Last friday Russia again launched a series of devastating energy grid attacks, proving once more that the latest campaign is in fact a systematic one to disable Ukraine’s grid rather than reflexive retaliation:
The media’s attritional war on reality is buckling under its own ponderous falsity, failing in the goal of eating away at the Thinking Person’s connection to sincerity and truth.
And S&P at ATH. Tech stocks at ATH. Who freaking cares? All money flushing onshore from the EU and China to the US in search for the AI and Quantum nirvana. Lol...
The Empire is in attack mode which all comes down to its assertion that you are either with or against us forcing countries to pick a side and, if you're on the wrong side, bad things will happen there. Might is right.
The reaction to the Masters of the Universe's open threat to attack the non-worshippers of the USD so far has been weak. BRICS itself is a weak-formed union that barely trusts each other. That's no way to stand against an opponent bent on destroying you. Trump will try to convince Russia to accept a deal which would include the removal of sanctions which means very little because he also said that he would apply tariffs on any country moving away from the USD.
There are also rumours of a second AFU attack into Russian territory to improve the terms of the
soon peace deal. Russia could let them advance into its borders as much as they want trapping them in by launching a concentrated multi-pronged blitzkrieg counter-offensive and surrounding Kyiv. The AFU kamikaze expeditionary force would lose their line of supply cut off deep in enemy territory and be forced to surrender or be obliterated along with all the other retreating stragglers. And that would be a checkmate against Ukraine. But it looks like Russia is going to settle for a lesser deal at a time when the Empire is in full-spectrum attack mode.
So, BRICS and friends are no match against the Empire as things stand because they are too soft and afraid to offend the Empire which can chip away to break the will of one country at a time. So far Russia fights alone and the Empire knows it. Lack of support from its allies could be the reason Russia is so measured in its SMO. The Masters of the Universe will continue to divide and conquer non-compliant countries. The Empire has struck back while Russia alone holds the line.
Hence, BRICS less R equals BICS which is an appropriate acronym meaning disposable lighter.
The Empire is bent on turning BRICS into BICS one flick at a time. lol
BRICS & friends are too soft and afraid bc the examples are not good. All “medium sized” countries that have opposed the Gringo empire (excluding autarkic & nuclear armed Best Korea) have been thoroughly wrecked: Libya, Iraq, Venezuela, Cuba, Yemen, Myanmar, etc. and, now Syria as well.
I guess elites in the Global South are not eager to stick their necks out to fight for multipolarity after seeing how things are developing…
BRICS countries are well aware of the empire's strength. However, BRICS is a long-term project, not a quick solution. Many, including alt-media sympathetic to the BRICS cause, yet seem to expect near future gains - new global reserves, payments systems, etc. - even in the face o0f consistent BRICS pronouncements to the contrary. And as BRICS continues to say, its objective is to provide alternative choice, not a direct challenge to the USD system. Right now, they are simply providing trade arrangements offering payment in national currencies.
My issue is that the Evil Gringo Empire has still a lot of fuel in the tank and it still can get a “lucky shot” and down the R or C of brics if he gets enough time and opportunities for it. And time and opportunities is exactly what R and C are giving away with their mostly passive strategy.
Victor, BICS are going to get dismantled one country at a time before they make it long-term unless it changes its formula. Long-term can't help you when you face short-term existential threats. The Empire does not accept alternative choices. You are either with or against them. That's the choice.
I agree. Trump clearly has the BRICS in his sights. The BRICS in 2025 need to urgently take action to ward off these attacks which Trump will launch. Slow and steady is a recipe for disaster.
Economically, briCs is some 80% China. And China is dangerously dependent on exports to the US; there is simply no other market that could absorb their manufacturing output. They tried, and failed, to diversify with the Silk Road initiative, which was meant to increase Chinese involvement in the EU market; but the EU is, firstly, rapidly failing economically and, secondly, so wretchedly enslaved to the US that they will cut their own collective throat sooner than disobey American instructions to antagonize China.
So, if the US under Trump and the neocons goes full sanction mode on China, the US populace (not the elites) will suffer massive shortages of everything, experience great hardship and be beggared; but China will be bankrupted into an acute economic crisis. Now, from the insane point of view of the Talmudist and Mammonist elites, /both/ outcomes are desirable, so there is no effective way to dissuade the US from this course of action.
The Chinese know this, and are afraid; an economic breakdown on this scale will certainly sweep Xi and his faction from power, and cause great difficulties to whoever picks up the helm afterwards. China is not resilient to sanctions the way Russia was, and efforts to develop such resilience are too little too late.
That is why the briCs is paralyzed, and will remain this way for the next couple of years, at least.
Only 16% of China's exports go to the US. That doesn't seem to be enough
to qualify as "dangerously dependent." What I do think is dangerously dependent is the fact that 85% of all antibiotics used in the US are manufactured in China along with numerous other highly critical medications. The US is one of the most sickly populations (think highly dependent on meds) on the planet. What effect will the loss of these medications have? What about all the US military hardware that can't be repaired without parts from china? Lots of their wunderwaffen can't be built without parts from China. I think there is a brutal reality awaiting donaldo. Cutting off China will be much more damaging to the US than it will be for China.
China is also vulnerable to blockades of food and fuel. Merely blockading the Panama and Suez, as well as Malacca could create serious problems for China in short order.
China has a sneaky way of sitting back and patiently waiting to move in after the opposing parties have been weakened. China may not fight wars, but it does know how to covertly infiltrate the political systems of countries for control like it got caught doing in Canada. Naughty, naughty, China. you no do anymore, huh? lol
Funny stuff considering that it is $lumville's ruling ZionaZis that have been behind the so-called global color revolutions and almost every act of terror on this planet in the last 2 decades. China owns you and he who pays the piper calls the tune.
'China may not fight wars' - Huh? Just recently after WW2 - Korea, Tibet, India, attempts against Soviet Union in the 60s, Vietnam, etc.
China fights (and starts) plenty of wars including 'wars of aggression'
it is a modern nation state as any other, aggressive, and utterly ruthless.
do not insult China by making them some kind of peace-loving conflict avoiding hippies, they are not. they try not to get into fights they cannot win, however will (and did and do) start plenty of their own. There is a reason why China has had territorial disputes with every one of its neighbors
It's been well over 50 years since any of those wars you list. Little border disputes aren't wars.
Compare China's record with that of the United States over the same time frame (since world war 2). It's an order of magnitude different especially if you count all the dirty wars the U.S loves to fight.
using your logic US had no wars at all, not even 'border disputes'. for example China lost the amount soldier count against Vietnam (that China started) in 3 weeks in 1979 that USA lost in Vietman in 10 years... so much for for 'little border disputes'
by the way, I was in India in spring of 2016 and remember reading newsletters that again China was sending its military units across line of demarcation in Himalayan mountains, constantly probing its neighbor. Just in the last 25 years China got territory (that I know of, may be more) from Russia (to settle border issues), from Tajikistan (in Pamir mountains).
Countries in the region know China very well and very aware of it. it is a huge predator that is close by, if that predator is relatively weak then you may be safe for the moment, otherwise make strong friends (enemies of your enemies). US may come and go but ultimately it is across the ocean and has its own continent North America. China is nearby and historically had Korea and Thailand and Vietman and all of south east Asia under occupation as some point. Ask Koreans how many times over thousands of years China invaded them, ask Thai about their history, ask Viet - you get a very different picture
Let me clarify my comment - the last major war that China has fought was a 3 week war against Vietnam in the late 1970s (honestly - I didn't even know about it). Whatever border disputes since then, like the ones you list with India, Russia, or whoever else, are not wars. Those conflicts are completely different, and on a much tinier scale, than the dozens of invasions and bombing campaigns and dirty wars the U.S has fought, by choice, thousands of miles from its own borders, over that same time period.
Yes China is a big, powerful country with a long and bloody history. But there are many countries like that. I can't think of a single so-called "great power" that doesn't have a body count. China was itself colonized for a time by Europeans.
All that doesn't contradict my argument that, over the same time frame (since world war 2), China's foreign policy, in aggregate, has been an order of magnitude less destructive and militant than that of the U.S, especially if you count all the dirty wars the U.S loves to fight.
Let's do a quick count, from an arbitrary year - 1991 (post-Cold War): Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq again, Libya, Syria, Yemen. That's just the official armed engagements. Might as well sprinkle in drone wars in Somali, Pakistan, and Niger. I am sure I am missing some.
China has Zero to fear from the angloZionaZi paper tiger and its constant howling about "militarily confronting" the "China threat". How stupid! The destruction of Natostan in the sputtering rump Ukrapper dumpster fire is in fact the death knell of $lumville USSA and the inevitable collapse of its IOU worthless (ex) Saudimercan toilet paper dollah. The entire chosenite Wall St sewer is on the verge of implosion as Pentacon Kill Industries and its garbage weapons can no longer bring home the bacon. No more free stuff and if gung hoers in $lumville are under the delusion that they can "take on" the Bear and the Dragon and all their friends then I would suggest putting down the crack pipe, snapping out of the fentanyl delUSion and looking around at the stinking human slum in $lumville proper. It's all over and soon the fat hag WILL sing, the cookie mobster Nudelman and Bath-house Barry Obomber and the ruling Zio$ that have brought America (sic) to its debauched and ruinous state.
Bums don't decide Zilch when the fiat mu$cle no longer works.
Get ready for bankruptcy because Pentacon has become a joke...remember Afghanistan? And you imagine these deadbeats can whack the bear and Dragon. More LOL, "bot".
I tend to agree. Also not that desperation and increased violence usually signal something…. The best thing for the USA and the ROW is for the the former to withdraw its malign influence and focus on rebuilding its own crumbling infrastructure and perhaps even become a more productive member of the world rather than creative destruction and controlled chaos.
For that they will have to rid themselves of the ZionaZi poi$on in the body politic. Shut down Hollyweird pedo machine and take back all media from the neanderthal thugs that own the narrative. The inevitable collapse of their fiat filth will indeed manage a lot of that in short order. Otherwise USSA will die poisoned by the fetid albatross called israhell, lashed around every head of ussan tax cattle. The enemy is the ZionaZi parasite in the belly of the lurching idiot Golem thrashing in the Washing town sewer.
China has a lot to fear, not militarily, but economically. Their economy is reliant on export to the US to such an extent, that a full sanctions regime would break China economically, without a shot being fired.
It would, of course, also completely ruin Americans, in much the way the EU's economy is collapsing now, only worse; but the Talmudist and Mammonist Davos elites don't care about ordinary Americans, only about their own power, which will not be endangered by impoverishing their populace.
China quite rightly is dumping toxic, soon to be worthless USSAN treasury notes. It has however, more important markets that can still afford to pay for its products with real money. Apart from that it is now more concentrated on its own internal market to continue boosting growth. US days of "buying" free stuff with toilet paper is over.
Only 16% of their exports go to the US. You might want to learn how many of the critical medications needed to keep sickly Americans alive comes from china. 85% of all antibiotics used in the US are manufactured in China. Do you believe losing that import will have no effect? Any idea how many deaths are prevented every single day by use of these antibiotics? Then there are several dozen other meds that a very large number of these sickly Americans can't live without. The US is much more dependent on China than what you seem to believe. A very rude awakening is in the near future.
Didn't Napoleon say they one with the last reserves wins the battle. I can imagine the US and China watching each other wondering if they are going to commit. The fact that China is a military peer prevents the US from committing it's army.
Of course China understands the West's agenda for it.
Thing is - China has been preparing and is prepared.
China pioneered the ability to block out foreign interference via the internet as one example.
Another example is that China's exports more to the Global South than it does to the West.
What China is doing is pushing out the day in which open confrontation occurs because China is still growing faster than the US despite China's supposed economic stumbles.
Why not delay a confrontation when you are growing stronger, every day, than your attacker?
That's a lot better than what I expected. Losing about 50% (including various US proxies such as Japan and Australia) is survivable in the long run. And I bet the West will make exemptions for itself for the real strategic imports.
The reality is that Chinese manufacturing dominates the entire world much as OPEC dominates the oil market.
While a small country could figure out how to get oil without OPEC, a large one certainly cannot - and the West absolutely cannot survive without the products of Chinese manufacturing.
Not now, and not for the short and medium term foreseeable future even if those morons could get their shit together and reindustrialize.
Furthermore - all the present signs are in the opposite direction as opposed to the industrialize one.
Why don't you provide some sources to prop up your false assumptions? Sounds like you've been getting your information from the potato in the white house.
I think you misinterpret the signs. This Empire is being liquidated by it's Central Banking master's, the death throes are simply the sucking out of every drop of profit from the populous of the West as the genocidal enslavement increases in impetuous through the complete and absolute corruption of every single aspect of Western Governance.
The genocidal treason of the Covid19 Coup D'état should have awoken in rational thinkers the recognition, the point of no return for the Globalist Parasites, where the remainder of the 2020s will see the UN"s primary purpose as overseers of Mass Genocide and enslave of humanity.
There is an unlikely possibility of a recognition and successful rising up of humanities higher consciousness and selfless courage to over throw the parasitic masters of this Satanic Empire. Regardless before the mid half of this century there is a real likelihood the human population of the earth will be counted only in the millions.
The best hope is that the parasite caste will find themselves as square one and their numbers can be counted on one hand.
So anything you don't agree with is a bot? You sound much more like an establishment funded troll than aj does. His statement is much more accurate than anything you've offered.
I don't disagree with anything you say, but I think the East looks at things over a longer timescale.
When they asked Zhou En Lai about the effect of French Revolution in 1972, he said "Too early to say". Now I know it was apparently a misunderstanding, but there's a kernel of truth to it.
The balance of forces is moving, relatively quickly against the West, despite their best efforts. Even "successes" like Syria bring new problems.
So it may be that the BRICS+ are happy to avoid antagonizing an increasingly desperate West, in order to let Time do its work.
A lot of words saying only that the author does not actually understand what is going on.
BRICS is not about a creating a childish board game of Risk style competing military blocs - it is about creating a new and different world order for all those who wish to participate. And it seems most of the world wishes to participate.
BRICS need not confront the West militarily; all it needs to do is to continue to grow faster than the West. BRICS as it is, is a slightly arger share of global GDP than the West and can become double that of the West in less than 30 years.
Consider BRICS to be economic and sovereign nation-state insurgents; they win by not losing.
Only fools think that confronting the West in its only strength, is a good idea.
Yeah, my argument to, this geopolitical game is also played on the diplomatic and economic front, and on those fronts, the West still looks desperate and is loosing in a big way. The rest of the world has just to wait, most debt is on the Western side, not on the other side.
And Syria is just one example more, of the destructive behavior of the West, if they think they have to change something they do it via force, corruption and lying. I am not seeing Russian politicians in Georgia, their direct neighbor, I only see Western politicians, the rest of the World is fed up with the West and its disgusting ways.
And to be clear: the West can get out of this hole. It just will not be able to do so with the elites and policies that created the situation to start with - which is what is going on now.
Even so - the real problem, the strategic problem for the West is that its system of extracting value from the rest of the world is breaking/broken. This value extraction, in the past, was a function of superior technology, capital, leadership and strategy. The value extraction was thus not entirely unjustified given the real contributions the West did create and provide.
But real life is about "what have you done for me, lately".
None of the above 4 are true any more: the 2nd and 3rd world has been capitalizing the West for years now (look up the millions of articles about "savings gluts"). Leadership - lol. Strategy - I can't even lol because it is the behavior of a cocaine addled hamster hitting the "neocon/neoliberal strategy" lever over and over and over.
Technology? There is still some, but it is technology that largely does not matter for everyday living. Nobody needs an iPhone 16 to survive or even prosper. Nothing of actual real utility, above the massive capital expense, has come out of AI, or self-driving cars, or AR/VR or whatever other overhyped nonsense that has come out of the West in the last decade or more. It is all "Let them eat cake" <-- replacing cake with social media.
"Nothing of actual real utility, above the massive capital expense, has come out of AI, "
Not exactly true. Tom Friedman of the NYT was knocked for a loop when he discovered China's "dark factories" were dark because an all-robot labor force, organized with AI and low latency real 5G communications, can operate perfectly well without lighting. AI-5G- Robotics is making China an invincible industrial force, something the US has no prayer of repeating here. (Unless China sets up shop over here... like a North American colony)
China's also becoming energy independent, using domestic coal and nuclear energy to replace ICE vehicles run on imported oil, though Friedman would never admit that reality. He's too wedded to the Climate Catastrophe narrative.
Just be cause they get called the ‘master of the universe’ does not mean that one ought to use the term. Narcissistic sociopaths love worship, what say we not give it to them…..
"The AFU kamikaze expeditionary force would lose their line of supply cut off deep in enemy territory and be forced to surrender or be obliterated along with all the other retreating stragglers"
Forgive my ignorance. I've never been in the military and am not knowledgeable at all about these things but I have been trying to follow this war and I don't understand why Russia doesn't seem to use air power other than drones? I mean, if the AFU comes into Kursk or somewhere else in Russia in big numbers why don't the Russians just bomb them into oblivion?
Why aren't they doing that now in Kursk? And for that matter why aren't they doing that in Donetsk? Where are the attack helicopters or bombers or other air power?
They do use the air force, but nowadays this is not done the way it was in WW2, with waves of screaming Stukas and nightly carpet-bombing raids. Today the air force uses stand-off weapons: missiles and FABs with planing modules, not gravity bombs. And the Russians are doing just that. Doing it the old-fashioned way would expose them to unacceptable losses to modern AD. The future is now, old man.
_______
And yes, it is planing, not "planning". As in aquaplaning, referring to gliding aerodynamics.
You are the idiot that said China is dependent on the US but then you have the audacity to attack and insult someone for asking a question he clearly said he didn't know about? Typical dimocrat moron. Go play on the highway if your mom will let you out of the basement.
Yeah, Rus have only two allies - their army and their navy.
On a personal note, I have a gazprom bank account with union pay card and lately travelling through china I couldnt use the card anymore, due to the new sanctions re gazprom. I cannot believe that chinese dont even back their own card in their own country.
