistan mostly cancelled out the Russian superiority enjoyed by using helicopters for transportations there and forced their army to sit in their garrisons. On the positive side Russian soldiers worked out the details of making vodka by using the cooling systems of their trucks, managing staying alive and being happy at the same time. However, they lost the war.
MANPADS are welcome, but what was required, if president Xi was serious about his own communist party ideology, was to do what Mao would have done, i.e. send a whole lot of HQ-XXs with the crews as well as a triple digit number of J-20s to close the sky over Iran. Plus some YJ-20s to send the US carrier groups to the bottom of the Indian Ocean.
He didn't do that
Blah blah blah
Not yet Tovariska. Be patient, they gonna get it when it is really gonna hurt, and unable to respond.
Kudos. Not only are you a military tactician for the Russians, but now also the Iranians and Chinese.
You must be raking in the money.
Maybe the next Ruler of the World after Trump cashes in?
My comment to yours? Unnecessary sarcasm…
?
Unnecessary is a subjective opinion with respect.I
Personally I thought it was appropriate.
Exactly, you little armchair generalissimo. And tell your mommy to make you something good to eat so you’ll have the strength to keep spreading your “wisdom.”
You're as free with the lives of others as ol' Zele.
I get the sense the Iranians do not want this 'help' from China or Russia. Sure they will purchase some material but Iran looks to be in the driver's seat so why share that glory with China or Russia. I also think if Iran accepts big hardware from someone they will not have 100% freedom of action, which Iran wants.
The way this is going it will be Russia and China asking to buy drones and ballistic missiles from Iran, not the other way around.
It seems that the Persians are a very proud people and sometimes to their own detriment, but I have great respect for them in spite of that. Sure beats the lying sacks of shit in the USSA and their narcissistic POS leader.
They didn't lose the war. They were able to secure a more stable government and executed a planned and organised exit from the country. It was two or three years later that the government failed and the rest is history.
Western PR convinced everyone that Afghanistan was a disaster for the Russians and a total loss - simply not true. What really happened, unlike America who most often invades and stays, Russia came in to do a job, did it and left.
Yeah, it was a pretty complicated story as I recall. I did not pay too much attention to the details there but I noticed that the Stingers gave a major advantage to Regan’s ‘Freedom Fighters’. I understand it was a difficult war for the Russians at the end just like for the US. No accident they call the place ‘The Cemetery of Empires’.
Until people in the USA reasoned that one day those Stingers - or domestic builds thereof - might be targeted at their own assets, and set about to buy the unused ones back. Which the jihadis had gotten for free, as far as I know.
https://www.rferl.org/a/1057196.html
It's worth noting that the US Government has been trying to buy back the unexpended Stingers since the 1990's. The propellant in all remaining missiles would have expired years ago. So there must be some other feature they figure is still worth protecting.
How about viewing this effort as just another way to extort cash from taxpayers.?
With historical hindsight and a newly developed understanding of capitalist greed, the stingers were just a way for the MIC to rip off American taxpayers. The movie, “Charlie Wilson’s War “ was produced to promote the narrative that “Russia is evil and must be opposed “.
One would think that after over 100 years of that lie, Americans would begin to “get it”. But perhaps the propaganda remains effective until one reaches 65 and still maintains a reasonable level of mental competence.
Or, perhaps it has something to do with buying into “Capitalism “. Holding diametrically opposed ideas that cannot be reconciled.
I don’t see Xi’s actions as a betrayal of Trump. Rather self-defense.
‘I don’t see Xi’s actions as a betrayal of Trump. Rather self-defense.’
Neither do I see any form of betrayal; I was just trying to be sarcastic.
I kinda thought so but I always need a “/s” to confirm it. TJ for example mostly seems to be sarcastic until one gets used to hi rants.
Never let 'em know you are being sarcastic if they can't figure it out.
I do enjoy being rude to TJ.
You succeeded with your sarcasm.
I can't remember the documentary's name, but it illustrated how different sides learnt the wrong lessons. The Americans learnt that all they had to do was supply weapons to win a war. The Mujahideen learned that infidels could not stand against the righteous. Russian military reports at the time barely mention the stingers, while domestic financial collapse forced the USSR to withdraw.
Correct. The Afghan government of Mohammed Najibullah took over from the Soviets and remained in power through five years of brutal warfare against the Mujahideen. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, they ran out of resources (oil, grain) and could fight no more.
Yep, that's the "stable government" according to communist lovers. And apparently "stable" is something positive - but only when it comes to communists being able to hold on to power.
Perhaps you will be surprised by Russians’ contribution to higher education in Afghanistan during the war. The country had its first cohort of university-trained female medical doctors. The democracy-spreading US had made this fact disappear.
The Soviets also built the Kabul polytechnic university. That was Anathema for western usurers in charge
Um, what? The Soviet Union didn't lose in Afghanistan? LOL It was a military quagmire and the "stable government" they left behind was as "stable" as the one the U.S. installed. It was inevitable that the communist murderers would lose power to the Afghan uprising. The slaves hate communist slave masters. But people like you still dream of being one.
You surely prefer rich opium trade conducted by the CIA
The Afghan government lasted a bit more than three years after the Soviets left.
The Afghan government fell before the US managed to withdraw. Notice the distinction?
Najibullah stayed in Kabul until he met his demise in 1996.
Ghani hauled ass with bags of cash in 2021.
Shit was so bad the Taliban asked the US to help secure Kabul.
Ghani is believed to be enjoying his US tax-payer funded exile in the UAE.
After decades of digging into the depths of horror people call communism I watch armies of people with limited understanding boldly marching toward another chapter of the commie dream-land. I know what did and what will happen to them. In the 21st century those who do not understand commie history are submitting to the global extermination plan. The funny thing is they just keep marching. I am done trying to save them.
Thanks you for
I was about to make this very comment. They didn't flee the country and have people hanging on helicopters like America in Vietnam and in Afghanistan is 2021. They left Afghanistan with a government that lasted three years before it fell.
Any USA support for afghanistan first with USSR and recently just let the pederasts loose and opium production exploded
Kon a fair argument can be made that the explosion in Opium and thereafter Heroin production was a huge contributing factor. The $$$ that came rolling in paid for a lot of "off the books" projects and greased useful palms in buying the allegiance of useful Warlords. I even wonder if the decline in production has at all contributed to the growth of Fentanyl on the Street and it's deadly effects.
It is an unfortunate and grudgingly-acknowledged fact that the most effective group at eradicating opium production in Afghanistan was the Taliban, who basically wiped it out in two years. I guess somebody in America didn't like that, although to be fair there was not much to like about the Taliban.
https://www.npr.org/2022/06/02/1102586941/afghanistan-opium-heroin-taliban-poppy-farmers-ban
Do you have a link to the US-China agreement that China agrees not to supply Iran with weapons? As far as I know, there is none. Maybe the sales were in response to America selling weapons to Taiwan.
I do not remember any formal agreement and likely there wasn't any. On the other hand I clearly recall Trump quacking about some sort gentlemen's deal concerning the issue. Xi, quiet shamelessly, pulled this off before his US meeting with Trump. Actually, from a geopolitical view Xi's decision is completely logical. It is a critical interest for China and Russia as well not to allow a major Iran failure.
I would be surprised if China didn't supply Iran with weapons. In 2025, the Chinese foreign minister told Kaya Kallas they couldn't allow Russia to lose in Ukraine, because they knew that China would be next. The same logic would apply to Iran. Trump's statements are unreliable.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3316875/china-tells-eu-it-cannot-afford-russian-loss-ukraine-war-sources-say
Iran is pretty independently minded - they refuse external help on a regular basis, though recently they have, as I understand it, relented somewhat. Certainly with the Russians and perhaps even the Chinese in certain areas. I've heard rumours in both ways as to whether Iran accepted air support from China.
China, Russia and North Korea have been cooperating with the Iranian missile program for decades.
The Shahab-3 Medium-Range Ballistic Missile (MRBM) was developed from the North Korean No-dong missile, which was developed from the Soviet Scud missile (which was developed from the German V-2 missile) in the 1990s.
China transferred their HQ-2 Surface to Air Missiles (SAM) to Iran in 1986 and then a technology upgrade, including production lines to turn them into the M-7 Surface to Surface missile.
Iran is now using the Chinese Beidou navigation (and targeting) system.