There is even more to consider than just Russia being taken down. China is not as strong as it seems, and is currently going through upheavals both economically and culturally. While you may not agree with the following, please just consider:
The CCP consistently overhypes its economic data. Independent financial observers have determined that actual economic indicators have been overstated by 5% GDP growth per year. Unemployment is rampant, new graduates may be as much as 50% unemployed. The economic situation is currently a badly disguised recession that is quickly moving into a full-blown depression. The middle class are being hurt hard, and are moving back into poverty. Homelessness is increasing, as people cannot pay the mortgages on their homes. All aspects of society are heavily In debt, including provincial governments. Real estate has collapsed, including all associated construction enterprises. Everywhere businesses are laying off workers, and even not paying wages for months. This includes state-owned businesses which were always touted as “iron ricebowls” for their stability. Banks are closing, and those that remain are seizing customer's deposits or only allowing small transactions. Foreign businesses are scared of the the CCP's new business restrictions, and are moving their large industries to other SE Asian countries. Large Chinese cities are polluted, both air and water. Floods frequently ravage smaller cities, because flood control is so poorly designed.
The Chinese people are in revolt, such that there are spontaneous demonstrations everywhere, and attempts to fight for their “rights” by taking their pleas to the government. Instead they're getting arrested on any pretense. The Chinese people are increasingly blaming both Xi Jingping and the Communist Party. All this is happening in spite of the fact that Chinese society is the most surveilled and controlled on earth, where they spend more on 'internal protection' than they do on the military.
I suggest you look through some of the following channels:
All of Ukraine’s fortified defensive lines in Donbas were established between 2014 and 2021—initially at the hands of Azov Battalion-type militia once the civil war erupted in the aftermath of the Euromaidan coup and then gradually from 2015 through 2021 as the U.S.-led OTAN became a steady partner. It’s peculiar that Ukraine has no fortifications beyond Pokrovsk, especially since leaders in the West have insisted on “fighting to the last Ukrainian,” a vociferously stated goal which likely made for quite an entrenched conflict. Military strategists in the West, advising Ukraine, would have had time enough in the 1000 days it took Russia to reach Pokrovsk to begin fortifying areas beyond the citadel, in order to preserve the population of viable Ukrainian soldiers, but no engineers sallied forth to design fortifications or bulk up other earthwork baffles that would slow Russia’s roll eventually as its forces ultimately took village after village. The shovels may have been there for Ukraine, ready, but not the shovel-ready work. The lack of war-urgency or war-industry in the western nations, their inability to *ramp up,* got reflected on the battlefield in Ukraine, even amplified there, where military tactics had an indolent, sometimes irrational quality.
Though U.S. leaders brayed loudly about “fighting to the last Ukrainian,” they behaved like it never actually would be possible to run out of Ukrainians. As if consulting a fantasy chapter out of the Rand Corporation’s bestselling novel about how Russia gets weakened in an unending war, they saw a limitless supply of Ukrainians, as if they could conjure them out of the rasputitsa in numbers sufficient enough—like the terracotta army from 209 B.C. China—that they could overwhelmingly force Russia’s capitulation.
There was always going to be a ceasefire. Except now, Ukraine is in a much worse position because it has lost dramatically more territory since the first ceasefire was negotiated in March 2022. Hundreds of thousands more men, women and children have been needlessly killed or maimed because ‘leaders’ from the West, sitting in the safety of their offices thousands of miles from the battlefield, wanted to continue table-topping a really fun board game, using men, women and children as cheap, disposable, pawns.
Not going to be a cease-fire. Ukraine (the US) will fulfill all the demands that Putin has issued or the SMO will continue until there is no Ukraine as a nation.
The good news is the Ukrainian government-in-exile will be safely tucked away in Lviv, Poland.
Think again of course there will be a cease fire, question is how many in a row? You believe the Hundred Years’ War, they were fighting every day? Peace is nothing else than a preparation for the next war.
Unless there is a decapitation event prior to them setting up a government in exile…..the envelope keeps getting pushed to the point where this seems increasingly likely….and Israel has already set the precedent…..
Thanks about fortification in Donbas over ten years. What I don’t understand is Kursk where Ukro-Nazis entered recently but — it appears are very difficult to dislodge!!??
Something about the fortification story doesn’t add up…
There are no fortifications in Kursk, except a military post near the border, which the Russians had staffed before the Incursion commenced--and whatever village homes & barns the OTAN/merc/AFU can occupy: school buildings in Sudzha & the like.
Terrain-wise, the Kursk region is rolling & forested, densely so, unlike the Donbas areas.
Those meat-assaults by the female DPRK troops are hell in the forest
Small correction. It wasn't a military post on the border that was attacked, it was a regular border crossing / passport control point, with regular border guards. The men who were killed in AFU's initial assault were not RA - they were border security (separate branch in the Russian system).
There were RA troops as well defending the border, but they weren't involved in the initial gunfire that killed a handful of Russians when the AFU assaulted the border checkpoint station.
The Kursk salient itself isn't densely forest - the forests are a good bit south of the border (I think ~15km), on the edge of Sumy.
We could also consider that the RF forces are not rushing in Kursk on purpose. They see that the situation is managable, UA keeps sending reinforcements which are getting depleted, reducing pressure on other areas of the front.
True. Once the threat of artillery strikes on KNPP were neutralised, then the Kursk salient became a convenient firebag for the annihilation of Ukro forces.
Another foray of similar size, by Ukraine, would give Russia yet more opportunity to further decimate the AFU.
They don't need to make "passes" and expose themselves, when all this area is reachable with stand-off weapons, FABs in particular. The RuAF is doing its share, the smart way.
The RA is working on cutting supply lines and attempting to create encirclements of AFU troops. I don't think it's any deep strategy to keep Ukraine feeding troops into a meat grinder; there is a lot of risk of allowing the AFU to hold ground inside Russia's pre-war border (both inside Russia and in Russia's relations to foreign powers).
I think the Kremlin just isn't willing to sacrifice troops in the head-on assaults that would be required to quickly dislodge the AFU forces, and is instead adapting and trying other strategies.
Russia's primary strategy is attritional warfare. The Banderan army keeps playing into it every single time. Even when it couldn't even manufacture an intellectually defendable reason.
Zelenski is the director of a film-noire reality TV serial production.
Once they dislodge them from Kursk oblast, they will have to face the same khokhols holed up behind fortifications in and near Sumy. It is far preferable to attrit them in open country, like they do now.
There are very large pine forests north and east of Sumy, not far from the pre-war border in the Kursk region. The AFU used those forests to mass troops and armored equipment. The RA was aware that they were doing it, but there are a number of vectors that an attack could be launched along from that area.
Part of Ukraine's goal before the Kursk invasion was to force Russia to reinforce sparse border troops and pull that strength away from other parts of the line. Russia didn't take the bait and chose to maintain a higher combat intensity elsewhere. There were various units held in the rear to counter any AFU invasion across the pre-war border: VDV troops (airborne) appeared on the ground in the Sudzha area within hours of the Ukrainian invasion.
The terrain is really different in the Kursk salient than other theaters of the war, the latter being mostly either open fields bordered by tree lines, rivers and lakes/reservoirs, and forest. The topography of the Kursk salient, north of Sudzha, is really different than the typical glacial till of both European Russia and Ukraine. There are endless large creeks flowing into small rivers, like leaves on a tree. It's striking when you look at it on a satellite map.
Ukraine was able to take favorable positions early in their invasion, and had good logistics to support those positions. The RA appears to be preparing for a counter-invasion targeting Sumy itself; even if they stop short, it will cut supply lines to their forces in the salient.
tldr; it's weird topography that favors the AFU, and lets them move both vehicles and troops under some amount of cover anywhere in the salient.
The Russians are using the area as a training ground for killing the best troops of Ukraine in a remote sparsely populated area of Russia. A real war training exercise. The Russians are training the future trainers of the Russian Army in modern warfare techniques while they become nimble at changing equipment on the fly to refine these techniques.
The big stink about drones u known drones flying all over shows the ignorance of Americans about these changes. Some Social Science military expert wrote how Russians are behind in large ( expensive) drones. The Russians just build hundreds if not thousands of smaller drones with similar capabilities. The US is up shit creek blind with no paddle.
It is Zelenski's misintention that holding Kursk until Trump takes office gives Ukraine a better negotiating position during negotiations. It is Russia's intention that as long as the Banderan army wants to occupy an operationally insignificant part of Kursk and reinforce the untenable position, then let it.
When the Banderan army begins it's retreat from Kursk the RUF will be following to open another front in Sumy that will be isolated from the Southern Theater.
To paraphrase Napoleon;
"Never interrupt your enemy while he is committing a mistake."
NATO wasted billions in Ukraine to build roads for the war they hoped for.
The money was spent and the improvements were largely not made.
"With $1 million in gifts from two prominent foundations, RAND is creating a distinguished chair in Israel policy to oversee a slate of new research endeavors.
The establishment of a dedicated chair allows RAND to deepen what has become a steady stream of research on Israel in recent years." -- The ongoing NATO military operations in Ukraine represent Judea War on Russia.
There is no point dislodging them from this indefensible wasteland into fortified positions near Sumy. What the RF is doing instead, is taking this God-given opportunity to exterminate these fuckers in open field---while Yerlensky is playing into their hand by pushing his best troops and equipment into that killing ground.
Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake, as Sun Tzu said. Or whoever.
You're forgetting that the majority of Ukrainian people were / are fine with this war. Sure, they've been groomed, but that Nazi-stuff worked twice within less than 70 years with them. How come?
Is there something within that nation that needs a similar treatment as the one given to Germany, i.e. demilitarization, open-air prison, puppet state, etc.?
No, they are Shanghaied off the streets and desertion rates are high and getting higher. Do you like the US's role in Ukraine? We all got Shanghaied into war and are now hostages to their depravity.
You're obviously ignoring the past 20 years. Nobody was "Shanghaing" anybody off or onto the streets when Ukrainian cities were overflowing with Neo-Nazis marching those exact streets. The people in the Donbass-regions are at war with that scum since 2014, and according to the results of the 2018-election the majority of Ukrainians were fine with that when they elected the comedian.
I'm German, the US has been occupying our country for almost 80 years. We could've driven them out in the 90s when the Allies released our land from occupation, but we did the opposite by embracing the artificial prison they gave us. I know it's our fault that these clowns are still around. We aren't victims, neither are the Ukrainians victims, and neither are you.
These are genuine questions, because as an American it's very hard to find truthful news. First, so it sounds like b4 the war, you are saying many Ukrainians were fine with neo-Nazis? What would that mean to them, like...wanting socialism or wanting a strong leader and to go to war? I associate nazi-ism with Germany so don't understand what this term means in a different country. Second, is it true Zelensky was elected on a peace platform originally, but NATO nations talked Z into not entering the peace negotiations offered by Russia? Third, what do Ukrainian citizens want now given current conditions? My last question veers off in a different direction, but do countries like Poland, Sweden, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia really believe that Russia is a threat? Thanks, I would really appreciate comments from people who know about this.
The National-Socialists (of the German Empire) had the history for all of Europe ready to be utilized. What I mean is that they dug up all information on any kind of historic conflict between ethnic minorities and majorities or political or religious parties throughout Europe and the adjacent land areas. They used this 'bad blood' to incite chaos which they then channeled to suit their own purposes.
I don't know if you know anything about WWII, so I'll tell you this: The German Army had little resistance conquering most of Europe. Even the Soviets were helping them with tanks and resources throughout the 1930s. One of the significant reasons for this ease was that they had the perfect marketing strategy for any nation / state. F.e. the people of the Baltic states are hated in Russia to this day because they greeted the 'Nazis' with bread and salt when they invaded them. While the Russians are still holding a grudge, one might say that the Baltic people simply wanted to get out of Communism, or that they were fed up with being pushed around just because of the geo-strategic importance of the area they lived in (Baltic Sea coast). The National-Socialists played both angles, promising the Baltic people the land where milk and honey flow, and where there is no Communism or any Russian.
With the Ukrainians it's a bit 'more difficult' because the Ukrainian nation is somewhat artificially created. Just like there weren't any Germans 200 years ago, there weren't any Ukrainians 110 years ago. Both are constructs. The Germans were created by Bismarck who united Prussians, Bavarians, Saxons, etc. under the banner of the "German Empire". And the people constituting today's Ukrainians were given a similarly unifying identity by Lenin. The name 'Ukraine' translates to 'border' btw, which means that 'Ukrainians' are literally 'people who live on Russia's borders' (and yet this is the 2nd time in their short history that they think they're superior to Russians). The National-Socialists knew exactly how to manipulate these border-dwellers' new spirit of nationalism to meet their own ends.
I don't have an easy source for you because history is not easy to comprehend, especially when it has anything to do with the so-called 'Nazis', but if you want to start somewhere to understand f.e. the modern day Ukrainians you could start with their hero who helped the Nazis kill as many Jews, Poles, Russians, and other 'Untermenschen' as possible: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepan_Bandera
P.S.: The organization that has become the European Union was founded by ex-Nazis and people who financed and endorsed them. So, it is hardly a coincidence that the European Union would incite the Ukrainians to fight for 'them' once again. It's ridiculous actually, because any educated German knows all these things, but nevertheless, we seem to be at the same point in history again.
Axtually, according to recebnt public opinion, most Ukrainains want an end to the war.
That anyone in Ukraine would admit to this is impressive in itself, as anyone in Ukraine publicly calling for anything less than Sportpalast Total Victory is inviting a visit from the secret police, with their usual fascist light touch.
Sure dude, secret police will get you if you don't get vaccinated for Covid-19, right? Gestapo and Stasi... Still the best boogeyman to sell victim-status. "I can't say anything, or they'll get me!" Ever heard of MK-Ultra?
If I went to the town center and started yelling that we need to dispose of the German government, then I would most assuredly be arrested in Germany too. And that would be absolutely justified.
How to say that you are opposed to freedom of speech without saying that you are opposed to freedom of speech? You put on a master class.
Nobody said anything about "disposing of the [Ukrainian] government, BTW, so quit arguing with strawmen. See Brandenburg v Ohio in the US.
But let's pretend that what you said were accurate. Are you seriously claiming that the Gestapo in Germany will arrest you, imprison your without trial and torture you without legal process? And you are okay with this? I know europeans like being slaves but this is too much.
All the answers are in the fog of a lesser known history going back to Frederick the Great age and his niece who become Catherine the Great. She imported Prussian farmers into the lands of of actual Ukraine to aide their motherland with agricultural products. That was the beginning of all dark future events.
She invited Prussians into Ukraine to increase farming productivity. Can you please clarify the connection between that and current events? In case you are interested, there is a short clip from a longer interview of Jeffrey Sachs at the Cambridge Union where he talks about western interference in Ukraine starting in 2014 I believe where a legitimately elected president was replaced, which was a long term plan leading to current events. There are a number of people including US congressman Lundsay Graham who has actually admitted that the west needs to get Ukraine's resources rather than let Russia get them. I don't claim to have all the answers, but this is something to consider.
In July, Pokrovsk was busy beautifying the city, not digging and pouring cement.
I can't agree the Banderan tactics were indolent. Over:-optimistic and corrupt to the point of being repeatedly feckless is how I describe NATO the EU and our key leaders in our proxy state
RAND's best selling futurist fiction novels repeatedly missed or ignored possible key story arc points: The Russian Federation populace doesn't want to repeat the dystopian 90s, Putin is not corrupt, Putin is a real leader and knows how to delegate, Russia is an autarky and Russia began to modernize it's arms industry starting in 2010. More bots, less assembly line.
The Ukranians are gleeful with new Laser weapons they are pushing I am hearing, most likely at a range of 2 km, likely mostly useful for shorads drone type stuff. I bet the russians do not find it useful for day to day stuff otherwise they would have fielded it en masse. Another wunderwaffen
Absolutely not. Lithium batteries do not do well with massive discharges, plus they are super slow to charge, if you want to use them for very long.
A shipboard nuclear reactor could work, or a grid connection.
That's what dumbasses don't realize with these EM and laser weapons - the power is the problem. Missiles, bullets, artillery have their energy packaged with the ammo.
There is a reason why the "electromagnet" guns are so clunky and shitty: batteries don't cut it.
And don't expect this to change. A high end lithium battery already is 2/3rds the energy density of gunpowder. A 10x improvement in storage capacity makes them more dangerous than 4 times the equivalent weight in TNT.
This can be fixed by including a massive capacitor bank between the battery and laser. But capacitors of that power are very expensive, much more so than the batteries themselves. Not to mention clunky.
The capacitors are just a quick-discharge buffer, the energy still comes from the lithium battery. A half-minute cap recharge for a 100ms shot is not unreasonable.
The only practical way to use them on the Ukie front, is to put them in permanent emplacements in fortified cities, power them off the grid, and use to shoot down incoming suicide drones. Not a bad concept, but guess what.
Today's laser systems should be adequate for blinding enemy drones (and more). Perhaps aren't used widely yet for similar reasons as why APS on armored vehicles aren't -- side effects for defenders to include (1) giving away position (2) harm to friendly men and equipment (3) vulnerable to feints. #1 was also true for now universal vehicle-mounted drone jammers, but eventually the balance changed. Within a year of universal adoption of jammers, fiber rendered them obsolete. So we might well see it
Line of sight, direct fire systems are limited in range - which means they in turn are vulnerable to counter attack. In the case of missiles and shells - the missile launchers and artillery systems that are firing the shells would be literally out of sight of the lasers - meaning said lasers would at best be defensive.
And even then, there are so, so many ways to interfere with their operations ranging from smoke/fog to decoys to reflective coatings to attacking power sources.
I would also personally be pretty fucking scared to be on the firing side - the type of power involved are such that explosive accidents would not be infrequent, and the effects on the crews pretty much 100% fatal.
By escalating hostilities w/ an Oreshnik-launching card-carrying nuclear superpower, Joe’s admin is imperiling the American people & the world during what’s supposed to be a “peaceful transfer of power”—the interregnum.
His admin’s vanity project of “weakening Russia” has failed.
Joe, Blinken and Sullivan do not have a mandate to endanger America & the world any further by provoking Russia to retaliate w/ next-level responses.
It behooves them to stop relying on Russia to show restraint. Global safety should not depend on Russia exhibiting self-control & acting prudently. Continual & needless provocations jeopardize everybody.
I agree Cheetos, however it's no skin off their noses to "mix a bottle" of trouble and grief for the incoming Trumpster team. It's highly unlikely Blinken & Co will be held accountable for their bad faith actions, in fact they'll probably be amply rewarded and still end up with decent, well paid and risk free jobs, just somewhere else.
I don't think my Potato-in-Chief was ever in control.
It was obvious when he started campaigning in 2019 that he his brain was impaired. He was a tool to be used and discarded.
The "debate" with Trump that sealed my Potato-in-Chief's political fate was a set-up to move him out of the way. I believe Obama wanted Newsom and the Clintons along with Pelosi pre-empted him and got the DEI hire Kamel positioned early.
Obama can't resist openly and ain't no white Democrat, particularly a man, going to publicly state the DEI hire isn't qualified.
The Democrat ballot blood magic didn't work this time. Trump had teams of warlocks positioned in battleground states with judges standing ready, monitoring the polls.
I have NEVER even seen Dnjepar river on these millions micro-maps with detailed fields, wood edges and patios.
Nor you can see any rivers on these maps and they frequently mentioned.
That Military Summary, for example, seems to me as an endless stream of “war porn” that generates good cash but doesn’t inform at all anybody on anything much.
Yeah liveuamap or deepstatemap are good high level views, and you can rewind the clock and hit "play" and see how much the front has moved (hint: not much). Military Summary is a Youtuber first, keep that in mind. Suriyak Maps on TG does good detailed maps, bit too detailed maybe.
Have you ever seen a map of Ukraine and areas liberated from Ukro-Nazis in 2024 ? I never did ! Nor I ever see were is a Dnjepar river on all of the millions micromaps shown.
All these mappers using GIS can calculate / show areas liberated in 2024. Its not biggie, just nobody shows it. I am sure if you ask weeb union dude on telegram about this that they would reply to you.
Dnieper is at different distance depending on the location, in some places Rus are on Dnieper already.
Russia is playing a waiting game while moving forward with as few casualties as possible . If the Ukrainians launch another "offensive" it will require them to accumulate men and machines and that just makes them worthwhile targets . If the F16's are used in foreign bases those bases will be visited by Oreshniks which will destroy even the most protected bunkers . All scenarios will have already been gamed by the Russian AI's and will incur rapid responses as its all set up . Putin has shown the big stick but not applied it yet .
Russia has massive reserves which have not been deployed . That is what I mean by "waiting" . As they are casualty averse , it pays to go slow and not incur unnecessary losses as offensives can be very costly as the Ukrainians found out.
The grind will continue. Eventually all the major cities east of Dnieper will be Russian with sieges forming up on those on the river. The river can be crossed at places of Russia's choosing. I still favor a blitz down Kerson way. As I wrote earlier this month, I see capitulation being the endgame, not negotiations as NATO is currently incapable of accepting what must be accepted--a new Eurasian security structure that nullifies NATO and sends it to the garbage pile.
In the greater conflict between Russia and the Outlaw US Empire, I see NATO's MIC having to spend 5X Russia's current 6.2% of GDP just to catch-up in both quality and numbers; yet, that gap continues to widen daily, and as Putin said Russia's not slowing down. Imagine what devoting 25% of GDP to the MIC would do to all NATO economies. Yes, the geopolitical game has yet to end, but its ending contours are visible. The Empire lacks the proxies and the military to defeat Russia, China or BRICS. That will be of little solace to Syrians or Palestinians. And the nations comprising the Arc of Instability and their people will likely experience the dying writhing of the Imperial Sanke. It won't happen tomorrow or next year, but as long as the nukes don't fly, the Outlaw US Empire has lost because it lacks the resources and industrial capacity to conquer the world.
I see no way for a real peace. The European leaders live in a fantasyworld. They believe in their own lies. It is like Hitler in the Führerbunker '45. He commanded armies that was not existing, he planned retaliation with non existent wonder-weapons, the wochenschau reported about massive attacks on the Soviets on the Oder, when in reality the troops were depleted and in retreat.
You said "I see NATO's MIC having to spend 5X Russia's current 6.2% of GDP just to catch-up in both quality and numbers"
I disagree. The reason the West's MIC is in tatters is because of waste and profiteering. Increasing the money going into an economic black hole only makes the black hole bigger.
The West is also incapable of increasing military spending by even 2x. The existing debt, the lack of productivity, the lack of manufacturing, decaying infrastructure, fraying social contracts - these are not the powerful economic foundations of the US prior to WW2 or even WW1.
All those deficits you listed tell us why the West would need to spend at least that amount just to catch-up. Yes, of course, the reason it’s so far behind is already known to most—waste, fraud, corruption—that it no longer needs to be listed. In other words, for NATO to become on par with Russia is would need to cease being NATO—its entire political-economic system would need to be overhauled. Capitulation would be so much easier and far less costly, and really the only rational NATO choice.
The parasite"leadership" that hijacked the West is THE problem to begin with. But it's not a recent development. Read up on this site to get the long-term picture:
I am familiar with Cynthia. She is not wrong about the PMCs, of which the West's leadership is an extension.
But this is nothing new. Every elite class in history, sooner or later, starts to think it is somehow special and deserving of its position as opposed to being in a position of responsibility.
When your MIC has a primary purpose of fleecing the treasury and creating huge money sinkholes, you have a problem. When you have to outsource all manner of parts and components to other countries you have a problem. Being protected by two oceans can only get you so far.
Of course that is not going to end - but a big part of it is simply the relative wealth of the West vs. its targets.
That will change as the share of global wealth held by the West decreases - not because of absolute declines per se in the West but because the rest of the world is growing so much faster.
Bribing an African warlord with $1m, or even $100K was really effective in the 1990s - much less so today and even less so in 30 years. It will be almost the equivalent of Grandma giving you a $5 bill for Christmas: it was a lot of money when she was a working adult but is literally pocket change now.
Yes, that and the fact that it’s easier now more than ever to see what it gets you in the end….there is a trail of smoldering bridgeheads and ruined nations in the its wake. At some point a group of people have to weigh the odds and either fight or take some kibble for a short term fiesta.
I don't really understand the inference about the North Korean soldiers, men are like artillery shells, you can never have too many. It's great to have them fighting along side the Russians, hopefully the contingent will grow to six figures.
Having troops you can't communicate with, whose training and experience are unknown, who are trained on and use different equipment - you can use them as a standalone force in non-critical situations but not otherwise.
All soldiers are not created equal nor perform equally - it is a classic civilian idiocy to think so.
I always find it amusing when people simultaneously completely miss the point i'm trying to make, and confirm it. Let's say, for argument's sake, that it was 100% confirmed that North Korean soldiers were taking part in assault operations in Kursk. Would you consider this a bad thing, and, if so, why? Would this development completely change your view of this conflict? Would you, if you support Russia, stop doing so as a result?
I find it amusing that you clearly did not even try to understand what I wrote.
To answer your question: Yes, I would consider North Koreans participating in Kursk, or anywhere, a bad thing.
Because it means that Russia really is having a hard time such that it would take in a disruptive, unknown, unreliable force in such a critical operation.
But this has nothing to do with supporting Russia or not. It would be nothing more than an indicator of whether what Russia has been saying is accurate or not.
Compare this with Ukrainian garbage: the more they lie, the less anyone with any sense pays attention to anything they say.
But again: the point was that there is no benefit to bringing North Koreans to fight in Kursk or Ukraine - it would only be done if Russia had no choice. Because soldiers are not like artillery shells. Even Western 155mm artillery shells are not like each other.
Anyone who thinks so, has no idea what the fuck they are talking about.
Well, it appears as if the Russian general staff and political leadership agree with me and not you. And I'm willing to trust their judgement over some internet rando who seems more intent on sounding smart than actually stopping to think. So, my original point stands, we're happy to have the Norks fighting on our side.
I know you don't understand what I'm talking about and there are a couple of reasons for it. One, you are wracked by confirmation bias. You have decided that the use of North Korean soldiers is a bad thing, and Russia is good, ergo this would never happen. You also seem to greatly overrate your knowledge of military affairs.
So I'll try and explain this one last time. I am agnostic as to whether or not there are Nork soldiers fighting in Kursk. I've seen some circumstantial evidence they are, but certainly nothing definitive. My only point here is that, if they are, it is not necessarily a bad thing. That's it.
However many NK troops may actually be in RF and whatever they might really be there for, they are NOT fighting as infantry on lines of contact as far as I can tell. The Ukrainian & NATO MSM would certainly be parading visual evidence if any NK troops were killed/captured, they have not done so to my knowledge.
My bet is NK military had a good number of people sent for TRAINING with RF tactics and/or equipment, possibly some are even learning "hands on" at behind the lines locations? Maybe they could be operating air defense systems? Possibly working long range artillery equipment? Even running drones? But not out there clearing trenches & bunkers the old fashioned way. If they are supposed to be returning as trainers, they can't be wasted on such activities.
Basic infantry maneuvers, squad movement & attack can be taught ANYWHERE there is space. Learning the newest RF RADAR, ECM, AAA, counter battery fire systems and tactics? THAT has to be done where the equipment and operators are, which isn't NK. And I would guess the RF isn't exporting their bleeding edge systems to anywhere they might get "borrowed" by US/NATO/South Korea.
I agree that NK personnel (if they are there at all) will be learning new techniques of war, rather than fighting at the front.
I also would suggest that they could be used in logistics, maintenance, and weapons factories, esp near the Korean border. That makes a whole lot more sense economically and does not have any personnel liable to be captured.
There were already hundreds of thousands of Koreans and Korean descended people living inside RF AND the now INDEPENDANT ex USSR republics before the whole Ukraine related NK troops claims showed up in Western MSM. Koreans have been coming to Russian territory for much of the last century, since before the days of WWI, on through USSR vs. the Japanese Empire and even more during & after the Korean war- There are quite a few in RF's far East who came when Japan controlled their areas and we're never repatriated to Korean peninsula after WWII or forced to relocate under Stalin.
I think as time passes it is quite clear that a few things are true - yes, Russia is massively defeating Ukraine BUT at unacceptable losses to Russia. Losing 100-200 men a day means losing 30-40k KIA of your best people a year, with 3x as many more wounded. By the time this war is over, 1% of Russia's population will have been either killed or maimed by war, which if you age and sex adjust will mean 5-10% of military aged men. Its a travesty.
Yes, Ukraine will be a non-state, 404 as they say on TG. But Russia needs to endure somehow, and it faces grave challenges. I don't understand why they haven't Oreshnik-ed Zelensky yet, I don't understand why they haven't used it again, and I don't understand why they let EU/NATO/US get away with murder (literally). From where I'm sitting Russia is winning tactically but losing strategically. It doesn't help that her opponents (Germany, England, Finland, Baltics, Ukraine, etc) are maniacally enthusiastic about committing economic suicide but economies can be rebuilt, men stay dead.
Wholly agree! Russia’s demographic winter will not be helped by the current battlefield casualties…
(And claiming that Russia is adding population bc of the former UKR citizens that are now part of Russia is hard cope)
Also, I would add that current Russian retaliations for long range strikes against the Motherland are moronic as these are only hitting targets inside Ukraine and we all know how much Western elites care about Ukrainians. Don’t they?
It's true but I've long held a counter argument to that, which is steel sharpens steel and Russia's losses are a necessary "watering of the tree of liberty with blood". Russia's 'liberty' is its strength. Those sacrifices in the form of losses are building generational strength, cementing genetic legacies of the warrior bloodline which will keep Russia strong. In short, Russian warlike culture is maintained and strengthened for all time, while the West devolves and dissolves into soy weakness. As such, all the losses are in fact accomplishing a great deal in strengthening Russia and cementing its independence and sovereignty for all time.
Also, keep in mind even if Russia were to lose 1 million people, Russia has gained thus far something like 10 million total new citizens from Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye, Kherson, and could still potentially gain millions more in the future depending how far it goes. This vastly overshadows any losses and Russia will have a massive net population gain after the war is done, so all "demographic catastrophe" talks are mostly nonsense.
And as for those who keep returning to the trope of 'slavs killing slavs', the truth is slavs are the most populous ethnic group in all of Europe by far, with no one even close, this war won't change that.
As long as Russia doesn't permanently get rid of cretins like Chubais its watering of the tree won't amount to much. Russia needs an ideology, what does it stand for; not what it stands against. Thus far the Kremlin hasn't articulated such an ideology. The best I've seen, and it's full of issues, is the Eurasianism pushed by people such as Dugin.
In fact, Putin’s economic policies are classic liberal: free market, small state, non interventionist (except for defense industry, of course). I don’t pretend to be an expert but this IMO stands in total contradiction with the Russian tradition of community & mutual cooperation (“Sobornost”).
"Russian tradition of community & mutual cooperation (“Sobornost”)"
This tradition is mostly a myth. Russians are very individualist people. At least after Soviet regime which destroyed most of traditional communal institutions. All in all, today's Russian are more or less happy to be on their own.
Highly individual and incredibly paranoid and mistrustful of govt and large institutions in general. One of the reasons why its so hard to make friends with them but if you do its for life.
Thanks for the correction! I would have thought that them present day Russians would be more community-focused as e.g. the Scandinavians are (or were?).
No, absolutely not. Recently there have been some "green shoots" of horizontal cooperation but mostly people here prefer that nobody pokes one's nose in their life. Patriotism and nationalism are probably the only things we can be rallied around.
I just hope there is someone even more Russophilic and patriotic than Putin lined up to take over for him. Russia should embrace the best traditions of all its previous iterations. Western style liberal democracy and free markets are not the answer and won't bring Russia to the forefront of global powers. That all starts with an ideology to unite the masses. The Tsar had that, so did the Commissars. Modern Russia does not.
I’m pretty sure the poor guys doing the irrigation might NOT agree with that.
Also, this whole argument is to be expected by Gringo citizens that have experienced nothing but colonial wars in far away places against inferior forces and fought mostly by professional soldiers and PMCs…
In the rest of world I would bet that people in general prefer to make their nations & culture stronger without going to war.
Agree that Slavs vs Slavs makes no sense. Change that to Russians vs Russians (bc a LOT of UKR casualties have been Russian speakers from the Central & Eastern areas of Ukraine) and then it doesn’t sound so good at all.
Last: until the fertility rate climbs above 2.1, Russia will remain in a demographic winter. That’s a fact.
Russia is not alone in facing demographic problems. Birth rates in South Korea and Japan have plummeted and are approaching one child per woman. The only population growth in AUKUS countries and Europe is coming from global South immigration - the White population is collapsing.
At least Russia is taking serious steps to reverse the trend: oppose normalizing and encouraging homosexuality, providing social support for families, providing incentives for larger families. Having a third child provides a family with a substantial down payment on a larger house or apartment. Having ten puts you in a room with Putin on national television, and freedom from any worry. In between, the incentives are large.
Norway is doing much the same with incentives and social support, and has the income from its energy exports to do so. But it hasn't had much impact, and the Norwegian birth rate is still dangerously low. Perhaps it's because of the constant homosexual propaganda?
Am I correct in understanding that Christian conservative Europeans and Americans are lining up to move to Russia?
I read somewhere that after the sacrilegious spectacle opening of the Olympic games last summer that European applications to move to Russia jumped in the weeks after.
There is propaganda about it in media now and then. I do not think it is a large phenomenon. There have been some different classes of residency permits created to make it easier for self-exiles from unfriendly countries to move to Russia.
There have never been many Anglos / Europeans in Russia, even in the heyday when everybody thought relations with Europe would continue to deepen (a decade ago). Estimates at the peak were 5k U.S. citizens total in Russia for voluntary reasons (not diplomatic), and not that many more from each of Germany, Spain, Italy, U.K., and France. That is in total.
Folks in the US et al with a strong martial family tradition may entertain the idea of emigrating to Russia. This of course depends on the immigration policies of the Russians. When the young do the math on the soy-boy future here in the U$, many might jump at the opportunity to exit the sinking ship of our long-in-the-tooth empire.
The times, "they are a changing". While I've seen much of the world in my 73 years, it is my great regret that I missed the opportunity to travel/experience Russia. Having briefly worked for one of the largest U$ airlines and retired (early-with only 5 years seniority)from the same with lifetime flight benefits, it would have been very easy. My anti-talent for learning languages would have been a drawback. With Russia being 25x the size of Texas, there are lots of empty spaces there to promote population growth.
As I tell my 44 y/o old son in San Diego, at least, in your head, always have a "go-bag" and plan for the time when the shit hits the fan. Always be thinking about where you might go next. In any larger hot war, SD, CA would be very high on any target list.
Jeffrey Sachs was interviewed by Tucker Carlson last night (for two hours on his eponymous network) In the first 25 minutes he deconstructed how the evil Nutty-Yahoo Zionists with their lapdog American neo-cons ruined country after country in the ME. A bracing interview with probing historical detail. Tucker is one of the best people in the U$ doing journalism today. I highly recommend a subscription to his TCN. His (Sachs) insights into what happened in Syria are gold.
It's not too late to visit Russia, and you should if you're so inclined. There's no issues with being a foreigner from an "unfriendly country" - Russians don't blame individuals for the sins of their states. St. Petersburg and Moscow are beautiful cities with deep culture.
You can generally find an English speaker in larger cities when you need one - no matter what happens with relations, English is still the international language of business. Russians who vacation in Turkey, Egypt, and Thailand (top three Russian vacation destinations abroad) need to speak it, for example.
And smart phone apps ease the path greatly. You can use the camera on an iPhone to automatically translate everything the camera sees. You can use built-in translation apps to carry on two-way conversations, with the phone translating both ways in audio. Language is no longer a barrier.
You do need to fly through a friendly country to visit Russia, like Turkey, UAE, Armenia, or whatever.
Once your "career" is over, what will you live off of? Russia is not in the business of supporting foreign retirees free of charge. The immigration policy is liberal, but you must demonstrate a stable source of income.
It is a better bet to find employment and "career" there now, and your security manager can go bugger himself.
I remember when I couldn't stand to listen to Tucker on MSM. Then he began to change and the MSM canned him. Now, he has probably surpassed Glenn Greenwald for the quantity of his quality journalism.
Sachs is a great analyst most of the time.
I don't much care for most of his environmental sustainability instruction, however.
Excellent point. That same point, along with the many unsuccessful invasions of Russia throughout history, should demonstrate to NATO/US that it is a foolish idea to keep poking the bear... Chip
One difference between Russia and the U.S. is that the former holds veterans in high respect, and proves it by deed. Veterans have life-long free public transport. They go to the front of the wait list almost everywhere they visit. I observed this yesterday at an emergency care hospital. Two active-duty SMO soldiers were immediately put to the top of the list when they entered. There was another contract soldier who had finished his term and had checked in before them (so he was at the top of the list). He went and asked the triage nurse to move him below the two active-duty guys. There's just a respect for service, and you can feel it in public.