Russia cooperated with Iran to develop and manufacture the Shaheed/Geran one-way attack drones, now available in huge numbers.
And that's just the Wikipedia tier information.
We are really talking the basics of geopolitics there. ‘The enemy of my enemy….’ Russia and China just by visualizing the possibility of an Iran closely managed by the USA, sooner or later start acting out. Every one of these nations stand on thousands of years of political/military traditions and they are thinking 24/7. For China supplying Iran with hardware is an easy act because of their huge economy. By keeping the US out of Iran (just like in North Korea) China can literally avoid a major conflict.
Psychopaths cannot be 'gentlemen'.
You right as usual.
but they can convincingly act as if they were.
Acting is what they learn to do very early in their life of pathology
Trump is a cad acting as if he were a cad.
Very accurate.
That 'gentleman's agreement' is likely Trump just running his mouth in the same way he claims that Iran is "begging" for a ceasefire or deal.
It's all 24 carat bullshit, and you should be able to see right through it by now.
Just for this conversation, I think I am very much in the clear about the nature of the beast.
Gentleman and Trump in the same sentence?
China agreed not to "Sell" weapons to Iran. It did NOT agree not to "Give" any weapons to Iran.
Details matter in diplomacy.
Power matters in diplomacy.
Before we get all excited calculating what 500 Chinese MANPADS could do, please note that the Asia Times "multiple media reports" are actually multiple re-reports of a single Reuters report citing "three sources familiar with the deal".
China and Pakistan have denied it.
I also checked the tree sources. The Chinese act is very substantial but if it is true it means most likely the start of major help, a serious commitment to Iran. The possibility of fake news is always there when we are dealing with limited sources at the early stages, but I tend to take this item for real now, until something else comes up. I do agree, the evidence on hand is on the weak side although dozens of publications joined and it is spreading like wildfire. Hard to believe that Reuters would go out on a limb but not impossible. Even the New York Times has picked it up:
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/13/us/politics/china-iran-weapons-trump-xi.html
I agree that there is evidence, but we cannot allow ourselves to slip from “there are claims that China has agreed to supply Iran with 500 MANPADS” to “China has supplied Iran with 500 MANPADS”.
And we must always remember that multiple repeats of the same claim are not multiple claims.
Zero times one million is still zero.
As the ancient joke goes: ‘We will see, said the blind man.’ Xi is looking at the whole of the US act against Iran as a series of events where the possibility of an accident/mistake that led to the weakening of their energy supplies is nonexistent. I also view things with an understanding that the present consequences were calculated and intentionally triggered. A total destruction of the oil exports of the Arab States would mean a lot to Trump.
Yes, and look what supporting people who shouted "death to America" whilst launching those Stingers got the US. Helping "heroes" like Gulbuddin Hekmatyar might be the single dumbest application of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" in history.
‘might be the single dumbest application of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" in history.’
I thought the first place was supposed to be held by the USA for building up the Chinese economy singlehandedly and keep doing that even after the Soviet collapse of 1991. Think Kissinger-Nixon ping-pong diplomacy.
American politicians don't think that far ahead, and the architect of the whole Stinger operation, the odious Charles Wilson said, "There 58,000 dead in Vietnam and we owe Russia one . . . I have a slight obsession with it, because of Vietnam. I thought the Soviets should get a dose of it . . . I've been of the opinion that this money was better spent to hurt our adversaries than any other money in the Defense Department budget".
Which is exactly the sort of petty-mindedness one should always suspect from American "statecraft".
Fake news. Iran makes their own MANPADS (Misagh) which have already demonstrated their battle effectiveness against a variety of US aircraft. They have a large trove of these scattered around the country, and troops who know how to use them. Why would they import a few hundred unproven MANPADS from China, which requires re-training of Iranians to use them, and risks a PR backlash for China? The story makes no sense at all.
The Chinese MANPADS in question have very high success rates in action. The weak point in the news is the limited dependable sources. The strength is in the logic of geopolitics: China and Russia has a very substantial interest to float Iran and they both demonstrated on numerous occasions they understand this need.
The MANPADS would become game changers for Iran if Orange Man decides to follow up on his favorite psycho-bobble and trigger a land war there. Land war spells lots of landings of planes and helicopters flying around, juicy targets for MANPADS.
With what purpose? I looked at technical details of several MANPADS and they fall short in distance. The speed of the missile also doesn't match those of fighter jets. They can be useful against cruise missiles, helicopters and drones but not fighter jets and bombers.
Iran's passive AD system is very effective against Reaper drones but here also the speed of the missiles is to slow for fighter jets. It is possible with the right angle, but US jets has EW and radars to detect missiles and can evade more easily.
Also hitting a fighter jet with a MANPAD seems difficult. The timeframe is short. Sometimes jets fly over and barely have time to spot them. You hear noise, see something coming and it's gone. I'm not 100% sure but I think MANPADS mostly rely on visual contact. China probably could deliver long range AD and produce enough to frequently replace them. We wil see if they hit the battlefield, if they do, China always is more cautious in those things. The Afghanistan part is true, helicopter are rendered useless against them.
'With what purpose?'
The MANPADS would become game changers for Iran if Orange Man decides to follow up on his favorite psycho-bobble and triggers a land war there. Land war spells lots of landings of planes and helicopters flying around, juicy targets for MANPADS.
At this stage people want the US to invade Iran. We all ask if someone is 'that' stupid. To protect against close air support from helicopters and possible A10's? If the news is true, I expected Iran producing their own. For Iran to support their ground troops wouldn't something like Pantsir give better protection? But I find it hard to believe the US would do a land invasion. We will see, didn't Trump made a new threat today? We will see.
What about very close to air base? Jets also need to fly slow when coming to landing.
How dare they? A foreign country supplying weapons and the US mic doesn’t get it’s slice. 🤣
"Substantial" doesn't cover it, Kenn. "Catastrophic", more like.
Yes, it sounds like serious as it is likely just kicking in the door. For the Chinese economy this is a minor issue.
Did the US win it?
I'm sorry but the US has no chance in this war. War is about logistics. Iran announced from the start of this war that the US would have no staging grounds. Erbil and the GCC countries were all fair game from day 1. How the f#$k is the US going to stage and maintain a ground invasion when nowhere is safe. If Saddam was still alive we could visit him in prison and tell him what an idiot he is for letting the US spend 6 months of sending massive equipment and supplies into Saudi Arabia ensuring his destruction without ever lifting a finger to stop it. Really incredible. Not only does the US have to deal with nowhere being safe but they have to deal with the mountains and terrain of Iran. Can you imagine these idiots trying to take an Island. The cliffs and hills are stuffed with hidden artillery Iran has been placing there for decades. Nobody even talks about that. They just talk about missles and drones. Those islands have thousands of artillery pieces pointed at them. It is literally a suicide mission. Iran has been smartly preparing for this moment for decades. They watched and learned. They know how the US operates in the region. They've had a front row seat for decades
Pakistan will be the staging ground.
they're not gonna go along with that.
And if they do, the US assets there will be struck as Pakistan will be a participant in the war. Pakistan has ZERO interest in going to war with Iran on the JUSA's behalf.
Amassing that much manpower and materiel *cannot* be hidden.
The US has many pressure points over Pakistan and its elites. In fact, don't be surprised when Pakistan is ordered to provide cannon fodder.
No, they won't like it. Nobody will ask them.
Revolution...they don't control that part of Pakistan all that well
it's not gonna happen. The JUSA lacked the pressure points to not have the ISI participate in 911 and the subsequent war....remember that
You are thinking of a different part of Pakistan.
Pakistan did participate in the War On Afghanistan and wasn't needed for Iraq, which (unlike Iran) does not border Pakistan.
500 MANPADS are not going to change anything. It's not much more than when germany sent a few helmets to Ukraine in the first stages of the war, back when they still feared Russia.
Why it was a ‘double-cross’ against Mr T?
Iran is already winning against USA.
‘Why it was a ‘double-cross’ against Mr T?’
If everything stays floating with this news item Xi actually gave an informal indication of staying out of the Iran war, giving no help. Now, when Iran looks better and keeps up the fight, Xi commits to substantial help. Trump is following very similar tactics against Russia by arming Ukraine. It sounds like a ‘double-cross’.
Most of the attacks are at a distance or altitude that makes the MANPAD ineffective.
For low altitude drones, helis, etc sure they create a danger.
Pure russtan's agitprop bullshit
You mean Ukraine is victorious again?
Haha, funny! In reality it's the second or third most accurate assessment I have found. Most of the flaws of this analysis was corrected a couple years ago. I made similar mistakes, but good information on the state of Russian technology is hard to find.
Take the Orion system, solid heavy drone, tons of potential, but I thought it had achieved mass production 4-5 years ago, when in reality we've only had prototypes until mid 2025. Similar with the low orbit Russian satellite constellation. Part of the problem, for me anyways, was not fully understanding the capability of existing Russian military satellites and how important Starlink, chief amongst Western ISR assets, was for keeping Ukraine from crumbling.
In short, the Russian military was in worse shape in 2014 then the data I plugged into the algorithms. They've come a long way since, but plenty of mistakes along the way. Our Al Queda proxies in Syria along with the Turkish proxies demonstrated early on the importance of drones and the ineffectiveness of Pantsir systems in dealing with large drone numbers. It looks to me like the Russian general staff was somewhat asleep at the wheel. Had they been forward thinking, resources would have been poured into drone/counterdrone as early as 2013. Had they done so, Russian military objectives might have already been reached, instead they are still a couple years away.
Thanks for the riviting analysis, it really got me thinking.
What are these algorithms of yours?
Not much really. I use 25 year old SSDS data analysis software on a 20 year old G5 and build algorithms for this and that and see how predictive it is. Military analysis is one use, who is the greatest basketball player ever is another. It's a weird hobby.
One result I got back in 2023 was Russia would finish the war by 1st qtr 2026. Got a lot of flak from both ProRussian and ProUkrainian for that prediction. It was wrong, obviously, so need to tweak some things. Not knowing how far along various military technologies are is a weak spot for sure.
There was no real preparation for war between 2014 and 2022.
Even though they should have already been on a wartime footing after 2001, 2005 the latest.
The military budget in fact went down after 2016. There was a bump because of Syria, and the military actually wanted to go in there seriously, with large amount of armor, much more aviation, etc., but Putin vetoed it, so if it had been up to the military, the budget would have been increased much more. Then it went back down and Putin was very publicly proud of and bragging about that.
Compare and contrast to what Stalin did starting in the late 1920s...
Also, hardware is where the malignant effect of Putin's tolerance towards the continued existence of the Russian oligarchy is most directly evident.
Because a half-a-billion megayacht for a Russian oligarch directly translates into one less submarine being built. And there are many dozens of megayachts that the Russian oligarchs bought in the last 15 years.
Same thing with aviation -- Usmanov's private A340 cost half a billion. Meanwhile drones fly all the way to Chelyabinsk and now even further because there is no continuous AWACS coverage over the country to detect them.
How many A-50s could have been procured with the money the Russian oligarchy spent on private jets?
How many more strategic bombers, Su-57s, etc. etc. etc.?
You are fundamentally right.
I think Putin was mesemrized by the western orderly appearence with their ”rule based order” and seemingly endless resources and commodity to feed their materialistic peoples lusts. The Olicharky in Russia was even more greedy and lustful than their western and african counterpart although it seems that the ”disease” is the same in every nation.
Putin fell(?) for the US/NATO scaring of the Russian threat with strategic aircrafts and missiles. The truth is that the brunt of work has been done with about 40 old TU-95, Bears and TU-160 Blackjack of which they only have 15.
The likewise old TU-22 Backfire is down to 10 planes. The truth is that Russia doesnt have any strategic airforce to talk about and they trusted the ”Nukes” to much to have a calmkng effect on the western warmongers.
>The truth is that the brunt of work has been done with about 40 old TU-95, Bears and TU-160 Blackjack of which they only have 15.
And the neglect of the strategic bomber fleet is not even the real problem. Strategic bombers were mostly obsolete before Starlink (with Starlink they become useful again as a launch platform for ultra-long range air-to-air missiles of the kind the US will be developing now; ultra-long-range as in thousands of kilometers, not hundreds, for which you need a satellite constellation to track the targets that are currently safe deep in the other side's airspace).
The real problem was the INF treaty.
Which the US pulled out of in 2018. That is four years before the SMO.
So Putin had plenty of time to let Votkinsk loose on pumping up MRBMs and IRBMs at maximum production rates.
Same with the various other factories producing GLCMs.
But he didn't.
Hasnt Putin pumped up MRBMs and IRBMs? All those Satan and Sarmats does no good if not used….
Strategic airforce may be obsolete in the future but they have proved to enable launching points nearer Ukraine than those launched from fixed or mobile launchers.
And yes, the INF treaty that Trumpie abandoned was a clear signal and notice not taken by smiling Putin.
>Hasnt Putin pumped up MRBMs and IRBMs? All those Satan and Sarmats does no good if not used….
Sarmats are ICBMs.
The Oreshnik is an IRBM.
But the problem is there was no lighter tactical ground launched missile in the 1000-2000km range that is cheap and mass produced. The Iranians have that, Russia doesn't.
There still isn't one -- there was supposedly a test of an Iskander-1000 to western Ukraine at one point, but that was nearly a year ago.
The Zircon performs that function now, but it is not exactly cheap. And they only started scaling production once the SMO started.
They can't generate a truly massive salvo.
>Strategic airforce may be obsolete in the future but they have proved to enable launching points nearer Ukraine than those launched from fixed or mobile launchers.
The problem with the airforce is that it is visible to everyone the moment it takes off.
What you need is the capability to launch very large salvos (as in hundreds and even thousands of missiles) with no warning, from ground launchers.
That means concealable TELs and ground-based VLS cells or silos.
**In mass numbers**
The INF treaty had made all that impossible, and the genius Putin stuck to it for half a decade after the US pulled out instead of unleashing the shackled for 30+ years Russian missile factories.
"I think Putin...." - always fun to hear from yet another Western Putin-fersteher. I know Putin-fersteher really means different thing, but this name still suits you :)
Yes. Verstehen is understanding in german.
Are you longing for it or what?
Sure, buddy. Your “wisdom” is incredible. I think you could give advice to anyone.
but he's fucking right
wtf is it with you people's need to lick Putin's ballsack?
A50s...fuck that.
Saab340, GlobalEye type shit is the future. Nobody is building the rotating dome crap anymore. But RF doesn't seem to even grasp this.
they HAVE airframes...SJ100s etc., that could embark this thing. They HAVE flat panel phased array AESA radars...they should have the DSP stuff. For fuck's sake they could have put their Irbis shit into the cargo hold of a SJ100 and fiberglassed the panel and flown in one direction in overlapping routes with a fleet of half a dozen planes...CHEAP AF interim solution, augment with a 2nd set in the front, and had VASTLY better, unavoidable coverage than they have now.
Instead they did fuckall. They saw the materiel coming over from Rezsow....df did they do? All hands on deck for 1000km missile? Shit boss we can't build one buy from PRK or Iran? NO. They did with the Shahed but NOT a fucking missile that could reliably hit the border?
These failures are literally so asinine that they justify treason charges
I mentioned the A-50s because it is the one AWACS they did have already designed and produced.
Sure you can go into more modern solutions, that goes without saying.
Doesn't even have to be manned, in fact it would be better if it wasn't, both for scaling up production and operation.
>Instead they did fuckall. They saw the materiel coming over from Rezsow....df did they do? All hands on deck for 1000km missile? Shit boss we can't build one buy from PRK or Iran? NO. They did with the Shahed but NOT a fucking missile that could reliably hit the border?
What exactly are you going to hit? If it's just making holes into roads, Kh-22/32s would have done the job just as well. But it was never even tried.
Nukes are the only way to reliably seal the border anyway
KH32 probably doesn't got the range either
Zircon and KH32 are listed as up to 1000km but they've never, ever been used in a strike at that distance....from which one can infer they cannot hit that far out.
You're going to hit border crossings and materiel. The port wasn't sealed off by nuking it; it was by interdicting ships
if that meant hitting cargo in Poland, so be it. The point of this is a PROMPT strike in response to space ISR- shortened kill chain
even if you could significantly *reduce* the flow, you'd be way ahead of the game. Imagine the 2023 offensive if Ukranus had *half* of the armor
The 2023 offensive was never meant to succeed. The goal was to normalize NATO's direct involvement, and that goal was achieved.