That holds true even for unpopular wars (Chechnya). The Russian airborne forces (VDV) supplied much of the troop strength in that conflict. They're now given a literal pass once a year, in the summer. On their day, they all get drunk and congregate at public fountains where they sit in the water and have a huge party. Normally drinking hard liquor in public is strictly forbidden. No one cares on VDV day; they earned it.
Contrast that to how U.S. soldiers were treated after Vietnam. The current fetishization of veterans of America's foreign police actions is bizarre. The same people who protested the U.S. invasion of Vietnam now all put bumper sticks supporting the wars on their enormous SUVs. But it's not an issue of respect; these are people from the lower classes, and it's almost as if they owe the professional classes gratitude for giving them the opportunity to rise above their squalid roots.
I see the above clearly in U.S. television and movies the past couple of decades. Every presentation of U.S. troops is either some kind of elite special forces super trooper who fought hard combat in the rugged hills of Afghanistan or elsewhere (which is a misnomer, and was incredibly rare). Or they're a damaged loser with PTSD - and their war buddies are confined to wheelchairs. It's either an idolization of something that didn't exist except in very small numbers (superhero complex), or a tragedy.
There are no "normal" veterans of the West Asian wars of choice in the U.S., men who return home and pick up where they left off with their girlfriends or wives and family. There's just a constant focus on trauma - if someone's not a superhero Ranger, the question then is... "how traumatized are you, really?".
One could argue that the number of just "normal" people in the U.S. is collapsing precipitously. Maybe it's that.
Media representation of US soldiers. I actually am surrounded by same. They make up most of the civilian DoD work force, and the contractors. Normal? No. They are abnormal in today's society, but it doesn't require much looking hard to find them.
They don't all ride in wheelchairs and have PTSD and some of them actually did come back home to their wives. Though I have a good anecdote about this. On my way back from Iraq in 07/08, they held us all at a facility until the Ops people called each married soldier's home to make sure it was ok for their man to come home. A lot of women take up with someone new when the men are on deployment, and the Army is trying to stop possibly violent domestic disputes.
Yes! A US Marine friend came home on leave once to discover his wife "entertaining" a paramour. It ended badly for the interloper who woke up badly damaged, in the hospital. That was the end of that marriage.
HBI, it's like you overheard our conversation:
"A lot of women take up with someone new when the men are on deployment, and the Army is trying to stop possibly violent domestic disputes." I felt sorry for the Vietnam generation of soldiers who this sad outcome must have been all too common. As Johnny Cash sang in "Jackson"...
I'm sorry about your friend, but i've known more than one who had the same happen to him. Some women are great. Many are not. Lots of guys in theater finding out that their pay is going to pay for another guy while stuck on deployment. The kind of people we had to buy smokes for because they had $0 left after the wife cleaned out the account on pay day. It's a pretty low thing to be the solder in base housing who is fucking someone else's wife while he's off on deployment. But people do it.
A lot of young wives were put up to it by their mothers. Women know that the Army will make sure you get paid for, get child support and alimony, etc. The women are unhappy, they didn't want this relationship, and the guys soon tire of it, but their mothers were quite correct. They arranged a benefits plan to get their daughter out of the house. I've sat in a few divorce proceedings supporting soldiers, too.
In the late Soviet period and through the 90s, a lot of Russian marriages were contractual in nature, like you describe for U.S. married soldiers. By that I mean love may or may not have been involved - but a lot of the motivation for the relationship had to do with housing. Combined with widespread atheism, and infidelity was so common it was entirely unexceptional.
That has changed completely in Russia. Now the incentives to stay in a marriage are personal in nature, not connected to being able to live in a major city (for those in Soviet times who married for propiska, or residency permit). Religiosity of a benign variant is prevalent (e.g. a high percentage of the population nominally believes in the Orthodox canon, but there isn't anything like the "Bible thumper" phenomenon the U.S. has with Evangelicals). Infidelity is now uncommon and generally condemned.
Ukraine is still living in the 90s on those matters. It's why Ukrainian prostitutes and OnlyFans models are so common. The roots of Zelensky's war against the Moscow Patriarchate is move involved than simple worries about "Russian influence".
Thanks for the additional insight. A student deferment and high lottery number got me past the war in Vietnam. My family has been neck deep in the military for a long time. Gramps was in WW1-Germany. Nephew a Navy Seal. Lost a 21-y/o uncle-shot out of the sky in the Pacific islands in WW2. Other extended family members graduated from West Point and the Naval Academy. My pop spent six months in Japan and one year in China in WW2.
All this service to yield our sad present circumstances-a grifter, demented "president" and a military that is essentially a Praetorian Guard for the fascist Zionist project. Bigly sad.
Another check against the claims RF has a "demographic catastrophe" coming?
Speaking as a male, nothing makes you want to fuck as much as being shot at & MISSED. What do you think those guys are doing during their regular rotations out of the LOC?!
Since the Ukrainian front line military are mostly now stuck out there until they get HIT (or captured, desert, & etc.), they are not going to see this effect much.
Depressing to read ”watering of the tree of liberty with blood" and ”cementing genetic legacies of the warrior bloodline which will keep Russia strong”.
That is far, far from the last bastion of Christianity. It is a Blood Cult and the only generic you gets is Evil.
I have lived a life where I have seen the consequences of watering with blood and what happens with the bloodline. It is not a happy ending.
Mikey, war is like entering a dark room, fighting and killing, offence and defence, gives you real information how strong you and your opponent are.
This war is seriously asymmetrical, as Russia is obviously stronger, but if the West is willing to support Ukraine 100%, war could end in stalemate. Could.
A stalemate could be interpreted as a victory.
But let's look at the war from another point.
When all is over, who will know, understand deep inside, that he had made a mistake?
US and the West entered this war as a luxury war, a non existential war, and are faced with a Russia that is willing to fight a war as existential, to the end.
It was a mistake.
Whatever the West does now, it is difficult to turn this war into existential- that means be ready to send soldiers to die in Ukraine.
And if West is not ready to send soldiers to die in Ukraine, the war will be lost on the battlefield
Creating a NATO army out of Ukrainians is possible, but still does not guarantee victory, just exhausting the Ukrainian population.
Even with full NATO support, as is being provided right now, in weapons, information, there is no way to win, for Ukraine.
In my judgement, raising the stakes, by creating a bigger, larger Ukrainian army creates a risk that Russia will be obliged to form an even stronger army.
Why would Russia accept any ceasefire if it has to create an army that is capable of winning against Ukrainian army just to be offered negotiations on ceasefire.
The moment West offers negotiations, is the moment West admits Ukraine is losing, and then there is no point in negotiations.
West has created a monster in Ukraine that is going to destroy Ukraine. Millions more will die.
This war is existential for Russia and the only way they won't win it is if NATO goes all-in and I can't see it.
This isn't the war they want to fight. They are far more invested in Israel and Taiwan than Ukraine.
Countries like Hungary, Turkey and Slovakia are actively against escalation, the populations in most Western countries are bored with 'Slava Ukraini' and even in the USA, the Pentagon isn't keen.
I certainly hope the War will end with a decisive Russian victory. Just now it is hard to see that Putin can survive if he isnt creating miracles. 600 000 and more to come is nothing the population will forget unless they take half of Ukraine and then can create a economic boost and ever increasing living standards. A ceasefire and a stalemate will be perceived as a Western victory.
either escalate and be ready for nuclear exchange, frankly, with all the bravado, MI6 and assorted personnel Kaja Kallas, Mark Rutte etc. are showing, there is not a solid majority in the West for this approach
keep supporting Ukraine until victory, propping up financially, and sending all war materiel except soldiers. West has been pursuing this strategy for three years, and it does not seem to lead to success. There is a hope, until the war ends that suddenly Russia might collapse, that is a hope and we have no serious predictive abilities how much more Russians can suffer. But what we definitely see collapsing are Western governments, because Western citizens are fed up with this war. Trump is a genius of marketing, and when he says both Putin and Zelensky want, need the war to stop, it is a beautiful presentation but the truth is really the opposite, it is western smart leaders, that sense, understand the deep opposition to this war in western public, and it is them that want the war to stop.
Because this road lead to defeat.
Talking about ending the war has to start with recognizing Ukrainian, Russian and western legitimate interests, and the actual power to support its interests, at this moment and in the future.
Arrangement similar to Shanghai communique would have to be produced, but even Kissinger himself would find it difficult.
I tend to agree with Prof. Mearsheimer, US is simply unable for first class diplomacy, today.
I wish, but doubt, it is enough smart leaders in the West with enough integrity to admit defeat and end their participation in this futile War against Russia. Frankly, it is a real test of how deep is the Deep State in the West?
Annuling the Romanian election was an eery reminder from deep under…
If I am sanguine on this point, it is because of a conviction that men and nations do behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives. Surely the other alternatives of war and belligerency have now been exhausted.
These people will not stop killing once the war officially stops. They'll turn into terrorists. So it's better to have them croaked in the open field than hunt down in a crowd later. I don't hold my breath about any kind of negotiations up till mid-30s. They wanted an all out war until the last Ukrainian, they should have it. And Russians should simply keep up the 1:6 ratio and grind. This kind of conflict can only end for good.
Insurgency is a phenomenon of young rebellious populations. I think of a deathly suicidal terrorist rampage without any constructive goal, simply wanton opportunistic destruction.
But the article does not say so much about the Russian way of wasting lifes as the Western way to sacrifice young men for nothing. Very good article but not about this topic. I dont believe for a second that Russian kids/men want to die in a trench or for that matter be in a war year after year.
What is significant is that US soldiers has died all over the Earth but not in the Homeland. Russian fought and sacrificed themselves in defense of the Homeland. That says a lot of propganda and naarrative working in the West.
The fighting in Vietnam bore no resemblance to what is happening in Ukraine, or any other war lately. Every time the NVA showed up with full units they were crushed by US firepower. So they stopped even trying, and instead did the insurgent thing. Tet was actually a huge defeat for the Viet Cong and they never reconstituted properly. The problem in Vietnam was that the penny-packet deployment of a massive amount of forces offered ample opportunity to kill Americans in small unit actions, which was the point. Body bags equaled protests, which equaled the ultimate US pull out.
This is why in Iraq, the force size was controlled from the outset. Instead of dropping 500,000 troops in country like what was done in Vietnam, the maximum size in-country was about 200k and drew down afterward. Fewer targets, and more concentrated. It reduced the wastage. Also, the US KIA count for things like Iraq and Afghanistan was relatively light, but the WIA count was high.
Vietnam: 58,281 KIA, 153,372 WIA
Afghanistan: 1,922 KIA, 20,769 WIA
Iraq: 4,431 KIA, 31,994 WIA
Note the altered ratios. It was way easier to survive in the latter two conflicts because the medical care was better, but you tell me whether you'd like to live with a TBI?
Also, there were more USNAT contractor dead in both of the latter conflicts than there were military dead. No figures on wounded, but probably same story there.
Now let's look at a direct comparison with Ukraine. WWII in Europe and Korea. Let's just look at the US contribution, because the Soviet front will really make things look good in Ukraine today.
WWII ETO: 318,274 KIA, 565,861 WIA ~4M serving
Korea: 29,856 KIA, 77,596 WIA ~2M serving over 3 years
Now why are these numbers so high? Because they were fighting in real fronts and advancing against real soldiers who were well armed, in particular with artillery. The Korean War numbers are really kind of low, and part of the reason is that the ROKs absorbed a lot of casualties, and the last 2/3 of the war was all in fortification lines and very little movement.
I can trot out the Eastern Front of WWII if you want to see just how parsimonious the Russian MOD is being with casualties.
Clearly you still don't understand the term "sacrifice" or what the article actually talked about - measuring sacrifice against that which said sacrifice is supposed to be for.
Sacrifice does not mean giving up the things you don't care about, or that you can easily afford. It means losing that which is precious to you - and doing so only because the end goal is worthy of the sacrifice.
The West doesn't know shit about sacrifice.
It is all magnetic yellow ribbons and puffery and Smedley Butlerian corporate strong arming.
Simple. The alt media has mislead it's audience about the strength of Russia. Yes, Russia is winning against the Ukraine, and yes if the Ukraine were fighting alone this war would have ended in the spring months of 2022. But for 2 plus years we've been fed bs about Putin and co playing 5D chess, etc. It's all bunk. The worst of the lot is Martyanov. At least Simplicius tries to maintain some impartiality and admits when he doesn't know something.
Anyway, I hope Russia finally kicks things into overdrive in 2025 and wins a decisive victory. One can only hope...
Both sides have been hard-coping. The truth was always in the middle. And what was obvious from may 2022 was that the US and China were the big winners, while Europe and Russia the big losers, and Ukraine the graveyard
If Ukraine ends up capitulating, which seems more likely by the day, then Russia will at the least end up with the 4 oblasts they have annexed. These happen to be the 4 top oblasts in Ukrainian GDP. They are the powerhouse of the Ukrainian economy with a sizeable industrial base, large populations (though many are displaced) and loads of primary resources. I wouldn't be calling Russia a big loser just yet. Let's wait and see if they push past the massive lithium deposit west of Kurhakove.
Yes. And I hope the Chinese and Americans have a nice blow out in the western Pacific or Korea. The Chinese have done just enough to keep Russia afloat, and not enough to truly bring about a new world geopolitical order. Perpetual merchants. And the American empire has got to come to an end; it is evil.
The Chinese have played their hand a bit badly. On paper its smart and safe, low risk max reward. In reality, fortune favors the bold and they are anything but
If the casualties of war would be that bad Russia would not be thriving economically and sitting in 4th place behind India in the global standings. Winning wars for a just cause strengthens a nation greatly, even with the human losses involved. These men are celebrated as heroes and their familes treated with the utmost respect by the populace. Also don't forget that the battle hardened Donbas militias incorporated into the RAF have contributed greatly to the fighting at the front and are liberating their own lands from the banderite occupation which again is heroic in itself.
I always think that it is the Troops in the Donbas Militias, and now regular Russian Army, that are the ones that are truly fighting for their homeland. While Kyiv's Soldiers from central and western Ukraine likely don't even care what goes on in eastern Ukraine.
Intentionally assassinating the enemy's leadership is beyond the pale of decency in war. Just because Ukraine stoops to that level doesn't mean Russia will follow.
The Allies could have killed Hitler or Mussolini during the war, but they didn't. Like Julius Caesar, they wanted to strangle those men in a public spectacle after the war was won.
Puh-lease. War is hell and you win by running the other guy over. There is no decency in war. If Moscow could end the war by killing half a dozen of Z & his buddies rather than 200,000 boys who want to be anywhere but there, then they should do it. What kind of rationale is this.
And no the allies couldn’t kill hitler or mussolini but not for lack of trying.
You need to look up the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich. The Brits performed that operation, using Czech cutouts for the action on the ground. He was essentially the deputy governor of Bohemia-Moravia, modern day Czechia.
Hitler and Mussolini were harder targets than they look from this angle. With a lack of precision munitions, they were mainly only susceptible to the kind of operation that brought down Heydrich.
My capstone on my history degree was about the internal German resistance to the Nazis. Interesting topic. They were ineffectual in the end, except for the Valkyrie attack on 20 July 1944 at Rastenburg, that was depicted in the movie. But it wasn't for lack of trying. They pretty much came to the same conclusion I am coming to - they needed to perform a small-scale attack using a bomb somehow. Some ideas they tried out were putting a bomb inside of a liquor bottle on HItler's plane, and having a soldier modeling a new Wehrmacht uniform have a suicide vest on and leap atop Hitler when he was checking it out. None ever worked out until they got Stauffenberg involved, who was a pretty committed person and actually performed the bomb attack.
Please re-read history. Many plots were hatched to kill the various leaders of the warring parties during WWII. In Tehran, 1943, the Germans almost got the Big Three. A Soviet-Armenian spy thwarted their plans.
And, zelensky is no longer the legitimate president of the Ukraine. He is fair game, even by your pacifistic standards.
“Since day one, this war has stunk to high Heaven,” Douglas MacKinnon says, writing in The Hill about Project Ukraine. “The biggest *mystery* is, why some do not want to stop the almost instantly stoppable killing in Ukraine. Another mystery is why some are so anxious to lead the world to the edge of World War III. Another is why some want no accountability for the hundreds of billions sent into Ukraine. And the last *mystery* is why so many in the media and in leadership positions in the U.S., the United Kingdom and France have deliberately ignored or downplayed the horrific casualty counts in Ukraine?”
McKinnon’s outrage is that of someone who has swallowed all the lies he was fed and now discovers what a stump he is for doing so. As recently as October McKinnon was cheerleading for Project Ukraine. It’s not a stretch, oddly, to imagine that McKinnon always knew a high percentage of the actual truth—that at no point was Ukraine capable of winning this war—and McKinnon fell into that big mysterious group of supposedly responsible witnesses to this horror who stood by & said nothing.
While Zelya claims only 83,000 Ukrainian soldier have died, the Western media at large has begun to report more realistic numbers in the high-100 thousands, which may in fact be a low-ball figure.
“Three men instantly opposed the war,” McKinnon writes, “while warning of the ultimate horror it could spawn — Trump, Vice President-elect JD Vance, and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.” He speaks of how all three guys were vilified for deigning to interrogate the casualty numbers, for instance, which always seemed too pie-in-the-sky unbelievable. “There are a great many questions some powerful people don’t want answered under any circumstances,” according to McKinnon.
He himself is on the verge of accepting that “the Obama White House and State Department played a role in the overthrow of the legitimately elected Ukrainian president Yanukovych in 2014.” Which means McKinnon is on the ground floor of jettisoning the propaganda. Jettisoning the propaganda is *not* nothing. But many of us less well-connected than McKinnon *saw,* believed and understood that the State Department played a role in the Euromaidan street coup which deposed Yanukovych. We ‘jettisoned the propaganda’ 10 years ago. Which means McKinnon is dramatically late. In a rush to laud DJT, JD & RFKjr and give them their flowers, he wants to bask opportunistically now in their glow. Something has happened for the media, something has happened for McKinnon. Even in the midst of ‘jettisoning the propaganda,’ he remains unconvincing.