But for that the offensive itself had to fail.
If it was to succeed, then the frog would have jumped out of the slowly boiling pot, and that was not part of the plan.
Regarding range -- it is 1000 km from Kharkov to Lvov, but it is just 650 from Bryansk to the border.
Plenty of Kinzhals have been used to strike at Lvov, but no further. So my assumption has always been that there is a veto on ballistic and hypersonic strikes very close to the border, in order to not "escalate" too much. In fact cruise missiles have not hit within 30-50 km of the border either, with a few exceptions around Uzhgorod.
For some reason there is no such veto for Romania on the Danube -- strikes have been carried out right at the border there.
But that there is one for Poland seems the most likely explanation for why one of the most obvious target for conventional strikes -- the railway gauge changing stations -- has never been touched. Destroying those would halt rail traffic completely. For some time, yes, but then of course you hit it again once they build new ones.
That sounds like a man doing his job well.
I agree with your analysis with all the hindsight that has piled up since 2014.
Starlink was effective already in 2022 and Ukraine was well prepared with ISR and real-time battlefield communication and assessments. So if Rassvets is a successful counterproduct one can ask why Russia didnt put up their own LEO-satellites sooner. Geostationary satellites parked over the equator could not be used in the way low-orbit satellites can.
Rassvet is not a counterproduct.
Starlink is a first strike system.
You don't counter it by putting something just like it but inferior in numbers.
Because that doesn't take away the enemy's first strike capability, which derives from both having Starlink and having encircled you physically. You have not similarly encircled the enemy so you have no strike assets positioned to take advantage of having your own Starlink
The only solution to the Starlink problem is to physically destroy it.
And that is not my radical opinion. Read Rogozin's numerous posts on the subject. He should know -- he was the head of Roscosmos and sounded the alarm about Starlink the moment Starlink was announced as intention, and he is the one battling the Starlink-guided drones out in the field today.
Exactly, you little armchair generalissimo. And tell your mommy to make you something good to eat so you’ll have the strength to keep spreading your “wisdom.”
It is a counterproduct but not a counter-weapon…
Russia need to have their own transparant deep battlefield and instantenously communications and assessment system no more relying on drones for it.
>Part of the problem, for me anyways, was not fully understanding the capability of existing Russian military satellites and how important Starlink, chief amongst Western ISR assets, was for keeping Ukraine from crumbling.
ppl say this is a drone war.
ppl are stupid.
this is an internet/network war.
drone tech exists for decades but until recently they couldn't be reliably remotely controlled.
If the Pantsir, that I took to be Russia's primary short range AD system, is ineffective what is achieving the high intercept rates of Ukrainian drones?
The Russian air defenses are clearly the best in the world. You would never guess this if you only read Western media
RF terrestrial AD is the best there is.
However, its detection coverage is shitty compared to AWACS.
HAD RF made ANY inroads into AWACS they'd not be having the problems they are having but this is chalked up to leadership incompetence more than anything else
Relax, Peter. It is 1:1.
You are a good Nazi.
you use a juish slur to demonize a person you think is on the side of the juze in this war....lmao gfd
You are far too enamored with USA propaganda but you don't even realize it. You are convinced that the Nazi program was entirely and only focused on Jews. You have no idea that Nazis also hated Russians, Slavs, gypsies, etc. You only think that Nazis hated Jews. You are a very good little boy by focusing all of your attention on Jews, and only Jews.
i really DNGAF about what the NAZIS supposedly hated
does your IDIOT ass understand that is the JUZE who wrote the narrative on the nazis?
THEY are who made the "nazis" this slur of ULTIMATE EVIL - this is a mental frame that YOU submit to, btw.
You carry water for the mfers who shoot freaking small children in the head and wantonly bomb purely civilian areas.
If you wanted to slur someone as an evil psychopath you should call them a gd JU!
If only Zelensky would not change the minister of defence and chief of army, surely he would win this campaign and also heavy influence Iran war with dron specialists.
This 40 days campaing was planned just before the September general elections in Russia, kind of electoral influence.
The next step would be some terrorist bombing campaign weekend before elections so on 10th September. Possibly Moscov and Petersburg metro trasport systems.
And at the same time false flag operation against NATO facilities on eastern flank, likely in Poland, a serious of bombings.
The last elections in Russia was Crocus City Hall terrorist attack with 149 dead and 500 injured. That was proved to be Ukrainian job. But the CIA knew well in advance about planns and warned American citizens living in Moscow
Why is it a disastrous end?
The goal of further shifting the red lines into a complete normalization of the strategic bombing of Russia has been very well accomplished.
But at what cost? 😉
Precisely zero cost to the people that make these decisions.
Such is "progress", the decision makers have not paid for several hundred years.
😉
cost to whom? The principals in the war? Near zero.
Not one single thing in the JUSA nor EU has been struck.
Ukraine has lasted longer than anyone expected.
Since it is not in Russia's plan to defeat Ukraine, Ukraine will remain intact whenever the terms of peace are established.
Russia's gains are recognized, but at a great cost.
Ukraine still has a lot of fight left.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/zelensky-we-seek-end-war-winter-through-escalation-military-diplomatic-fronts
Russia is taking losses too.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/entire-russian-city-enveloped-smoke-darkness-after-major-refinery-attacked
https://www.zerohedge.com/military/kamikaze-drone-slams-crowded-russian-black-sea-beach-killing-3
We don't know when or what a ceasefire or peace deal will entail.
That makes it hard to make a full assessment without being tendentious.
I've seen enough of this prolonged SMO turned into war with horrific losses on both sides.
The sooner this conflict ends, the better.
I postulate that this conflict will not have been worth whatever comes out of it.
Too long and too bitter for so little.
It's time to give peace a chance.
Russia will not denazify Ukraine, not demilitarize it, not change anti-Russian laws, and not stop NATO's eastward expansion. It has allowed the west to "normalize" bombing Russian cities and remove all the terror from the prospect of waging direct war with it. The SMO has failed in every important way. Judge Putin's "success" by measuring outcome against stated objectives.
Have a fig.
Bye, loser.
Maybe he is into figging...
Too many dummies posting. Sad.
Looks like it and many of us has asked the question of exatly HOW will Russia achieve those objectives when all we see is trenchwarfare in the Donbass and reactive strategic bombing of Ukrainian resources (arriving from Western factories and warehouses).
Not when jews run US foreign policy.
They've been trying to destroy Christian civilization ever since the Amalekites attacked them as they came out of Egypt 3500 years ago.
There was no Christianity 3500 years ago. You should know this.
Au contraire.
The very first word in the OT is "Barasheet."
We translate the word as "In the beginning."
Hebrew letters have intrinsic meaning - a unique feature of their alphabet.
So to read this word from its individual letters, we find
"The Son of God will die by His own hand on a cross."
And YHVH, by the same token?
"Behold the hand, Behold the nail."
You should know this.
But, the Hebrew language did not exist 3500 years ago and the oldest known writings related to the old testament only date back to c. 2650 years ago, so your interpretations prove nothing.
Good try - but fatally flawed logic.
Let's assume, as a concession, that you are correct.
Even so, we now have a document, 650 years before the event it speaks of, prophesying the death of the Son of God on a cross.
Let us further, look at the names of the ten patriarchs from Adam to Noah.
As well as individual Hebrew letters having meaning, the names have meaning too.
So chronologically, these names spell ot the sentence, "Man created mortal sorrow; the Blessed God shall come down teaching; His death shall bring the despairing rest and comfort."
These meanings exist - but they are also individually prophetic.
The individual whose name is translated as "His death shall bring" we know as Methuselah, who died in the year the Flood was sent.
So you are at liberty to argue over how long ago any of these things happened, but what you cannot argue about is what is encoded in the message - and God Himself clearly states that this is how we can tell that He is the One True God.
"Remember now the things of old, for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done."
What is flawed is your claim that the interpretation of a religious text written perhaps a thousand or more years later proves that the religion existed then.
So, a human being writes a coded message that states that the coded message itself proves that the subject of the message, God, is, in fact, the One True God. Sounds like circular reasoning to me. It also implies, if we accept the claim, that there must be other, untrue, Gods. Likewise, the commandment, "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me, " clearly contradicts the claim, "there is none else."
Well, I am sure you will have some tortuous, self-satisfying, explanation because, of course, it is only Islam's holy book that contradicts itself on every page.
Every religion has been weaponized by Imperialism.
Brits did it in India to put Hindus against Muslims (Pakistan), and even Muslims against each other (Sunni vs Shia), they also created the ethno-supremacist ideology called Zionism and founded their colony called Israel to put Jews against Arabs.
***
youtu.be/wtwwk5cuOvU?t=332
youtube.com/watch?v=d4XewymgC0s
youtube.com/shorts/jc9CjgQDky4
***
"Israel is a tool of Western imperialism. It was placed strategically in the Middle East to keep the Arab world fragmented and weak."
America's support for Israel is based on oil, not on any moral or humanitarian concern. The oil resources of the Arab world are vast, and the West wants to dominate them."
-Malcolm X, after visiting Gaza in 1964
Not so - do you think the Brits weaponized religion so they could divide India?
Why would they do that?
It would be in their obvious interest to keep India united and under British control, which would mean minimizing any religious antagonisms - not exacerbating them.
And how could they do that?
The Brits had no influence on what each religion either believed or did.
If they wanted to play on religious antagonisms, they would supply one side or the other with arms and money to precipitate a civil war - which obviously, they never did.
They divided India because existing Hindu / moslem hatreds made a unified nation under the Hindu Gandhi impossible.
Still less would they divide Sunni and Shia sects - they already hate each other enough so that nobody needs to do anything to make them hate each other even more.
Your analysis is naive in the extreme, and very cliche'd.
Western imperialism did not create Israel - the Rothschilds did; as quid pro quo for supporting the British Crown; eg in buying the Suez Canal for £4 million, and for bringing the US into WW1, when Britain was a few weeks at best from starvation and capitulation.
The "ethno-supremacist ideology called zionism" has nothing to do with the Brits - rather, it is a direct expression of jewish ethno-supremacist thought, as expressed in the jews' "Talmud," where it states explicitly that "Even the best of the Gentiles must be killed, as even the best of snakes must be killed."
What keeps the Arab world weak is jewish money and intrigue via Mossad; which seeks to divide and conquer all Arab lands, and to use US military force in pursuance of that, so Israel can expand into the vacuum as part of their Greater Israel project, which surely even you must have heard about by now.
And Malcolm X?
Really?
Iraq Petroleum:
British Petroleum: 23.75%; Shell: 23.75%; Compagnie Francaise des Petroles: 23.75%; Exxon: 11.875%; Mobil: 11.875%
***
Iran Petroleum Consortium 1954-1979:
British Petroleum: 40%; Shell: 14%; Gulf: 7%; Exxon: 7%; Mobil: 7%; Chevron: 7%; Texaco: 7%; Compagnie Francaise des Petroles: 6%
youtube.com/shorts/Cn1JTw_z-Qw
***
Abu Dhabi Petroleum Co.:
British Petroleum: 23.75%; Shell: 23.75%; Compagnie Francaise des Petroles: 23.75%; Exxon: 11.875%; Mobil: 11.875%
***
Bahrain Petroleum Co.
Chevron: 50%; Texaco: 50%
***
Aramco Saudi Arabia:
Exxon: 30%; Mobil: 10%; Chevron: 30%; Texaco: 30%
***
Dedollarization: How Iran challenges US dollar dominance and the petrodollar system:
youtube.com/watch?v=_ziGNmvOh6k&t=215s
None of these facts have any relationship to the Brits using religion to support their imperialism, which was your point.
The British played the decisive role in the partition of India, which created Pakistan. As the ruling colonial power, they controlled the timeline and mechanism of separation.
Policy of "Divide and Rule" – British administration historically exacerbated Hindu-Muslim divisions (separate electorates in 1909, communal representation) which strengthened the Muslim League's demand for a separate state.
***
Failure of the Cabinet Mission (1946) – The British proposed autonomy for Muslim-majority provinces.
Radcliffe Line – The boundary was drawn by a British lawyer who had never been to India, with minimal consultation of local demographics. Its flaws (e.g., dividing Bengal and Punjab) caused massive displacement and bloodshed.
***
In short, the British did not merely "allow" partition—they actively engineered it.
but of course.. Rothschilds acted alone.. right..?
***
The most vigorous Zio engineers in the UK: Winston Churchill, Lloyd George, Lord Balfour, Mark Sykes. Serving Alfred Milner’s Round Table system. Liaison agent: Chaim Weizmann.
youtube.com/shorts/hZ9pI-lLICw
***
David Lloyd George, the UK Prime Minister from 1916 to 1922, was one of the 20th century's most pivotal Christian Zionists. His alignment with Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann is widely recognized by historians as the critical "sine qua non" period for the foundation of Israel.
***
Theodor Herzl, the founder of Zionism, began a series of diplomatic initiatives to build support for a Jewish state, appealing unsuccessfully to German emperor Wilhelm II and Ottoman sultan Abdul Hamid II. And only at the Sixth Zionist Congress in 1903, Herzl presented the Uganda Scheme, endorsed by Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain on behalf of the British government.
youtube.com/shorts/s7okPhH7gys
***
The Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British Government in 1917 during the WW1 announcing its support for the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine, then an Ottoman region with a small minority Jewish population.
Rothschilds paid the bills, and the politicians danced.
But christian zionists missed the crucial point, ie that jews are not Hebrews; and judaism is a crime cartel, not an expression of OT religion.
A grotesque error which has resulted in the world we live in today.
Pax Britannia became Pax Americana after WW2. It is all part of globalism (Imperialism) that was carried out by the fascists of the 19th-21st Centuries.
U.S. Sen. Scoop Jackson started the project after 1967 to use Israel as a major U.S. proxy in the Middle East.
***
British and US establishments are closely intertwined, they're basically one and the same
substack.com/@beeley/note/p-164625270
Simply speaking, Brits are the wicked brain (Intelligence services/spy networks - colonial legacy) and the slush fund, and the U.S. is the brawn of the Global (Imperialist) Oligarchy.
youtube.com/watch?v=KaooeJzsRU8
***
CFR in the US and Chatham House in the UK. They are one and the same entity.
MI6 is part of "Five eyes". UK is a founding member of NATO.
Britain exerts influence through partial ownership of the FED. City of London is the headquarter of the global banking cartel. Besides, City of London basically runs all the main offshore funds:
youtube.com/watch?v=PlpcLU7WABk
youtu.be/PlpcLU7WABk?t=117
***
AND It still runs Israel through the Pilgrim Society, Privy Council, RIAA, etc.
Excellent Denis. What many of us has said before - the War was not worth it.
Yes, Mikey.
What more is there to say when we have already covered the details repeatedly for several years now. All that needed to be said has already been said. But the conflict has lasted so long that communications in this comment section swirls into a kind of repetitive trap and redundant cognitive fixation like in the movie Groundhog Day. No opinions change, everyone digs in with their viewpoint, rinse and repeat as the conflict never ends. My comment above was my attempt to break out from this trap, but I still ended up with the same message said differently. 😂
Your well reasoned pragmatic thoughts remain appreciated, Mikey.
Thank you.
Many things will be clearer when the war ends. For now a lot of it is bs.
Yeah, why not scribble a MoU (let's call it Minsk 3), giving that most trustworthy nation the USA the opportunity to re-arm while it works out new ways to kill your children.
Russia gave peace a chance multiple times, and was consequently pissed on multiple times by the West's cretinous leadership.
That idea typifies where the expression 'throwing good money after bad' came from.
Denis might like to further postulate what would have come out of the conflict had Russia not involved herself in it.
NATO missiles in a psychotically-anti-Russian EU / Ukrainian Frankenstein state.
Russia won a great victory. Before the war Russia leased Sevastopol. The whole point of the war was to kick Russia out of Sevastopol. To bottle it up on the Eaat coast of the black sea. Make Crimea a NATO base. Block Russian shipping and trade into the Mediterranean and reduce Russian influence in Africa. This is per Rand policy papers and Brezinski's Grand Chessboard. It is why the West refused Minsk 1, Minsk 2, Istanbul, and planned the 2023 counteroffensive to break the "landbridge". This was a US war to break Russia ad bring back the Yeltsin years. Now Russia controls all of Crimea, the entire Azov coastline and is 2 cities away from taking over the donbas. If the war ended today it is a clear Russian strategic victory over the US and NATO
Fair points. But you must know that one side does not want peace at all. They want the utter destruction of Russia. That's why it is tiresome seeing so many comments by Russian officials and pro Russian alt media types about the smo and what it has achieved. We will only know if this war was worth it for Russia when it ends. Clearly, an escalation is what many in western elite want because it would justify some of the things they want to do domestically and internationally. People are too stupid in the west to realize this. They will fall for it hook line and sinker.