One question about Syria : The SAA was decisively defeated, but it hardly seems DESTROYED, with evidence that many, if not most, retreated into Iraq. Mahar al-assad, Bashar's brother, also seems to still be with SAA units in Iraq.
Despite the current jubilation over HTS rule, once Syria evolves into a free for all like in Libya, would an Iranian-sponsored invasion of Syria be on the cards in the future?
Probably not. that's not Iran's general modus operandi. However, you can't discount the possibility of Iran heavily sponsoring the SAA remnants in Iraq to cause trouble in whatever is left of Syria, esp if the numbers of troops justify the investment.
I would bet the newer, kinder, rainbow diverse al Queda franchises/Suni anti Alawites/anti Baathists coalition can't maintain their unity without an active enemy and soon enough myst degenerate into infighting with various ethnic (and other) factions all vying for control & a lion's share of available loot or at least to carve out personal little sheikhdoms. Once THAT chaos gets well under way, perhaps those SAA units will come home and clean up any survivors?
That is something I was wondering about too. If Gaddafi wasn't killed in Libya, but escaped with a large part of his army intact, would he be able to retake power today?
Gadaffi is not available, also, he would be rather elderly now for a hard campaign. But quite a few in Libya are now likely nostalgic for the stability his regime once provided their society, plus free education & health care?
The war’s current trajectory highlights a significant shift in the nature of modern conflict: it is no longer about quick, decisive victories but rather prolonged, grinding battles that test not only military strength but also societal and political endurance. Russia’s approach reflects more than just its military capabilities—it demonstrates an ability to adapt to sustained pressure and rethink its strategic methods. By attacking infrastructure, decentralizing supply lines, and focusing on slow, incremental territorial gains, Russia isn’t seeking dramatic breakthroughs. Instead, it’s pursuing a strategy of gradual attrition, aiming to wear down Ukraine’s capacity to resist over time. This deliberate, patient approach echoes historical wars of attrition, but with modern tools like drones, electronic warfare, and precision strikes replacing brute-force tactics.
What makes Ukraine’s situation particularly precarious isn’t just its manpower challenges or logistical strains, but its heavy dependence on external support. Unlike Russia, which can rely on its internal resources and has largely weathered sanctions, Ukraine’s war effort is tied to the political and economic priorities of Western allies. This creates a largely unspoken vulnerability: Ukraine is effectively fighting two wars—one on the battlefield and another to keep international support intact. If Western governments shift their attention, face domestic political pressures, or prioritize other global issues, Ukraine’s ability to continue the fight could weaken dramatically.
For Russia, the conflict carries a broader geopolitical message that extends beyond Ukraine’s borders. By demonstrating its capacity to endure and adapt against the collective West, Russia is signaling to other nations that Western influence and military dominance have limits. This has far-reaching implications, particularly for countries viewing the war as a test case for a multipolar world order. For the Kremlin, the conflict is as much about reasserting Russia’s position on the global stage as it is about achieving specific military objectives.
At the same time, Ukraine’s leadership faces a difficult balancing act: projecting confidence and strength while contending with the very real risk of exhaustion—both militarily and within society. The rhetoric surrounding future offensives serves a dual purpose: maintaining domestic morale and convincing Western supporters that Ukraine can still achieve meaningful victories. But this strategy carries risks. If optimism fades and gives way to disillusionment, sustaining both domestic and international support will become even harder as the war drags on.
Ultimately, the war reveals an uncomfortable reality for modern military planners: advanced technology and tactical superiority cannot always overcome demographic challenges, industrial capacity, and the ability to adapt to prolonged conflict. Ukraine’s reliance on external lifelines places it in a precarious position where its survival depends as much on the endurance of its Western backers as on its own capabilities. Meanwhile, despite setbacks, Russia appears to be playing a long game, betting that it can outlast Ukraine and the resolve of its supporters. In this sense, the conflict is more than just a test of military strength—it’s a test of systems and resilience, a contest to see who can endure the strain the longest.
It is not clear that the SMO represents a fundamental new era of warfare.
Among many things:
1) The West's behavior in Ukraine is beyond reckless.
2) As part of this recklessness, the West has literally demilitarized itself. Russia could likely take on all of Europe's armies right now and win due to this, not that it wants or needs to.
3) It is not clear that any other entity will be as stupid as Ukraine for a generation. Ukraine is literally destroyed as a society regardless of the lines on the post-SMO map.
4) Russia has not only proven it has a superior army, one which keeps getting stronger and more experienced, it has demonstrated superior technology, superior weapons systems development, superior adaptability. Each of these strengths shown by the Russian military is literally the opposite for the West.
5) Ukrainian "leadership" has demonstrated that it does not give a shit about its people: soldiers or otherwise. Clearly, so long as they can collectively steal Western aid, they are perfectly fine feeding their fellow countrymen into the meat grinder.
I also continue to be of the opinion that the Russian priority is minimizing at least their own and civilian casualties. Absent that, we'd be seeing a very different form of warfare.
Hope Putin goes way of Assad after Ukraine gets to Moscow. Putin is not a wartime leader and 100-200 day is too many. He should have invaded right not with a piddly 100,000 and should have mobilized every day since instead of letting Ukraine/NATO bleed Russia out.
Is this the second most retarded comment, or the first?
Why do feral NAZIs always project their defects on to others?
Read your original stupid comment so you will understand.
Putin gets 4500-6000 Russians killed per month but gains 10 million population.
In 139 years, it will be a net loss..
No, actually it will never happen because those 10 million people make 200,000 more a year.
Zelensky in turn had a country with 44.5 million people or so when he was first elected - now there are maybe 20 something million left.
Can't say the situations are remotely similar.
Not pushing the mRNA clot shots, perhaps he is counting on the war in complying with the Globalist depopulation program.
Utterly laughable innumeracy.
Russia has gained at least 10 million people from the 4 ex-Ukrainian oblasts.
Those 10 million people alone make roughly 200,000 more a year.
By necessity the Mormons might gain a chance to compete with Russian Orthodox Church
The media’s attritional war on reality is buckling under its own ponderous falsity, failing in the goal of eating away at the Thinking Person’s connection to sincerity and truth.
Drones and tranny shootarounds while we print money to launder… only 35 days left to cash out!
And S&P at ATH. Tech stocks at ATH. Who freaking cares? All money flushing onshore from the EU and China to the US in search for the AI and Quantum nirvana. Lol...
As shit falls from their mouths they tend to slip on it.
An intricate web they weave when they practise to BULLSHITE ME !
Whoo! That's a beauty! 2 thumbs-up!
Looks like porksicles for Christmas!
"The Empire Strikes Back" with vengeful furry.
The Empire is in attack mode which all comes down to its assertion that you are either with or against us forcing countries to pick a side and, if you're on the wrong side, bad things will happen there. Might is right.
The reaction to the Masters of the Universe's open threat to attack the non-worshippers of the USD so far has been weak. BRICS itself is a weak-formed union that barely trusts each other. That's no way to stand against an opponent bent on destroying you. Trump will try to convince Russia to accept a deal which would include the removal of sanctions which means very little because he also said that he would apply tariffs on any country moving away from the USD.
There are also rumours of a second AFU attack into Russian territory to improve the terms of the
soon peace deal. Russia could let them advance into its borders as much as they want trapping them in by launching a concentrated multi-pronged blitzkrieg counter-offensive and surrounding Kyiv. The AFU kamikaze expeditionary force would lose their line of supply cut off deep in enemy territory and be forced to surrender or be obliterated along with all the other retreating stragglers. And that would be a checkmate against Ukraine. But it looks like Russia is going to settle for a lesser deal at a time when the Empire is in full-spectrum attack mode.
So, BRICS and friends are no match against the Empire as things stand because they are too soft and afraid to offend the Empire which can chip away to break the will of one country at a time. So far Russia fights alone and the Empire knows it. Lack of support from its allies could be the reason Russia is so measured in its SMO. The Masters of the Universe will continue to divide and conquer non-compliant countries. The Empire has struck back while Russia alone holds the line.
Hence, BRICS less R equals BICS which is an appropriate acronym meaning disposable lighter.
The Empire is bent on turning BRICS into BICS one flick at a time. lol
https://youtu.be/pfuZWP4YDW4
Here is the masterpiece:https://youtu.be/YMvcCfs8mf8
All good points!
And love the pun of the bic lighters!
BRICS & friends are too soft and afraid bc the examples are not good. All “medium sized” countries that have opposed the Gringo empire (excluding autarkic & nuclear armed Best Korea) have been thoroughly wrecked: Libya, Iraq, Venezuela, Cuba, Yemen, Myanmar, etc. and, now Syria as well.
I guess elites in the Global South are not eager to stick their necks out to fight for multipolarity after seeing how things are developing…
Thanks. Amusement keeps me sane in a crazy world. cheers.
BRICS countries are well aware of the empire's strength. However, BRICS is a long-term project, not a quick solution. Many, including alt-media sympathetic to the BRICS cause, yet seem to expect near future gains - new global reserves, payments systems, etc. - even in the face o0f consistent BRICS pronouncements to the contrary. And as BRICS continues to say, its objective is to provide alternative choice, not a direct challenge to the USD system. Right now, they are simply providing trade arrangements offering payment in national currencies.
I agree 100%.
My issue is that the Evil Gringo Empire has still a lot of fuel in the tank and it still can get a “lucky shot” and down the R or C of brics if he gets enough time and opportunities for it. And time and opportunities is exactly what R and C are giving away with their mostly passive strategy.
Victor, BICS are going to get dismantled one country at a time before they make it long-term unless it changes its formula. Long-term can't help you when you face short-term existential threats. The Empire does not accept alternative choices. You are either with or against them. That's the choice.
I agree. Trump clearly has the BRICS in his sights. The BRICS in 2025 need to urgently take action to ward off these attacks which Trump will launch. Slow and steady is a recipe for disaster.
Economically, briCs is some 80% China. And China is dangerously dependent on exports to the US; there is simply no other market that could absorb their manufacturing output. They tried, and failed, to diversify with the Silk Road initiative, which was meant to increase Chinese involvement in the EU market; but the EU is, firstly, rapidly failing economically and, secondly, so wretchedly enslaved to the US that they will cut their own collective throat sooner than disobey American instructions to antagonize China.
So, if the US under Trump and the neocons goes full sanction mode on China, the US populace (not the elites) will suffer massive shortages of everything, experience great hardship and be beggared; but China will be bankrupted into an acute economic crisis. Now, from the insane point of view of the Talmudist and Mammonist elites, /both/ outcomes are desirable, so there is no effective way to dissuade the US from this course of action.
The Chinese know this, and are afraid; an economic breakdown on this scale will certainly sweep Xi and his faction from power, and cause great difficulties to whoever picks up the helm afterwards. China is not resilient to sanctions the way Russia was, and efforts to develop such resilience are too little too late.
That is why the briCs is paralyzed, and will remain this way for the next couple of years, at least.
Only 16% of China's exports go to the US. That doesn't seem to be enough
to qualify as "dangerously dependent." What I do think is dangerously dependent is the fact that 85% of all antibiotics used in the US are manufactured in China along with numerous other highly critical medications. The US is one of the most sickly populations (think highly dependent on meds) on the planet. What effect will the loss of these medications have? What about all the US military hardware that can't be repaired without parts from china? Lots of their wunderwaffen can't be built without parts from China. I think there is a brutal reality awaiting donaldo. Cutting off China will be much more damaging to the US than it will be for China.
China is also vulnerable to blockades of food and fuel. Merely blockading the Panama and Suez, as well as Malacca could create serious problems for China in short order.
When will China finally realize that they are next on the platter of the hegemonic globalists.
I'd wager they have realised. That's why they are busy ramping up production of ships, planes, weapons, etc.
China has a sneaky way of sitting back and patiently waiting to move in after the opposing parties have been weakened. China may not fight wars, but it does know how to covertly infiltrate the political systems of countries for control like it got caught doing in Canada. Naughty, naughty, China. you no do anymore, huh? lol
Funny stuff considering that it is $lumville's ruling ZionaZis that have been behind the so-called global color revolutions and almost every act of terror on this planet in the last 2 decades. China owns you and he who pays the piper calls the tune.
'China may not fight wars' - Huh? Just recently after WW2 - Korea, Tibet, India, attempts against Soviet Union in the 60s, Vietnam, etc.
China fights (and starts) plenty of wars including 'wars of aggression'
it is a modern nation state as any other, aggressive, and utterly ruthless.
do not insult China by making them some kind of peace-loving conflict avoiding hippies, they are not. they try not to get into fights they cannot win, however will (and did and do) start plenty of their own. There is a reason why China has had territorial disputes with every one of its neighbors
It's been well over 50 years since any of those wars you list. Little border disputes aren't wars.
Compare China's record with that of the United States over the same time frame (since world war 2). It's an order of magnitude different especially if you count all the dirty wars the U.S loves to fight.
using your logic US had no wars at all, not even 'border disputes'. for example China lost the amount soldier count against Vietnam (that China started) in 3 weeks in 1979 that USA lost in Vietman in 10 years... so much for for 'little border disputes'
by the way, I was in India in spring of 2016 and remember reading newsletters that again China was sending its military units across line of demarcation in Himalayan mountains, constantly probing its neighbor. Just in the last 25 years China got territory (that I know of, may be more) from Russia (to settle border issues), from Tajikistan (in Pamir mountains).
Countries in the region know China very well and very aware of it. it is a huge predator that is close by, if that predator is relatively weak then you may be safe for the moment, otherwise make strong friends (enemies of your enemies). US may come and go but ultimately it is across the ocean and has its own continent North America. China is nearby and historically had Korea and Thailand and Vietman and all of south east Asia under occupation as some point. Ask Koreans how many times over thousands of years China invaded them, ask Thai about their history, ask Viet - you get a very different picture
Let me clarify my comment - the last major war that China has fought was a 3 week war against Vietnam in the late 1970s (honestly - I didn't even know about it). Whatever border disputes since then, like the ones you list with India, Russia, or whoever else, are not wars. Those conflicts are completely different, and on a much tinier scale, than the dozens of invasions and bombing campaigns and dirty wars the U.S has fought, by choice, thousands of miles from its own borders, over that same time period.
Yes China is a big, powerful country with a long and bloody history. But there are many countries like that. I can't think of a single so-called "great power" that doesn't have a body count. China was itself colonized for a time by Europeans.
All that doesn't contradict my argument that, over the same time frame (since world war 2), China's foreign policy, in aggregate, has been an order of magnitude less destructive and militant than that of the U.S, especially if you count all the dirty wars the U.S loves to fight.
Let's do a quick count, from an arbitrary year - 1991 (post-Cold War): Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq again, Libya, Syria, Yemen. That's just the official armed engagements. Might as well sprinkle in drone wars in Somali, Pakistan, and Niger. I am sure I am missing some.
China has Zero to fear from the angloZionaZi paper tiger and its constant howling about "militarily confronting" the "China threat". How stupid! The destruction of Natostan in the sputtering rump Ukrapper dumpster fire is in fact the death knell of $lumville USSA and the inevitable collapse of its IOU worthless (ex) Saudimercan toilet paper dollah. The entire chosenite Wall St sewer is on the verge of implosion as Pentacon Kill Industries and its garbage weapons can no longer bring home the bacon. No more free stuff and if gung hoers in $lumville are under the delusion that they can "take on" the Bear and the Dragon and all their friends then I would suggest putting down the crack pipe, snapping out of the fentanyl delUSion and looking around at the stinking human slum in $lumville proper. It's all over and soon the fat hag WILL sing, the cookie mobster Nudelman and Bath-house Barry Obomber and the ruling Zio$ that have brought America (sic) to its debauched and ruinous state.
Are you alright, bot? lol
Doin' fine, Denny. Shame you got triggered. Mucho LOL.
Just checking. Take care, man.
The Dragon can burn the USSAN buZZard when it wants.
Who own$ US? pretty much everybody at this stage of the collap$€. LOL
https://www.statista.com/statistics/246420/major-foreign-holders-of-us-treasury-debt/
Bums don't decide Zilch when the fiat mu$cle no longer works.
Get ready for bankruptcy because Pentacon has become a joke...remember Afghanistan? And you imagine these deadbeats can whack the bear and Dragon. More LOL, "bot".
https://www.usdebtclock.org/
I tend to agree. Also not that desperation and increased violence usually signal something…. The best thing for the USA and the ROW is for the the former to withdraw its malign influence and focus on rebuilding its own crumbling infrastructure and perhaps even become a more productive member of the world rather than creative destruction and controlled chaos.
For that they will have to rid themselves of the ZionaZi poi$on in the body politic. Shut down Hollyweird pedo machine and take back all media from the neanderthal thugs that own the narrative. The inevitable collapse of their fiat filth will indeed manage a lot of that in short order. Otherwise USSA will die poisoned by the fetid albatross called israhell, lashed around every head of ussan tax cattle. The enemy is the ZionaZi parasite in the belly of the lurching idiot Golem thrashing in the Washing town sewer.
China has a lot to fear, not militarily, but economically. Their economy is reliant on export to the US to such an extent, that a full sanctions regime would break China economically, without a shot being fired.
It would, of course, also completely ruin Americans, in much the way the EU's economy is collapsing now, only worse; but the Talmudist and Mammonist Davos elites don't care about ordinary Americans, only about their own power, which will not be endangered by impoverishing their populace.
China quite rightly is dumping toxic, soon to be worthless USSAN treasury notes. It has however, more important markets that can still afford to pay for its products with real money. Apart from that it is now more concentrated on its own internal market to continue boosting growth. US days of "buying" free stuff with toilet paper is over.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/256350/main-export-partners-for-china-by-export-value/
Only 16% of their exports go to the US. You might want to learn how many of the critical medications needed to keep sickly Americans alive comes from china. 85% of all antibiotics used in the US are manufactured in China. Do you believe losing that import will have no effect? Any idea how many deaths are prevented every single day by use of these antibiotics? Then there are several dozen other meds that a very large number of these sickly Americans can't live without. The US is much more dependent on China than what you seem to believe. A very rude awakening is in the near future.
Didn't Napoleon say they one with the last reserves wins the battle. I can imagine the US and China watching each other wondering if they are going to commit. The fact that China is a military peer prevents the US from committing it's army.