> Ukraine has lasted longer than anyone expected
That's what happens when 50+ countries pour weapons, intel, satellites, money, mercs, command & control, diplomatic and PR support. Weapons alone amounted to 3x Ukraine's GDP.
I don't think there was precedent for such sock puppet like Ukraine in history. "Ukraine" is not a country at this point, it's UN-recognized PMC and concentration camp.
>The 250 number was given by Serhiy Flash as requisite for having 24/7 coverage. If Russia reaches that by 2027 as some estimate, then Russia will have its very own fully native “Starlink” system to control drones of any kind at all distances, without requiring Belarusian “relays”, repeater tricks, mesh networks, etc. That’s not to even mention the revolution it would have on simple Russian battlefield networked communications and integrated battlefield management systems.
Which will make what difference exactly?
The goal should be to shut down the Polish border.
Does Russia have the military-technical capability to shut down the Polish border now? Yes, it does. Has it done it? No, because of political reasons.
If it gains the capability to do it with long-range drones, will those political reasons go away? Not really.
So what difference will it make?
What difference has the little bit of loosening of restraints done so far in the last month? The record for drones fired into Russia within a single day was just broken again the other day. That number should be going down if what Russia is doing is effective, not going up. But it keeps going up.
There is a bit of an increase in the pace of territorial progress, but that is just compensating for the slowdown in the first half of the year. Taking 750 km2 in a month continues to mean an effective stalemate. And the bulk of that came from northeastern Kharkov, which is the least important area of the frontline.
Also, how will Rassvet-guided drones shut down the Polish border exactly? How will they reach there in the required numbers? Russian drone numbers have been at best at a plateau, if not decreasing; certainly they are not increasing. And they are not going to be firing them from Brest, because Lukashenko wants no part of this oligarch-kneecapped shitshow. So we will need high triple-digit drones to get all across Ukraine to get to the Polish border and strike trucks and trains there. Does that sound realistic?
It sounds to me more and more that you are part of Elenski's PR-campaign. Only that you passed the 400 day mark already, I give you that.
3 dead on a beach in Russia, tragic and an act of terror on civilians for sure but here we have more people dead in traffic accidents for comparison.
Your data about RF's drone numbers and abilities are interesting just based on what exactly? To me it's incredible how you always know the right way, never a shred of self doubt or consideration of what it means to run a country the size of Russia with 140 plus million citizens. To run an SMO over years and at the same time increasing the standard of living in your country is an unprecedented achievement by itself. Just so as thought.
Putin is again not a tsar, he doesn't do the work alone and so far there are discussions but obviously there is no better solution - like yours suggested - deemed worth to put into reality. Might there be reason for that, other than the oligarchs in Russia that are hold by an increasingly short leash, like in China?
>3 dead on a beach in Russia, tragic and an act of terror on civilians for sure but here we have more people dead in traffic accidents for comparison.
Yes, 3 dead on a beach in Russia. And many others dead elsewhere. Every single day.
This is complete dereliction of duty, outright treason in fact.
Because while Russian civilians have no physical security anymore, and not just Russian civilians, but as it turns out, key General Staff figures too, the enemy has ironclad guarantees from the Kremlin that there will be no missiles landing on their heads.
Make that make sense other than as Putin being a traitor?
You make sure that no drones fall on beaches in Russia by immediately sending a Zircon to wherever Zelensky is after that. Then whoever replaces Zelensky will have the choice of either not doing that anymore or testing Putin's patience again. If the latter, another Zircon flies to the right place (no matter where that palce is), and you rinse and repeat until there is nobody brave enough to kill Russian civilians.
That is what you are supposed to do as the Russian president with the *power* in your hands and the *duty* to protect the lives and wellbeing of your citizens.
You have such a simplistic, myopic view of the world. Are you on the spectrum?
Scott Ritter explained the agenda the other day; which revolves around an MI6 / CIA psyop designed to reduce Russia's internal resilience, as it cannot be reduced externally on the battlefield.
He cites Gilbert Doctorrow as being a prime mover in the plot.
So, individuals like Denis and GM "Work, brothers!" to undermine the state from within, by constantly sniping at decision-making about which they have no real clue.
We already know that GM seeks a restoration of the USSR, and if that comes, he will be well-placed to become the new head of the NKVD as his reward for services rendered.
It seems a highly plausible explanation for their incessant doom mongering.
The more I think about it, the more sense it makes.
I used to think it was because of a love triangle between GM, Putin, and a mystery woman - either way, his attitude to Putin verges on the delusional.
There is money available, too, for those who are prepared to write the sort of guff he writes.
Another, even more plausible explanation, is that things aren't actually going very well.
One just wonders how are they supposed to undermine the Rus state from within writing essay comments on an English language blog, in English. A little bit silly.
Moreover, some of them are hypersensitive and quick to ban people. ;)
Anyway, here is an interesting Ukie paper about cognitive warfare:
https://ccdcoe.org/uploads/2026/04/ONTOLOGICAL_FOUNDATIONS_OF_COGNITIVE_WARFARE.pdf
Another aspect of Ukraine as a good proxy - can operate in Russian speaking realm.
Wonder no longer.
Many Russians speak English, and are connected to the internet.
are you fucking stupid?
in what reality do you occupy your time?
like you see what this incompetent Putin is doing as VIRTUE? How grotesque.
No; the real one; and indeed I do.
then you're flatly insane
you believe that a leader normalizing the killing of his people is a virtue
"It sounds to me more and more that you are part of Elenski's PR-campaign."
Hey Frank!
Did you check out "GM's" Substack stats?
He never comments on anything other than Simplicius's articles.
No tagline, no avatar and a handle that's so generic it's impossible to search for anywhere else.
Thousands of words here, yet no publications of his own, no jokes, no insightful quotes, no funny memes.
Almost like a man (woman, xe, bot) that doesn't even exist, and yet is fascinated with accelerating the Ukraine war up to Armageddon.
the final goal being pushing Russia AND Europe to mutual destruction for the good of the anglosaxon maritime empire. GM is an embeded agent provocateur and everyone here knows it. But he is not the only one. They work in teams.
There are few of them here writing geopolitical essays, but god forbid write their own substack.
Well smarty pants lady is supposedly writing on soft porn topics.;)
All roads lead to Tel Aviv.
At $7K a pop, it's a lucrative business to be in.
Unlike you Frank, GM is expressing his opinion on the SMO and is commenting with substantial claims and arguments.
You and others only express opinions about GM as a person, not a word about the War, no arguments for or against, no conclusions what so ever.
To claim GM is part of Zelenskys warfare against Russia is an insult.
You know what I think about opinions, Mikey.
Substantial claims and arguments is just what I miss. All I see is lamenting and arguing for a total devastation of Europe & Russia.
While his words talk to the emotions very well, his suggestions all end in total war and even the use of nukes.
I translated a few of his arguments to my 89 year old father who was a kid when the boms fell on Berlin. He was terrified and appaled that people even dare to argue for a repetition of that horror.
Neither you or GM knows what war really means to normal people. You're disgusting creatures who offer other people of course, not yourself, to the horror of war - even if is by words only.
That's my opinion.
Ok, I am a disgusting people…
I have never advocated nukes.
I have always written about making this War SHORT.
I have expressed concern over both Ukrainian and Russian soldier/people dying for NOTHING.
Of course I am the disgusting - not those who performs these despicable acts and prolong the War.
Hurrah! Orwell and Huxley was right….
You're not disgusting, just arrogant, tedious, and wrong.
It is pointless attempting a counter argument, as he has no argument in the first place. It is not possible to reason someone out of a position that is not reasonable. He simply advocates extreme violence as the solution to everything. That is childish and simplistic and ignores reality.
GM has more arguments than you have adjective over ones person.
No he doesn't. He has one. Maximal escalation as the solution to everything. Kill everyone. That's it. In toto.
Could you please elaborate how Russia can shut down the Polish border through air power alone? The Americans failed to stop the Ho Chi Minh trail despite having troops and the South Vietnamese army, they failed to close Taliban shipments over the Pakistani border. Israel struggles to stop arms reaching Hamas. What secret methods does Russia have? Please don't answer threaten Poland with nuclear missiles.
Obviously threatening Poland with nukes is one way to do it.
The other is to hit the railways and roads with 75-kt bunker buster missiles that will bury deep into the ground and then explode. Kinzhals and Zircons will do the job marvelously.
This will excavate giant craters like this one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedan_(nuclear_test)#/media/File:Sedan_Plowshare_Crater.jpg
Which will make it impossible to restore logistics for many months.
You don't hit Poland, you hit just inside, e.g. here:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/T1jZngoKun3rf7bY8
If they try to build new roads quickly elsewhere, you repeat the exercise.
And if they start doing airlifts and other stunts, then yes, you erase Poland entirely.
The Americans dropped 3million tons of bombs on the Ho Chi Minh trail, without effect. Vietnam is 50km wide at its narrowest, unlike the 535km of the Polish border.
Initially Russia did attack railway tracks, but it isn't cost effective. The tracks were repaired in 2 hours, and Kinzhals cost 10million, which is why they are used on high value targets. Dirt roads through forests are harder to monitor and disrupt.
I noticed the crater image you posted is from a nuclear test, not a conventional missile.
>I noticed the crater image you posted is from a nuclear test, not a conventional missile.
Did you even read what I posted? I explicitly mentioned "75-kt bunker buster missiles"
Of course there is no way to seal the border without nukes.
In fact you may have to use several hundred of them and dig a continuous moat along the whole border if they try to move stuff through dirt roads
That is still preferrable to the current catastrophe
P.S. The comparison with Vietnam is just assinine. The US wasn't trying to stop attacks on its own mainland and recover what is rightfully its own historic land inhabitted by its own people, it was the imperialist aggressor on the literla other side of the globe. When you are subject to a 24/7 strategic bombing campaign all tools should be used to stop. Including the nukes.
I'm sorry - you must have missed the part where I asked you not to say nuclear weapons are the solution.
Realistically, nuclear weapons against Ukraine hitting civilian railways and roads, would be met by total condemnation. Every country, including China would sanction Russia, and Russia would go down. Nuclear weapons would be provided within a month to Ukraine for retaliation. Nuclear fallout over Europe would unite everyone against Russia.
My comparison with Vietnam was to prove it is impossible to close the border using conventional weapons.
Why would it be met with condemnation?
It will kill almost nobody but it will save millions. Ukrainians themselves primarily.
Ukraine is criss-crossed by many rivers. Those rivers require bridges. Destroy bridges. Double- and triple-tape repair crews.
oh fucking please
do you people not know what a range circle is? How about this- you go and MAP OUT each bridge and a range circle for RF weapons LIKELY to achieve a hit and then cross analyze against the odds that the structure can be disabled or destroyed and/or replaced/augmented with temporary bridges?
FFS I am TIRED of hearing over and over how this or that thing can just be done like a wave of the gd hand when to do this thing you need the TOOLS to do so and you lack them.
Triple tap...with WHAT? You understand that cruise missile survivability in Ukranus is LOW, right? You need to study transit times of munitions, dude.
It, Rassvat, will only enable Russian frontforces to work effectively at the front and deeper into the Ukraine defense, maybe killing a few more Ukis and save some Russian souls.
I laughed hard when I saw the territory gain table. 750 square kilometers on a 1000+ km frontline equals only 750 meters gain on average which is 25 meters/day. I know that those ”gains” are concentrated to the holy grail of Donbass (and Charkov) but not putting those numbers into perspective is self-delusional.
>I know that those ”gains” are concentrated to the holy grail of Donbass (and Charkov)
Most of the gains are from Kharkov where the AFU finally is collapsing locally.
But that is the least important sector of the frontline, and it's also literally the most remote from Ukrainian point of view area
>numbers into perspective
The most important perspective is the ratio between remaining territory under Ukro-NATO-Nazi control and monthly Russian gains.
Currently that ratio is such that the proxy will be eliminated in the early 22nd century.
Yes, war of attrition is nonlinear, etc. We know that.
But that doesn't change the fact that the *current* rate of advance is very slow, and that the expansion of the strikes into the deep Russian rear has vastly outpaced the Russian advances in the other direction. Which is the most important parameter of the war.
You cannot claim that territorial gains are "The most important perspective" and then state there is no correlation in a war of attrition, and then further state that Ukraine's strike depth into Russia is "the most important parameter."
The most important parameter, by far, is the relative rates of attrition, particularly in regard to manpower where, even in the worst case scenario of Russian losses, the numbers are heavily in Russia's favour.
Ever heard of Falkenhayn?
I had not but have just read his wiki page. Seems he might have agreed with me.
Perhaps I should have made clear that the relative rate I refer to is in relation to total available resources, i.e. including reserves. So, Russia worst case an unlikely c. 1.5million lost is only c.25% of total whereas Ukraine's conservative 1.5milion losses is probably more than 50%. (Very rough, ball-park figures)
Finally an honest discussion with facts. Yes, I agree with you that Russia wouldnt have any problem to outlast Ukraine when it comes to soldiers.
What I dislike with that strategy and Falkenhayns is that killing people on mathematical terms is a mortal sin. Lets say that Russia already has lost 600 000 men and Ukraine 1,5 million. If 400 000 more Russian dead would mean another 1 million killed Ukrainians and their back broken two years from now, I wouldnt support it. Its an abonimation.
We've been hearing that Ukraine is cracking, the rate of losses is unsustainable for four years now.
True, I've fallen into that trap myself in the past but I have learned to be patient. However, it does now seem that Russia has decided to get it over with - no more talk, just total destruction of the Ukrainian state militarily and economically - "Work, brothers."
We've heard that "Russia is finally taking the gloves off, no for real this time really!" how many times over the last four and a half years?
It is abundantly obvious that:
1. The Russian populace is in favor of the war, but only if they are not too personally inconvenienced. Mostly, they just want to get back to their social media feeds, celebrity gossip, and similar burning issues.
2. The Russian leadership do not want to fight the West. They want to join it.
3. There is no 11-D chess, no master plan.
These things make Russia prey for the West. The sociopaths who rule the West see Russian dithering and indecision, not as reasonableness or humanitarianism, but as contemptible weakness.
RF does *not* have the military technical means *outside of use of nuclear weapons* at present to close the Polish border.
Russia COULD HAVE and SHOULD HAVE already developed said means. We've been waiting for Iskander-1000 for YEARS NOW.
Missiles of this class are in ABUNDANCE in PRK and Iran and could have been acquired and licensed for local production as Shahed was.
Seriously, STFU about nuclear weapons to close the border and advocate for development of a conventional solution. Use of nuclear weapons would force the abandonment of Russia by ANY ally they presently have. And it would legitimize their use by the JUSA and Israel.
Einstein did you ever heard about INF treaty?
Soviets/Russians did not lose any war in the last 100 years, USA/NATO did almost all and it usually was against guys in sandals wit AKs; so those guys are doing everything that SHOULD be done with a means that they have, USA/NATO losing every war with 1000x more resources is disgrace. baneristan war is proxy war of 70+ countries against Russia + minor support from Korea; so they are doing good job and by listening to your BS Russia would be balkanized in '22-'23 as west palned.
the INF treaty was abrogated many years ago, you stupid dipshit
none of the rest of anything you said has ANY relevance to now
tell me einstein how many years? and how many years to develop, test and procure new IRBM? so that we can learn something from a genious like you...
-
It is very relevant, one side is wining, other side is lossing and you dumb fuck have great idea for a winning side to waste resources on stupid crap, you must be amerikan...
Re sanction: yes, the European elites are reaching such a dead-end that Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni refused to impose sanctions on Russian fur coats; surely, they are worried about their own people! (Of course, I am being sarcastic here).
Re Starmer: his replacement has not changed foreign policy, so there is nothing to rejoice! In the end, Presidents, Prime Ministers, etc. are just puppets, especially when it comes to foreign policy, which is decided by other people behind the scene!
Economics, not puppet leaders, will decide the end. And medium term, it does not look good for the EU and UK. Nor does it look good for the US as their country falls deeper and deeper into systemic corruption and Jewish control.