Foolish statement.
Of course China understands the West's agenda for it.
Thing is - China has been preparing and is prepared.
China pioneered the ability to block out foreign interference via the internet as one example.
Another example is that China's exports more to the Global South than it does to the West.
What China is doing is pushing out the day in which open confrontation occurs because China is still growing faster than the US despite China's supposed economic stumbles.
Why not delay a confrontation when you are growing stronger, every day, than your attacker?
"China's exports more to the Global South than it does to the West"
Sources please. Extraordinary bullshit requires extraordinary evidence.
Percent of China's exports to the US: 15%
Percent of China's exports to the EU: 14.8%
Percent to rest of West: maybe 15% total.
Sum of the above is under 50% - meaning by definition China exports more to the rest of the world than to the West.
https://tradingeconomics.com/china/exports-by-country
That's a lot better than what I expected. Losing about 50% (including various US proxies such as Japan and Australia) is survivable in the long run. And I bet the West will make exemptions for itself for the real strategic imports.
China is not going to lose much, if anything.
The reality is that Chinese manufacturing dominates the entire world much as OPEC dominates the oil market.
While a small country could figure out how to get oil without OPEC, a large one certainly cannot - and the West absolutely cannot survive without the products of Chinese manufacturing.
Not now, and not for the short and medium term foreseeable future even if those morons could get their shit together and reindustrialize.
Furthermore - all the present signs are in the opposite direction as opposed to the industrialize one.
Next time learn some facts before repeating bullshit from cnn
Why don't you provide some sources to prop up your false assumptions? Sounds like you've been getting your information from the potato in the white house.
I think you misinterpret the signs. This Empire is being liquidated by it's Central Banking master's, the death throes are simply the sucking out of every drop of profit from the populous of the West as the genocidal enslavement increases in impetuous through the complete and absolute corruption of every single aspect of Western Governance.
The genocidal treason of the Covid19 Coup D'état should have awoken in rational thinkers the recognition, the point of no return for the Globalist Parasites, where the remainder of the 2020s will see the UN"s primary purpose as overseers of Mass Genocide and enslave of humanity.
There is an unlikely possibility of a recognition and successful rising up of humanities higher consciousness and selfless courage to over throw the parasitic masters of this Satanic Empire. Regardless before the mid half of this century there is a real likelihood the human population of the earth will be counted only in the millions.
The best hope is that the parasite caste will find themselves as square one and their numbers can be counted on one hand.
Discombobulated bot talk. What you bots up to, anyway?
No idea but I am just blocking them as they get flushed out. Improves the signal to noise here.
I dont read it as bot-talk. There are several legitimate points that are supported by reality.
It's looking more and more like little Denise is a cubicle dweller
Little Debbie has a treat for you
Bombs away. lol
Whatever, pussnboots. lol
So anything you don't agree with is a bot? You sound much more like an establishment funded troll than aj does. His statement is much more accurate than anything you've offered.
You da man, Henryeta. lol
Good post mate.
I don't disagree with anything you say, but I think the East looks at things over a longer timescale.
When they asked Zhou En Lai about the effect of French Revolution in 1972, he said "Too early to say". Now I know it was apparently a misunderstanding, but there's a kernel of truth to it.
The balance of forces is moving, relatively quickly against the West, despite their best efforts. Even "successes" like Syria bring new problems.
So it may be that the BRICS+ are happy to avoid antagonizing an increasingly desperate West, in order to let Time do its work.
FESTINA LENTE!
A lot of words saying only that the author does not actually understand what is going on.
BRICS is not about a creating a childish board game of Risk style competing military blocs - it is about creating a new and different world order for all those who wish to participate. And it seems most of the world wishes to participate.
BRICS need not confront the West militarily; all it needs to do is to continue to grow faster than the West. BRICS as it is, is a slightly arger share of global GDP than the West and can become double that of the West in less than 30 years.
Consider BRICS to be economic and sovereign nation-state insurgents; they win by not losing.
Only fools think that confronting the West in its only strength, is a good idea.
This is precisely the point. Commenters who frame it as a linear battle are missing that….
Yeah, my argument to, this geopolitical game is also played on the diplomatic and economic front, and on those fronts, the West still looks desperate and is loosing in a big way. The rest of the world has just to wait, most debt is on the Western side, not on the other side.
And Syria is just one example more, of the destructive behavior of the West, if they think they have to change something they do it via force, corruption and lying. I am not seeing Russian politicians in Georgia, their direct neighbor, I only see Western politicians, the rest of the World is fed up with the West and its disgusting ways.
The debt is largely a symptom, not a cause.
And to be clear: the West can get out of this hole. It just will not be able to do so with the elites and policies that created the situation to start with - which is what is going on now.
Even so - the real problem, the strategic problem for the West is that its system of extracting value from the rest of the world is breaking/broken. This value extraction, in the past, was a function of superior technology, capital, leadership and strategy. The value extraction was thus not entirely unjustified given the real contributions the West did create and provide.
But real life is about "what have you done for me, lately".
None of the above 4 are true any more: the 2nd and 3rd world has been capitalizing the West for years now (look up the millions of articles about "savings gluts"). Leadership - lol. Strategy - I can't even lol because it is the behavior of a cocaine addled hamster hitting the "neocon/neoliberal strategy" lever over and over and over.
Technology? There is still some, but it is technology that largely does not matter for everyday living. Nobody needs an iPhone 16 to survive or even prosper. Nothing of actual real utility, above the massive capital expense, has come out of AI, or self-driving cars, or AR/VR or whatever other overhyped nonsense that has come out of the West in the last decade or more. It is all "Let them eat cake" <-- replacing cake with social media.
Terrifying, isn't it?
"Nothing of actual real utility, above the massive capital expense, has come out of AI, "
Not exactly true. Tom Friedman of the NYT was knocked for a loop when he discovered China's "dark factories" were dark because an all-robot labor force, organized with AI and low latency real 5G communications, can operate perfectly well without lighting. AI-5G- Robotics is making China an invincible industrial force, something the US has no prayer of repeating here. (Unless China sets up shop over here... like a North American colony)
China's also becoming energy independent, using domestic coal and nuclear energy to replace ICE vehicles run on imported oil, though Friedman would never admit that reality. He's too wedded to the Climate Catastrophe narrative.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/17/opinion/us-china-musk-swift-tariffs-manufacturing.html
Those factories don't operate on AI.
Don't confuse automation with the LLM hallucinatory pile of shit that is what is presently being termed AI.
Just be cause they get called the ‘master of the universe’ does not mean that one ought to use the term. Narcissistic sociopaths love worship, what say we not give it to them…..
"The AFU kamikaze expeditionary force would lose their line of supply cut off deep in enemy territory and be forced to surrender or be obliterated along with all the other retreating stragglers"
Forgive my ignorance. I've never been in the military and am not knowledgeable at all about these things but I have been trying to follow this war and I don't understand why Russia doesn't seem to use air power other than drones? I mean, if the AFU comes into Kursk or somewhere else in Russia in big numbers why don't the Russians just bomb them into oblivion?
Why aren't they doing that now in Kursk? And for that matter why aren't they doing that in Donetsk? Where are the attack helicopters or bombers or other air power?
They do use the air force, but nowadays this is not done the way it was in WW2, with waves of screaming Stukas and nightly carpet-bombing raids. Today the air force uses stand-off weapons: missiles and FABs with planing modules, not gravity bombs. And the Russians are doing just that. Doing it the old-fashioned way would expose them to unacceptable losses to modern AD. The future is now, old man.
_______
And yes, it is planing, not "planning". As in aquaplaning, referring to gliding aerodynamics.
You are the idiot that said China is dependent on the US but then you have the audacity to attack and insult someone for asking a question he clearly said he didn't know about? Typical dimocrat moron. Go play on the highway if your mom will let you out of the basement.
Yeah, Rus have only two allies - their army and their navy.
On a personal note, I have a gazprom bank account with union pay card and lately travelling through china I couldnt use the card anymore, due to the new sanctions re gazprom. I cannot believe that chinese dont even back their own card in their own country.
Its beyond my comprehension.
There is even more to consider than just Russia being taken down. China is not as strong as it seems, and is currently going through upheavals both economically and culturally. While you may not agree with the following, please just consider:
The CCP consistently overhypes its economic data. Independent financial observers have determined that actual economic indicators have been overstated by 5% GDP growth per year. Unemployment is rampant, new graduates may be as much as 50% unemployed. The economic situation is currently a badly disguised recession that is quickly moving into a full-blown depression. The middle class are being hurt hard, and are moving back into poverty. Homelessness is increasing, as people cannot pay the mortgages on their homes. All aspects of society are heavily In debt, including provincial governments. Real estate has collapsed, including all associated construction enterprises. Everywhere businesses are laying off workers, and even not paying wages for months. This includes state-owned businesses which were always touted as “iron ricebowls” for their stability. Banks are closing, and those that remain are seizing customer's deposits or only allowing small transactions. Foreign businesses are scared of the the CCP's new business restrictions, and are moving their large industries to other SE Asian countries. Large Chinese cities are polluted, both air and water. Floods frequently ravage smaller cities, because flood control is so poorly designed.
The Chinese people are in revolt, such that there are spontaneous demonstrations everywhere, and attempts to fight for their “rights” by taking their pleas to the government. Instead they're getting arrested on any pretense. The Chinese people are increasingly blaming both Xi Jingping and the Communist Party. All this is happening in spite of the fact that Chinese society is the most surveilled and controlled on earth, where they spend more on 'internal protection' than they do on the military.
I suggest you look through some of the following channels:
China Insider:
https://youtube.com/@chinainsider-tv?si=VPjXe7-fs7BRY9Bo
China Lens:
https://youtube.com/@chinalens2024?si=UiTEr43Hb_HmRYzD
China Uncensored:
https://youtube.com/@chinauncensored?si=ciiDnR_GxhJA56qB
China Undercover:
https://youtube.com/@chinaundercover?si=tiw3j_JaBm6_0KoE
China Unfolded:
https://youtube.com/@chinaunfolded2024?si=lQEd8ibFKa82OdqC
China Unscripted:
https://youtube.com/@chinaunscripted?si=Ye2ybEKAtElnY9VQ
While some of these may duplicate each other's information, the best and most intelligent is China Uncensored.
The CCP may be due to being brought down, with Chinese society imploding.
BRIS ???
You are kind, Eric. Thanks for all the information and I fully agree. When you dig deeper, China is not what it's made to look like.
All of Ukraine’s fortified defensive lines in Donbas were established between 2014 and 2021—initially at the hands of Azov Battalion-type militia once the civil war erupted in the aftermath of the Euromaidan coup and then gradually from 2015 through 2021 as the U.S.-led OTAN became a steady partner. It’s peculiar that Ukraine has no fortifications beyond Pokrovsk, especially since leaders in the West have insisted on “fighting to the last Ukrainian,” a vociferously stated goal which likely made for quite an entrenched conflict. Military strategists in the West, advising Ukraine, would have had time enough in the 1000 days it took Russia to reach Pokrovsk to begin fortifying areas beyond the citadel, in order to preserve the population of viable Ukrainian soldiers, but no engineers sallied forth to design fortifications or bulk up other earthwork baffles that would slow Russia’s roll eventually as its forces ultimately took village after village. The shovels may have been there for Ukraine, ready, but not the shovel-ready work. The lack of war-urgency or war-industry in the western nations, their inability to *ramp up,* got reflected on the battlefield in Ukraine, even amplified there, where military tactics had an indolent, sometimes irrational quality.
Though U.S. leaders brayed loudly about “fighting to the last Ukrainian,” they behaved like it never actually would be possible to run out of Ukrainians. As if consulting a fantasy chapter out of the Rand Corporation’s bestselling novel about how Russia gets weakened in an unending war, they saw a limitless supply of Ukrainians, as if they could conjure them out of the rasputitsa in numbers sufficient enough—like the terracotta army from 209 B.C. China—that they could overwhelmingly force Russia’s capitulation.
There was always going to be a ceasefire. Except now, Ukraine is in a much worse position because it has lost dramatically more territory since the first ceasefire was negotiated in March 2022. Hundreds of thousands more men, women and children have been needlessly killed or maimed because ‘leaders’ from the West, sitting in the safety of their offices thousands of miles from the battlefield, wanted to continue table-topping a really fun board game, using men, women and children as cheap, disposable, pawns.
Depravity & hypocrisy walk hand in hand.
No (good) news from the western front, cannon fodder into drones fodder or propaganda fodder, no spectacular news not even with a cease fire.
Not going to be a cease-fire. Ukraine (the US) will fulfill all the demands that Putin has issued or the SMO will continue until there is no Ukraine as a nation.
The good news is the Ukrainian government-in-exile will be safely tucked away in Lviv, Poland.
Think again of course there will be a cease fire, question is how many in a row? You believe the Hundred Years’ War, they were fighting every day? Peace is nothing else than a preparation for the next war.
Unless there is a decapitation event prior to them setting up a government in exile…..the envelope keeps getting pushed to the point where this seems increasingly likely….and Israel has already set the precedent…..
Thanks about fortification in Donbas over ten years. What I don’t understand is Kursk where Ukro-Nazis entered recently but — it appears are very difficult to dislodge!!??
Something about the fortification story doesn’t add up…
There are no fortifications in Kursk, except a military post near the border, which the Russians had staffed before the Incursion commenced--and whatever village homes & barns the OTAN/merc/AFU can occupy: school buildings in Sudzha & the like.
Terrain-wise, the Kursk region is rolling & forested, densely so, unlike the Donbas areas.
Those meat-assaults by the female DPRK troops are hell in the forest
;]
Small correction. It wasn't a military post on the border that was attacked, it was a regular border crossing / passport control point, with regular border guards. The men who were killed in AFU's initial assault were not RA - they were border security (separate branch in the Russian system).
There were RA troops as well defending the border, but they weren't involved in the initial gunfire that killed a handful of Russians when the AFU assaulted the border checkpoint station.
The Kursk salient itself isn't densely forest - the forests are a good bit south of the border (I think ~15km), on the edge of Sumy.
Hahaha...at least Kim armed the ladies with brooms.
We could also consider that the RF forces are not rushing in Kursk on purpose. They see that the situation is managable, UA keeps sending reinforcements which are getting depleted, reducing pressure on other areas of the front.
True. Once the threat of artillery strikes on KNPP were neutralised, then the Kursk salient became a convenient firebag for the annihilation of Ukro forces.
Another foray of similar size, by Ukraine, would give Russia yet more opportunity to further decimate the AFU.
One wonders why a few White Swans dont make a few passes over the area…..
They don't need to make "passes" and expose themselves, when all this area is reachable with stand-off weapons, FABs in particular. The RuAF is doing its share, the smart way.
The RA is working on cutting supply lines and attempting to create encirclements of AFU troops. I don't think it's any deep strategy to keep Ukraine feeding troops into a meat grinder; there is a lot of risk of allowing the AFU to hold ground inside Russia's pre-war border (both inside Russia and in Russia's relations to foreign powers).
I think the Kremlin just isn't willing to sacrifice troops in the head-on assaults that would be required to quickly dislodge the AFU forces, and is instead adapting and trying other strategies.
Russia's primary strategy is attritional warfare. The Banderan army keeps playing into it every single time. Even when it couldn't even manufacture an intellectually defendable reason.
Zelenski is the director of a film-noire reality TV serial production.
Once they dislodge them from Kursk oblast, they will have to face the same khokhols holed up behind fortifications in and near Sumy. It is far preferable to attrit them in open country, like they do now.
There are very large pine forests north and east of Sumy, not far from the pre-war border in the Kursk region. The AFU used those forests to mass troops and armored equipment. The RA was aware that they were doing it, but there are a number of vectors that an attack could be launched along from that area.
Part of Ukraine's goal before the Kursk invasion was to force Russia to reinforce sparse border troops and pull that strength away from other parts of the line. Russia didn't take the bait and chose to maintain a higher combat intensity elsewhere. There were various units held in the rear to counter any AFU invasion across the pre-war border: VDV troops (airborne) appeared on the ground in the Sudzha area within hours of the Ukrainian invasion.
The terrain is really different in the Kursk salient than other theaters of the war, the latter being mostly either open fields bordered by tree lines, rivers and lakes/reservoirs, and forest. The topography of the Kursk salient, north of Sudzha, is really different than the typical glacial till of both European Russia and Ukraine. There are endless large creeks flowing into small rivers, like leaves on a tree. It's striking when you look at it on a satellite map.
Ukraine was able to take favorable positions early in their invasion, and had good logistics to support those positions. The RA appears to be preparing for a counter-invasion targeting Sumy itself; even if they stop short, it will cut supply lines to their forces in the salient.
tldr; it's weird topography that favors the AFU, and lets them move both vehicles and troops under some amount of cover anywhere in the salient.
Are you and Dances With Bears related?
The Russians are using the area as a training ground for killing the best troops of Ukraine in a remote sparsely populated area of Russia. A real war training exercise. The Russians are training the future trainers of the Russian Army in modern warfare techniques while they become nimble at changing equipment on the fly to refine these techniques.
The big stink about drones u known drones flying all over shows the ignorance of Americans about these changes. Some Social Science military expert wrote how Russians are behind in large ( expensive) drones. The Russians just build hundreds if not thousands of smaller drones with similar capabilities. The US is up shit creek blind with no paddle.
It is Zelenski's misintention that holding Kursk until Trump takes office gives Ukraine a better negotiating position during negotiations. It is Russia's intention that as long as the Banderan army wants to occupy an operationally insignificant part of Kursk and reinforce the untenable position, then let it.
When the Banderan army begins it's retreat from Kursk the RUF will be following to open another front in Sumy that will be isolated from the Southern Theater.
To paraphrase Napoleon;
"Never interrupt your enemy while he is committing a mistake."
NATO wasted billions in Ukraine to build roads for the war they hoped for.
The money was spent and the improvements were largely not made.
"With $1 million in gifts from two prominent foundations, RAND is creating a distinguished chair in Israel policy to oversee a slate of new research endeavors.
The establishment of a dedicated chair allows RAND to deepen what has become a steady stream of research on Israel in recent years." -- The ongoing NATO military operations in Ukraine represent Judea War on Russia.