Melons is a skank.
't is why she needs her fur coats. from Russia, with love.
In her case it's all just fornication.
Yep. Immigrants still pouring into Italy despite all the promises.
with the exception of Pedro Sanchez, who is being targeted
I am not convinced that Burnham is as rabidly pro-Israel as Starmer was. Nor that he wants to be a 'Statesman' as much.
I think he is much more domestically focussed.
He is a 'thing' and totally subject to the Thing of England - king Chuck.
I definitely read that either on the very day he entered politics, or declared his intention to stand in the by-election and enter parliament so as to assume leadership of the LP, he joined the "Friends of Israel" group.
NOBODY gets anywhere in the UK except by kissing the ring.
If they are a spineless colourless sodomite with an unnatural interest in Ukrainian rent boys in addition, then so much the better.
I agree, he's not as rabidly pro-Israel as Starmer. But that's not saying much - he's still rabidly pro-Israel.
I wouldn't be hugely surprised if Starmer, or his wife, was Mossad. I honestly think he cared for Israel more than Britain.
I don't see that (yet) with Burnham.
But I agree with Tim if he doesn't want to be "Corbyned" he's got to support the genocide. It's just a question of how absurdly he does it.
back in june already Burnham appointed former Labour Friends of Israel chair James Purnell as his chief of staff and Israeli news rejoices - https://www.thejc.com/news/politics/burnham-is-someone-who-will-listen-and-who-cares-says-jewish-former-special-adviser-xpnpjmwt
Use the surname of the new British Prime Minister as a suggestion.
BURN the HAM on your eyes. ;)
(Explanation: if people are blinkered, in Italy we say that they have ham on their eyes)
nice! when spoken his name sounds like "burn'm" ;-)
Guess what Burnham did once he became Prime Minister! He appointed the former Defense Minister, John Healey, as the new Chancellor of the Exchequer (i.e. the British equivalent of the Minister of Finance). And John Healy resigned from his previous role because he was not getting enough money in his ministry from Starmer, triggering the latter's resignation. Can you see the plot? ;)
also his early appointment of Purnell as his chief-of-staff. Craig Murray's worried - https://x.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/2069721014938841375
So, it seems that Ukie PR machinery started to push highest KIA rates ever (41-42k in July), because of the increased territorial loses.
A while ago Rus stated they would systematically degrade everything and now people are surprised.
I remember well all those critical thinkers that bring added value to our lives here, according to one of them, how they were hysterical that nothing ever happens.
Life on the Internet can do strange things to the most sensible people.
$7K a post is a massive inducement.
1.25 million dead is the real number.
Firstly, I am talking abut monthly "score" Ukies claim. And it fits nicely not only into their PR efforts to deflect the facts on the ground, but also into their ideas of killing 50k a month. And here they do not talk about Rus troops, but Russians.
Secondly, you are very confident about this number. Where does it come from?
Tell us, Franzie.
As usual, Ukro-nazi talmudist lies are simple. In this case they take the figures of other organizations, such as the Pussy-Riot affiliate, Media zona, who strangely do a fairly accurate count - and simply reverse them. There are many other signs such as the corpse exchanges which show an average kill ratio of about 30 (recently over 50) to 1 in favor of Russia. Lots more where that came from. Check it out yourself and remember that Zelensky and his band of 300 Jewtans (see the movie starring him) are children of Satan like NATO and USA - liars .
I have a feeling that Frenchies will do what they do best: left will engage in their classic infighting, sabotaging themselves, and people will vote against somebody again. Usually that somebody is Le Pen, due to the fearmongering.
Lets see what happens.
The smart money is on Brigitte Macron emerging and taking over control of the whole of Europe.
She has already shown she can outwit her husband with a smart blow to the face, such that he needs to wear sunglasses for a few days to hide what she did.
Candace Owens had better watch out - she will be first on the extradition list.
Will she march on Moscow, though? Are we in for encore une foi?
Almost certainly.
She is a great admirer of Sun Tzu, who has convinced her to always do what your enemy least expects.
But Russia is loooooosing and the US is still wiiiiiiining
"As time goes by, it seems more and more that Putin’s strategic patience may be paying off, as the old hostile European structures slowly collapse like an iceberg calving into the sea."
Perhaps that will be the case, in which case those of us that were suspicious of the go slow approach will be proven wrong.
Interesting as to weapons, both drones, starlink and real time battlefield viewing have proven substantial advantages. Drones were emerging anyway, however Ukraine taught Russia how vital they were, the other two were US advantages that they have now shown to any adversary that they need be neutralized or at least equaled. Iran too has seen the need to get off GPS, yet the US went to war there ignoring the drone threat Ukraine had revealed.
The US is completely hubristic in its approach - the result of believing its own propaganda as to being the indispensible nation.
Not that the Scots aren't far behind, of course.
"however Ukraine taught Russia how vital they were"
Tell that to Lancets, or fiber-optic FPVs invented by Russia, Gerans that became an whole family of multi-purpose, most numberous drones of the war
у этого пидора Зеленского и его кураторов все пошло по пизде и они начали как сучки скулить о перемириях , надеюсь ВВП дожмет этих пидоров , думаю Краматорск скоро сольют там сейчас очень тяжело для ВСУ , всем добра ! победа будет за нами !
lol
I am not a fan of getting personal but it's quite annoying to see you put this comment section to an all time low with your 'lol' without an argument. This is however exposing your western arrogant mindset to ridicule all you do not agree with or don't understand. I see that daily with my teenagers who are ignorant and insecure.
Your behavior against a fellow commentator should reach the level of an adult, as I see it.
By the way, I think Хуй Вам has it right.
😂
Денис Вы походу полупокер из ихней масти
" ... everything went to hell for this fagot Zelensky and his curators and they started whining like bitches about truces, I hope the GDP will put the squeeze on these fags, I think Kramatorsk will soon be merged there now it’s very difficult for the Armed Forces of Ukraine, good for everyone! victory will be ours!
( In case you were wondering. )
Thanks. I was wondering… ;-)
Ochen Milo. Smejus'.
I don't know what you are saying, Bam, but I agree with every word!
Я не Бэм , по вашему хуй пойми что Вы имели ввиду ... если Вам что то не понятно спрашивайте разберёмся , Краматорск падает это факт сколько осталось хуй его знает Я думаю до сентября , всем добра будьте здоровы живите богато !
BAM as you write it means "to you".
He says that Denis is a smug layman.
That's what I thought! :)
The future of financial innovation is next phase: Integration.
Next phase of finance is no to say no to TradFi and no to want to go back in time and keep everything as is. It's about creating a free, safe platform enabling both ecosystem to thrive together.
Expanding tokenized assets, programmable payments, instant settlement, AI enabled risk management, decentralized technologies, and legally compliant digital identity-all interconnected via trusted financial networks-these are the best opportunities. The industry should leverage the proven stability and governance from traditional financial institutions and digital asset technology innovation and efficiency, to make cross-border payments, capital markets, trade finance and financial inclusion better.
The victory will be determined by shared technical standards, cybersecurity, interoperability, open and transparent governance, and collaboration between banks,fintechs, regulatorsand technology providers. Those institutions that over engineers these bridges will be more likely to overcome friction, drive up resilienceand access new streams ofeconomic value.
Ultimately, the future does not favor separate financial ecosystems; it favors interconnected financial ecosystems. The true mass of innovation is only achieved where trust, technology, and collaboration jointly thrive-bridges always deliver greater value than islands.
Nope.
Хуй Вам
The industry should leverage the proven stability and governance from traditional financial institutions and digital asset technology innovation and efficiency, to make cross-border payments, capital markets, trade finance and financial inclusion better.
Since when is are privatized banking sector to be trusted or stable for that matter?
There are no open and free capital markets. There are oligarchs, banks, hedgefonds, monopolies and insurance companies playing a rigged game together with corrupt and changeable political figures who provide a so called legislation to make theft and manipulation legal.
I am astounded to read such nonsense here.
I think he is taking a long-term view here on a global basis. If you look around, you see more and more developing countries signing up to the Russian/Chinese alternatives to one degree or another. The West as we know it is full of mismanaged and corrupt oligarchs, international corporations and investment bankers who can never be relied upon to provide trusted and free markets. However, the evolution occurring in the East and South definitely favours a new world order composed of a multi-nodal structure.