There is no point dislodging them from this indefensible wasteland into fortified positions near Sumy. What the RF is doing instead, is taking this God-given opportunity to exterminate these fuckers in open field---while Yerlensky is playing into their hand by pushing his best troops and equipment into that killing ground.
Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake, as Sun Tzu said. Or whoever.
Cynism at its worst.
You're forgetting that the majority of Ukrainian people were / are fine with this war. Sure, they've been groomed, but that Nazi-stuff worked twice within less than 70 years with them. How come?
Is there something within that nation that needs a similar treatment as the one given to Germany, i.e. demilitarization, open-air prison, puppet state, etc.?
No, they are Shanghaied off the streets and desertion rates are high and getting higher. Do you like the US's role in Ukraine? We all got Shanghaied into war and are now hostages to their depravity.
You're obviously ignoring the past 20 years. Nobody was "Shanghaing" anybody off or onto the streets when Ukrainian cities were overflowing with Neo-Nazis marching those exact streets. The people in the Donbass-regions are at war with that scum since 2014, and according to the results of the 2018-election the majority of Ukrainians were fine with that when they elected the comedian.
I'm German, the US has been occupying our country for almost 80 years. We could've driven them out in the 90s when the Allies released our land from occupation, but we did the opposite by embracing the artificial prison they gave us. I know it's our fault that these clowns are still around. We aren't victims, neither are the Ukrainians victims, and neither are you.
They elected the midget because they believed the lies he told them. Do you not know what he campaigned on?
Do you mean that they got duped by the guy who starred in this show which has the same name as his party?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JceiIUTMvD0
Watch till the end, in case you haven't seen that trailer yet.
These are genuine questions, because as an American it's very hard to find truthful news. First, so it sounds like b4 the war, you are saying many Ukrainians were fine with neo-Nazis? What would that mean to them, like...wanting socialism or wanting a strong leader and to go to war? I associate nazi-ism with Germany so don't understand what this term means in a different country. Second, is it true Zelensky was elected on a peace platform originally, but NATO nations talked Z into not entering the peace negotiations offered by Russia? Third, what do Ukrainian citizens want now given current conditions? My last question veers off in a different direction, but do countries like Poland, Sweden, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia really believe that Russia is a threat? Thanks, I would really appreciate comments from people who know about this.
The National-Socialists (of the German Empire) had the history for all of Europe ready to be utilized. What I mean is that they dug up all information on any kind of historic conflict between ethnic minorities and majorities or political or religious parties throughout Europe and the adjacent land areas. They used this 'bad blood' to incite chaos which they then channeled to suit their own purposes.
I don't know if you know anything about WWII, so I'll tell you this: The German Army had little resistance conquering most of Europe. Even the Soviets were helping them with tanks and resources throughout the 1930s. One of the significant reasons for this ease was that they had the perfect marketing strategy for any nation / state. F.e. the people of the Baltic states are hated in Russia to this day because they greeted the 'Nazis' with bread and salt when they invaded them. While the Russians are still holding a grudge, one might say that the Baltic people simply wanted to get out of Communism, or that they were fed up with being pushed around just because of the geo-strategic importance of the area they lived in (Baltic Sea coast). The National-Socialists played both angles, promising the Baltic people the land where milk and honey flow, and where there is no Communism or any Russian.
With the Ukrainians it's a bit 'more difficult' because the Ukrainian nation is somewhat artificially created. Just like there weren't any Germans 200 years ago, there weren't any Ukrainians 110 years ago. Both are constructs. The Germans were created by Bismarck who united Prussians, Bavarians, Saxons, etc. under the banner of the "German Empire". And the people constituting today's Ukrainians were given a similarly unifying identity by Lenin. The name 'Ukraine' translates to 'border' btw, which means that 'Ukrainians' are literally 'people who live on Russia's borders' (and yet this is the 2nd time in their short history that they think they're superior to Russians). The National-Socialists knew exactly how to manipulate these border-dwellers' new spirit of nationalism to meet their own ends.
I don't have an easy source for you because history is not easy to comprehend, especially when it has anything to do with the so-called 'Nazis', but if you want to start somewhere to understand f.e. the modern day Ukrainians you could start with their hero who helped the Nazis kill as many Jews, Poles, Russians, and other 'Untermenschen' as possible: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepan_Bandera
P.S.: The organization that has become the European Union was founded by ex-Nazis and people who financed and endorsed them. So, it is hardly a coincidence that the European Union would incite the Ukrainians to fight for 'them' once again. It's ridiculous actually, because any educated German knows all these things, but nevertheless, we seem to be at the same point in history again.
Thanks for the reply 👍
Axtually, according to recebnt public opinion, most Ukrainains want an end to the war.
That anyone in Ukraine would admit to this is impressive in itself, as anyone in Ukraine publicly calling for anything less than Sportpalast Total Victory is inviting a visit from the secret police, with their usual fascist light touch.
Sure dude, secret police will get you if you don't get vaccinated for Covid-19, right? Gestapo and Stasi... Still the best boogeyman to sell victim-status. "I can't say anything, or they'll get me!" Ever heard of MK-Ultra?
In Ukraine, the secret plice most assuredly will get you if you say the wrong things in public.
If I went to the town center and started yelling that we need to dispose of the German government, then I would most assuredly be arrested in Germany too. And that would be absolutely justified.
How to say that you are opposed to freedom of speech without saying that you are opposed to freedom of speech? You put on a master class.
Nobody said anything about "disposing of the [Ukrainian] government, BTW, so quit arguing with strawmen. See Brandenburg v Ohio in the US.
But let's pretend that what you said were accurate. Are you seriously claiming that the Gestapo in Germany will arrest you, imprison your without trial and torture you without legal process? And you are okay with this? I know europeans like being slaves but this is too much.
All the answers are in the fog of a lesser known history going back to Frederick the Great age and his niece who become Catherine the Great. She imported Prussian farmers into the lands of of actual Ukraine to aide their motherland with agricultural products. That was the beginning of all dark future events.
My ancestors were among those people, please enlighten me.
She invited Prussians into Ukraine to increase farming productivity. Can you please clarify the connection between that and current events? In case you are interested, there is a short clip from a longer interview of Jeffrey Sachs at the Cambridge Union where he talks about western interference in Ukraine starting in 2014 I believe where a legitimately elected president was replaced, which was a long term plan leading to current events. There are a number of people including US congressman Lundsay Graham who has actually admitted that the west needs to get Ukraine's resources rather than let Russia get them. I don't claim to have all the answers, but this is something to consider.
In July, Pokrovsk was busy beautifying the city, not digging and pouring cement.
I can't agree the Banderan tactics were indolent. Over:-optimistic and corrupt to the point of being repeatedly feckless is how I describe NATO the EU and our key leaders in our proxy state
RAND's best selling futurist fiction novels repeatedly missed or ignored possible key story arc points: The Russian Federation populace doesn't want to repeat the dystopian 90s, Putin is not corrupt, Putin is a real leader and knows how to delegate, Russia is an autarky and Russia began to modernize it's arms industry starting in 2010. More bots, less assembly line.
It actually hasn’t - Russia holds less territory more than it did in March 2022.
In March 2022 Russia held Kherson City and surrounds and also a large slice of Kharkiv.
Ukraine is in a better position now, territory wise, than it was in March 2022.
Get your facts straight.
The Ukranians are gleeful with new Laser weapons they are pushing I am hearing, most likely at a range of 2 km, likely mostly useful for shorads drone type stuff. I bet the russians do not find it useful for day to day stuff otherwise they would have fielded it en masse. Another wunderwaffen
The problem is that these weapons need a lot of electricity.
My guess is lithium batteries.
Absolutely not. Lithium batteries do not do well with massive discharges, plus they are super slow to charge, if you want to use them for very long.
A shipboard nuclear reactor could work, or a grid connection.
That's what dumbasses don't realize with these EM and laser weapons - the power is the problem. Missiles, bullets, artillery have their energy packaged with the ammo.
In my experience with lithium batteries, one thing they do very well is deliver massive discharges over short bursts.
Massive for a cell phone maybe.
But not massive in GW or even 100 MW laser terms.
There is a reason why the "electromagnet" guns are so clunky and shitty: batteries don't cut it.
And don't expect this to change. A high end lithium battery already is 2/3rds the energy density of gunpowder. A 10x improvement in storage capacity makes them more dangerous than 4 times the equivalent weight in TNT.
I said nothing about cell phones.
This can be fixed by including a massive capacitor bank between the battery and laser. But capacitors of that power are very expensive, much more so than the batteries themselves. Not to mention clunky.
You still need to charge the capacitors, unless your weapon is one shot per hour or something equally medieval.
The capacitors are just a quick-discharge buffer, the energy still comes from the lithium battery. A half-minute cap recharge for a 100ms shot is not unreasonable.
The only practical way to use them on the Ukie front, is to put them in permanent emplacements in fortified cities, power them off the grid, and use to shoot down incoming suicide drones. Not a bad concept, but guess what.
The grid is no longer there. . .
Today's laser systems should be adequate for blinding enemy drones (and more). Perhaps aren't used widely yet for similar reasons as why APS on armored vehicles aren't -- side effects for defenders to include (1) giving away position (2) harm to friendly men and equipment (3) vulnerable to feints. #1 was also true for now universal vehicle-mounted drone jammers, but eventually the balance changed. Within a year of universal adoption of jammers, fiber rendered them obsolete. So we might well see it
Line of sight, direct fire systems are limited in range - which means they in turn are vulnerable to counter attack. In the case of missiles and shells - the missile launchers and artillery systems that are firing the shells would be literally out of sight of the lasers - meaning said lasers would at best be defensive.
And even then, there are so, so many ways to interfere with their operations ranging from smoke/fog to decoys to reflective coatings to attacking power sources.
I would also personally be pretty fucking scared to be on the firing side - the type of power involved are such that explosive accidents would not be infrequent, and the effects on the crews pretty much 100% fatal.
By escalating hostilities w/ an Oreshnik-launching card-carrying nuclear superpower, Joe’s admin is imperiling the American people & the world during what’s supposed to be a “peaceful transfer of power”—the interregnum.
His admin’s vanity project of “weakening Russia” has failed.
Joe, Blinken and Sullivan do not have a mandate to endanger America & the world any further by provoking Russia to retaliate w/ next-level responses.
It behooves them to stop relying on Russia to show restraint. Global safety should not depend on Russia exhibiting self-control & acting prudently. Continual & needless provocations jeopardize everybody.
I agree Cheetos, however it's no skin off their noses to "mix a bottle" of trouble and grief for the incoming Trumpster team. It's highly unlikely Blinken & Co will be held accountable for their bad faith actions, in fact they'll probably be amply rewarded and still end up with decent, well paid and risk free jobs, just somewhere else.
Trump will lose no political capital from washing his hands of Ukraine.
The key question is whether the State Department and CIA will let him?
Eight years of lawfare, slander, libel and two failed assassination attempts later I believe they will. Unless a third attempt is successful.
Who cares whether they have a mandate or not? The only question is whether they can do it.
I don't think my Potato-in-Chief was ever in control.
It was obvious when he started campaigning in 2019 that he his brain was impaired. He was a tool to be used and discarded.
The "debate" with Trump that sealed my Potato-in-Chief's political fate was a set-up to move him out of the way. I believe Obama wanted Newsom and the Clintons along with Pelosi pre-empted him and got the DEI hire Kamel positioned early.
Obama can't resist openly and ain't no white Democrat, particularly a man, going to publicly state the DEI hire isn't qualified.
The Democrat ballot blood magic didn't work this time. Trump had teams of warlocks positioned in battleground states with judges standing ready, monitoring the polls.
There is NO map showing total territory freed in 2024 - only endless number of derailed fields and patios freed daily - very confusing.
For example - how far from Dnjeper river are we now away along the entire front? That is NEVER shown — a big mystery… !!!???
Derailed typo was meant to be — detailed ;-((
Just go to deepstatemap and use their ruler. It's 80-100km depending where you measure from
Thank you.
I have NEVER even seen Dnjepar river on these millions micro-maps with detailed fields, wood edges and patios.
Nor you can see any rivers on these maps and they frequently mentioned.
That Military Summary, for example, seems to me as an endless stream of “war porn” that generates good cash but doesn’t inform at all anybody on anything much.
Yeah liveuamap or deepstatemap are good high level views, and you can rewind the clock and hit "play" and see how much the front has moved (hint: not much). Military Summary is a Youtuber first, keep that in mind. Suriyak Maps on TG does good detailed maps, bit too detailed maybe.
The Dnieper river is a long, long, long way off.
Weeb union dude on youtube is marking monthly progress and makes calculations.
Have you ever seen a map of Ukraine and areas liberated from Ukro-Nazis in 2024 ? I never did ! Nor I ever see were is a Dnjepar river on all of the millions micromaps shown.
All these mappers using GIS can calculate / show areas liberated in 2024. Its not biggie, just nobody shows it. I am sure if you ask weeb union dude on telegram about this that they would reply to you.
Dnieper is at different distance depending on the location, in some places Rus are on Dnieper already.
Russia is playing a waiting game while moving forward with as few casualties as possible . If the Ukrainians launch another "offensive" it will require them to accumulate men and machines and that just makes them worthwhile targets . If the F16's are used in foreign bases those bases will be visited by Oreshniks which will destroy even the most protected bunkers . All scenarios will have already been gamed by the Russian AI's and will incur rapid responses as its all set up . Putin has shown the big stick but not applied it yet .
Russia is not "playing a waiting game".
It is attriting the Ukrainian military.
Russia has massive reserves which have not been deployed . That is what I mean by "waiting" . As they are casualty averse , it pays to go slow and not incur unnecessary losses as offensives can be very costly as the Ukrainians found out.
Don't kid yourself concerning any attack on NATO bases.
If the F16s operate from NATO bases those bases will get hit . The Russians have already said this . Thats why they have not been used so far .
Don't kid yourself. If Russia wanted a pretext to hit NATO bases, a pretext would be found. F16s are already used from NATO bases.
Which bases ? please supply link.
The grind will continue. Eventually all the major cities east of Dnieper will be Russian with sieges forming up on those on the river. The river can be crossed at places of Russia's choosing. I still favor a blitz down Kerson way. As I wrote earlier this month, I see capitulation being the endgame, not negotiations as NATO is currently incapable of accepting what must be accepted--a new Eurasian security structure that nullifies NATO and sends it to the garbage pile.
In the greater conflict between Russia and the Outlaw US Empire, I see NATO's MIC having to spend 5X Russia's current 6.2% of GDP just to catch-up in both quality and numbers; yet, that gap continues to widen daily, and as Putin said Russia's not slowing down. Imagine what devoting 25% of GDP to the MIC would do to all NATO economies. Yes, the geopolitical game has yet to end, but its ending contours are visible. The Empire lacks the proxies and the military to defeat Russia, China or BRICS. That will be of little solace to Syrians or Palestinians. And the nations comprising the Arc of Instability and their people will likely experience the dying writhing of the Imperial Sanke. It won't happen tomorrow or next year, but as long as the nukes don't fly, the Outlaw US Empire has lost because it lacks the resources and industrial capacity to conquer the world.
I see no way for a real peace. The European leaders live in a fantasyworld. They believe in their own lies. It is like Hitler in the Führerbunker '45. He commanded armies that was not existing, he planned retaliation with non existent wonder-weapons, the wochenschau reported about massive attacks on the Soviets on the Oder, when in reality the troops were depleted and in retreat.
You said "I see NATO's MIC having to spend 5X Russia's current 6.2% of GDP just to catch-up in both quality and numbers"
I disagree. The reason the West's MIC is in tatters is because of waste and profiteering. Increasing the money going into an economic black hole only makes the black hole bigger.
The West is also incapable of increasing military spending by even 2x. The existing debt, the lack of productivity, the lack of manufacturing, decaying infrastructure, fraying social contracts - these are not the powerful economic foundations of the US prior to WW2 or even WW1.
All those deficits you listed tell us why the West would need to spend at least that amount just to catch-up. Yes, of course, the reason it’s so far behind is already known to most—waste, fraud, corruption—that it no longer needs to be listed. In other words, for NATO to become on par with Russia is would need to cease being NATO—its entire political-economic system would need to be overhauled. Capitulation would be so much easier and far less costly, and really the only rational NATO choice.
The West could fix its problems.
It just will not be able to with its existing leadership.
My point is that the West's problem is a leadership problem.
We get the government we deserve.
The parasite"leadership" that hijacked the West is THE problem to begin with. But it's not a recent development. Read up on this site to get the long-term picture:
https://cynthiachung.substack.com/
I am familiar with Cynthia. She is not wrong about the PMCs, of which the West's leadership is an extension.
But this is nothing new. Every elite class in history, sooner or later, starts to think it is somehow special and deserving of its position as opposed to being in a position of responsibility.
When your MIC has a primary purpose of fleecing the treasury and creating huge money sinkholes, you have a problem. When you have to outsource all manner of parts and components to other countries you have a problem. Being protected by two oceans can only get you so far.
The US can protect itself just fine.
It just cannot project power like it used to, or wants to, or think that it can.
Yeah i am not so much worried about some crazy frontal invasion as I am subversion and rot.
Of course that is not going to end - but a big part of it is simply the relative wealth of the West vs. its targets.
That will change as the share of global wealth held by the West decreases - not because of absolute declines per se in the West but because the rest of the world is growing so much faster.
Bribing an African warlord with $1m, or even $100K was really effective in the 1990s - much less so today and even less so in 30 years. It will be almost the equivalent of Grandma giving you a $5 bill for Christmas: it was a lot of money when she was a working adult but is literally pocket change now.
Yes, that and the fact that it’s easier now more than ever to see what it gets you in the end….there is a trail of smoldering bridgeheads and ruined nations in the its wake. At some point a group of people have to weigh the odds and either fight or take some kibble for a short term fiesta.
I don't really understand the inference about the North Korean soldiers, men are like artillery shells, you can never have too many. It's great to have them fighting along side the Russians, hopefully the contingent will grow to six figures.
Having troops you can't communicate with, whose training and experience are unknown, who are trained on and use different equipment - you can use them as a standalone force in non-critical situations but not otherwise.
All soldiers are not created equal nor perform equally - it is a classic civilian idiocy to think so.
I always find it amusing when people simultaneously completely miss the point i'm trying to make, and confirm it. Let's say, for argument's sake, that it was 100% confirmed that North Korean soldiers were taking part in assault operations in Kursk. Would you consider this a bad thing, and, if so, why? Would this development completely change your view of this conflict? Would you, if you support Russia, stop doing so as a result?
I find it amusing that you clearly did not even try to understand what I wrote.
To answer your question: Yes, I would consider North Koreans participating in Kursk, or anywhere, a bad thing.
Because it means that Russia really is having a hard time such that it would take in a disruptive, unknown, unreliable force in such a critical operation.
But this has nothing to do with supporting Russia or not. It would be nothing more than an indicator of whether what Russia has been saying is accurate or not.
Compare this with Ukrainian garbage: the more they lie, the less anyone with any sense pays attention to anything they say.
But again: the point was that there is no benefit to bringing North Koreans to fight in Kursk or Ukraine - it would only be done if Russia had no choice. Because soldiers are not like artillery shells. Even Western 155mm artillery shells are not like each other.
Anyone who thinks so, has no idea what the fuck they are talking about.
Well, it appears as if the Russian general staff and political leadership agree with me and not you. And I'm willing to trust their judgement over some internet rando who seems more intent on sounding smart than actually stopping to think. So, my original point stands, we're happy to have the Norks fighting on our side.
I don't know what the F you are talking about.
Russia is not, has not deployed North Koreans in Kursk or anywhere else in the SMO.
Russia is training North Koreans in East Russia, but that's for the North Koreans' benefit.
So yes, I am willing to trust their judgment more than some idiot who clearly reads Ukrainian and/or Western Pravda nonsense.
I know you don't understand what I'm talking about and there are a couple of reasons for it. One, you are wracked by confirmation bias. You have decided that the use of North Korean soldiers is a bad thing, and Russia is good, ergo this would never happen. You also seem to greatly overrate your knowledge of military affairs.
So I'll try and explain this one last time. I am agnostic as to whether or not there are Nork soldiers fighting in Kursk. I've seen some circumstantial evidence they are, but certainly nothing definitive. My only point here is that, if they are, it is not necessarily a bad thing. That's it.
Have a nice day!
Where has it actually been confirmed beyond anonymous "Western Intelligence", that North Korean troops are fighting?
@Donald Obama
However many NK troops may actually be in RF and whatever they might really be there for, they are NOT fighting as infantry on lines of contact as far as I can tell. The Ukrainian & NATO MSM would certainly be parading visual evidence if any NK troops were killed/captured, they have not done so to my knowledge.
My bet is NK military had a good number of people sent for TRAINING with RF tactics and/or equipment, possibly some are even learning "hands on" at behind the lines locations? Maybe they could be operating air defense systems? Possibly working long range artillery equipment? Even running drones? But not out there clearing trenches & bunkers the old fashioned way. If they are supposed to be returning as trainers, they can't be wasted on such activities.
Basic infantry maneuvers, squad movement & attack can be taught ANYWHERE there is space. Learning the newest RF RADAR, ECM, AAA, counter battery fire systems and tactics? THAT has to be done where the equipment and operators are, which isn't NK. And I would guess the RF isn't exporting their bleeding edge systems to anywhere they might get "borrowed" by US/NATO/South Korea.
I agree that NK personnel (if they are there at all) will be learning new techniques of war, rather than fighting at the front.
I also would suggest that they could be used in logistics, maintenance, and weapons factories, esp near the Korean border. That makes a whole lot more sense economically and does not have any personnel liable to be captured.
There were already hundreds of thousands of Koreans and Korean descended people living inside RF AND the now INDEPENDANT ex USSR republics before the whole Ukraine related NK troops claims showed up in Western MSM. Koreans have been coming to Russian territory for much of the last century, since before the days of WWI, on through USSR vs. the Japanese Empire and even more during & after the Korean war- There are quite a few in RF's far East who came when Japan controlled their areas and we're never repatriated to Korean peninsula after WWII or forced to relocate under Stalin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koryo-saram
I think as time passes it is quite clear that a few things are true - yes, Russia is massively defeating Ukraine BUT at unacceptable losses to Russia. Losing 100-200 men a day means losing 30-40k KIA of your best people a year, with 3x as many more wounded. By the time this war is over, 1% of Russia's population will have been either killed or maimed by war, which if you age and sex adjust will mean 5-10% of military aged men. Its a travesty.
Yes, Ukraine will be a non-state, 404 as they say on TG. But Russia needs to endure somehow, and it faces grave challenges. I don't understand why they haven't Oreshnik-ed Zelensky yet, I don't understand why they haven't used it again, and I don't understand why they let EU/NATO/US get away with murder (literally). From where I'm sitting Russia is winning tactically but losing strategically. It doesn't help that her opponents (Germany, England, Finland, Baltics, Ukraine, etc) are maniacally enthusiastic about committing economic suicide but economies can be rebuilt, men stay dead.
Wholly agree! Russia’s demographic winter will not be helped by the current battlefield casualties…
(And claiming that Russia is adding population bc of the former UKR citizens that are now part of Russia is hard cope)
Also, I would add that current Russian retaliations for long range strikes against the Motherland are moronic as these are only hitting targets inside Ukraine and we all know how much Western elites care about Ukrainians. Don’t they?
For an existential war this is not so bad
It's true but I've long held a counter argument to that, which is steel sharpens steel and Russia's losses are a necessary "watering of the tree of liberty with blood". Russia's 'liberty' is its strength. Those sacrifices in the form of losses are building generational strength, cementing genetic legacies of the warrior bloodline which will keep Russia strong. In short, Russian warlike culture is maintained and strengthened for all time, while the West devolves and dissolves into soy weakness. As such, all the losses are in fact accomplishing a great deal in strengthening Russia and cementing its independence and sovereignty for all time.
Also, keep in mind even if Russia were to lose 1 million people, Russia has gained thus far something like 10 million total new citizens from Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye, Kherson, and could still potentially gain millions more in the future depending how far it goes. This vastly overshadows any losses and Russia will have a massive net population gain after the war is done, so all "demographic catastrophe" talks are mostly nonsense.
And as for those who keep returning to the trope of 'slavs killing slavs', the truth is slavs are the most populous ethnic group in all of Europe by far, with no one even close, this war won't change that.
As long as Russia doesn't permanently get rid of cretins like Chubais its watering of the tree won't amount to much. Russia needs an ideology, what does it stand for; not what it stands against. Thus far the Kremlin hasn't articulated such an ideology. The best I've seen, and it's full of issues, is the Eurasianism pushed by people such as Dugin.
Great point!
In fact, Putin’s economic policies are classic liberal: free market, small state, non interventionist (except for defense industry, of course). I don’t pretend to be an expert but this IMO stands in total contradiction with the Russian tradition of community & mutual cooperation (“Sobornost”).
"Russian tradition of community & mutual cooperation (“Sobornost”)"
This tradition is mostly a myth. Russians are very individualist people. At least after Soviet regime which destroyed most of traditional communal institutions. All in all, today's Russian are more or less happy to be on their own.
Highly individual and incredibly paranoid and mistrustful of govt and large institutions in general. One of the reasons why its so hard to make friends with them but if you do its for life.
Thanks for the correction! I would have thought that them present day Russians would be more community-focused as e.g. the Scandinavians are (or were?).
No, absolutely not. Recently there have been some "green shoots" of horizontal cooperation but mostly people here prefer that nobody pokes one's nose in their life. Patriotism and nationalism are probably the only things we can be rallied around.
I just hope there is someone even more Russophilic and patriotic than Putin lined up to take over for him. Russia should embrace the best traditions of all its previous iterations. Western style liberal democracy and free markets are not the answer and won't bring Russia to the forefront of global powers. That all starts with an ideology to unite the masses. The Tsar had that, so did the Commissars. Modern Russia does not.
I’m pretty sure the poor guys doing the irrigation might NOT agree with that.
Also, this whole argument is to be expected by Gringo citizens that have experienced nothing but colonial wars in far away places against inferior forces and fought mostly by professional soldiers and PMCs…
In the rest of world I would bet that people in general prefer to make their nations & culture stronger without going to war.
Agree that Slavs vs Slavs makes no sense. Change that to Russians vs Russians (bc a LOT of UKR casualties have been Russian speakers from the Central & Eastern areas of Ukraine) and then it doesn’t sound so good at all.
Last: until the fertility rate climbs above 2.1, Russia will remain in a demographic winter. That’s a fact.
Russia is not alone in facing demographic problems. Birth rates in South Korea and Japan have plummeted and are approaching one child per woman. The only population growth in AUKUS countries and Europe is coming from global South immigration - the White population is collapsing.
At least Russia is taking serious steps to reverse the trend: oppose normalizing and encouraging homosexuality, providing social support for families, providing incentives for larger families. Having a third child provides a family with a substantial down payment on a larger house or apartment. Having ten puts you in a room with Putin on national television, and freedom from any worry. In between, the incentives are large.
Norway is doing much the same with incentives and social support, and has the income from its energy exports to do so. But it hasn't had much impact, and the Norwegian birth rate is still dangerously low. Perhaps it's because of the constant homosexual propaganda?
Am I correct in understanding that Christian conservative Europeans and Americans are lining up to move to Russia?
I read somewhere that after the sacrilegious spectacle opening of the Olympic games last summer that European applications to move to Russia jumped in the weeks after.
There is propaganda about it in media now and then. I do not think it is a large phenomenon. There have been some different classes of residency permits created to make it easier for self-exiles from unfriendly countries to move to Russia.
There have never been many Anglos / Europeans in Russia, even in the heyday when everybody thought relations with Europe would continue to deepen (a decade ago). Estimates at the peak were 5k U.S. citizens total in Russia for voluntary reasons (not diplomatic), and not that many more from each of Germany, Spain, Italy, U.K., and France. That is in total.
Folks in the US et al with a strong martial family tradition may entertain the idea of emigrating to Russia. This of course depends on the immigration policies of the Russians. When the young do the math on the soy-boy future here in the U$, many might jump at the opportunity to exit the sinking ship of our long-in-the-tooth empire.
The times, "they are a changing". While I've seen much of the world in my 73 years, it is my great regret that I missed the opportunity to travel/experience Russia. Having briefly worked for one of the largest U$ airlines and retired (early-with only 5 years seniority)from the same with lifetime flight benefits, it would have been very easy. My anti-talent for learning languages would have been a drawback. With Russia being 25x the size of Texas, there are lots of empty spaces there to promote population growth.
As I tell my 44 y/o old son in San Diego, at least, in your head, always have a "go-bag" and plan for the time when the shit hits the fan. Always be thinking about where you might go next. In any larger hot war, SD, CA would be very high on any target list.
Jeffrey Sachs was interviewed by Tucker Carlson last night (for two hours on his eponymous network) In the first 25 minutes he deconstructed how the evil Nutty-Yahoo Zionists with their lapdog American neo-cons ruined country after country in the ME. A bracing interview with probing historical detail. Tucker is one of the best people in the U$ doing journalism today. I highly recommend a subscription to his TCN. His (Sachs) insights into what happened in Syria are gold.
It's not too late to visit Russia, and you should if you're so inclined. There's no issues with being a foreigner from an "unfriendly country" - Russians don't blame individuals for the sins of their states. St. Petersburg and Moscow are beautiful cities with deep culture.
You can generally find an English speaker in larger cities when you need one - no matter what happens with relations, English is still the international language of business. Russians who vacation in Turkey, Egypt, and Thailand (top three Russian vacation destinations abroad) need to speak it, for example.
And smart phone apps ease the path greatly. You can use the camera on an iPhone to automatically translate everything the camera sees. You can use built-in translation apps to carry on two-way conversations, with the phone translating both ways in audio. Language is no longer a barrier.
You do need to fly through a friendly country to visit Russia, like Turkey, UAE, Armenia, or whatever.
Thanks MWB-much appreciate the insight. Now if I can overcome my aversion to the handsy TSA fondlers...I just might be game for such a trip.
Not I, until my career is over. Explaining to my security manager why i'm going to Russia sounds like a fun conversation.
Once your "career" is over, what will you live off of? Russia is not in the business of supporting foreign retirees free of charge. The immigration policy is liberal, but you must demonstrate a stable source of income.
It is a better bet to find employment and "career" there now, and your security manager can go bugger himself.
I was born American and will die an American.
I remember when I couldn't stand to listen to Tucker on MSM. Then he began to change and the MSM canned him. Now, he has probably surpassed Glenn Greenwald for the quantity of his quality journalism.
Sachs is a great analyst most of the time.
I don't much care for most of his environmental sustainability instruction, however.
Excellent point. That same point, along with the many unsuccessful invasions of Russia throughout history, should demonstrate to NATO/US that it is a foolish idea to keep poking the bear... Chip
One difference between Russia and the U.S. is that the former holds veterans in high respect, and proves it by deed. Veterans have life-long free public transport. They go to the front of the wait list almost everywhere they visit. I observed this yesterday at an emergency care hospital. Two active-duty SMO soldiers were immediately put to the top of the list when they entered. There was another contract soldier who had finished his term and had checked in before them (so he was at the top of the list). He went and asked the triage nurse to move him below the two active-duty guys. There's just a respect for service, and you can feel it in public.
That holds true even for unpopular wars (Chechnya). The Russian airborne forces (VDV) supplied much of the troop strength in that conflict. They're now given a literal pass once a year, in the summer. On their day, they all get drunk and congregate at public fountains where they sit in the water and have a huge party. Normally drinking hard liquor in public is strictly forbidden. No one cares on VDV day; they earned it.
Contrast that to how U.S. soldiers were treated after Vietnam. The current fetishization of veterans of America's foreign police actions is bizarre. The same people who protested the U.S. invasion of Vietnam now all put bumper sticks supporting the wars on their enormous SUVs. But it's not an issue of respect; these are people from the lower classes, and it's almost as if they owe the professional classes gratitude for giving them the opportunity to rise above their squalid roots.
I see the above clearly in U.S. television and movies the past couple of decades. Every presentation of U.S. troops is either some kind of elite special forces super trooper who fought hard combat in the rugged hills of Afghanistan or elsewhere (which is a misnomer, and was incredibly rare). Or they're a damaged loser with PTSD - and their war buddies are confined to wheelchairs. It's either an idolization of something that didn't exist except in very small numbers (superhero complex), or a tragedy.
There are no "normal" veterans of the West Asian wars of choice in the U.S., men who return home and pick up where they left off with their girlfriends or wives and family. There's just a constant focus on trauma - if someone's not a superhero Ranger, the question then is... "how traumatized are you, really?".
One could argue that the number of just "normal" people in the U.S. is collapsing precipitously. Maybe it's that.
Media representation of US soldiers. I actually am surrounded by same. They make up most of the civilian DoD work force, and the contractors. Normal? No. They are abnormal in today's society, but it doesn't require much looking hard to find them.
They don't all ride in wheelchairs and have PTSD and some of them actually did come back home to their wives. Though I have a good anecdote about this. On my way back from Iraq in 07/08, they held us all at a facility until the Ops people called each married soldier's home to make sure it was ok for their man to come home. A lot of women take up with someone new when the men are on deployment, and the Army is trying to stop possibly violent domestic disputes.
Yes! A US Marine friend came home on leave once to discover his wife "entertaining" a paramour. It ended badly for the interloper who woke up badly damaged, in the hospital. That was the end of that marriage.
HBI, it's like you overheard our conversation:
"A lot of women take up with someone new when the men are on deployment, and the Army is trying to stop possibly violent domestic disputes." I felt sorry for the Vietnam generation of soldiers who this sad outcome must have been all too common. As Johnny Cash sang in "Jackson"...
"We got married in a fever
Hotter than a pepper sprout
We've been talkin' 'bout Jackson
Ever since the fire went out
I'm goin' to Jackson
I'm gonna mess around
Yeah, I'm goin' to Jackson
Look out Jackson town..."
I'm sorry about your friend, but i've known more than one who had the same happen to him. Some women are great. Many are not. Lots of guys in theater finding out that their pay is going to pay for another guy while stuck on deployment. The kind of people we had to buy smokes for because they had $0 left after the wife cleaned out the account on pay day. It's a pretty low thing to be the solder in base housing who is fucking someone else's wife while he's off on deployment. But people do it.
A lot of young wives were put up to it by their mothers. Women know that the Army will make sure you get paid for, get child support and alimony, etc. The women are unhappy, they didn't want this relationship, and the guys soon tire of it, but their mothers were quite correct. They arranged a benefits plan to get their daughter out of the house. I've sat in a few divorce proceedings supporting soldiers, too.
In the late Soviet period and through the 90s, a lot of Russian marriages were contractual in nature, like you describe for U.S. married soldiers. By that I mean love may or may not have been involved - but a lot of the motivation for the relationship had to do with housing. Combined with widespread atheism, and infidelity was so common it was entirely unexceptional.
That has changed completely in Russia. Now the incentives to stay in a marriage are personal in nature, not connected to being able to live in a major city (for those in Soviet times who married for propiska, or residency permit). Religiosity of a benign variant is prevalent (e.g. a high percentage of the population nominally believes in the Orthodox canon, but there isn't anything like the "Bible thumper" phenomenon the U.S. has with Evangelicals). Infidelity is now uncommon and generally condemned.
Ukraine is still living in the 90s on those matters. It's why Ukrainian prostitutes and OnlyFans models are so common. The roots of Zelensky's war against the Moscow Patriarchate is move involved than simple worries about "Russian influence".
Thanks for the additional insight. A student deferment and high lottery number got me past the war in Vietnam. My family has been neck deep in the military for a long time. Gramps was in WW1-Germany. Nephew a Navy Seal. Lost a 21-y/o uncle-shot out of the sky in the Pacific islands in WW2. Other extended family members graduated from West Point and the Naval Academy. My pop spent six months in Japan and one year in China in WW2.
All this service to yield our sad present circumstances-a grifter, demented "president" and a military that is essentially a Praetorian Guard for the fascist Zionist project. Bigly sad.
Another check against the claims RF has a "demographic catastrophe" coming?
Speaking as a male, nothing makes you want to fuck as much as being shot at & MISSED. What do you think those guys are doing during their regular rotations out of the LOC?!
Since the Ukrainian front line military are mostly now stuck out there until they get HIT (or captured, desert, & etc.), they are not going to see this effect much.
First thing I did virtually when I got back from theater. Well, I got drunk first.
lol
Depressing to read ”watering of the tree of liberty with blood" and ”cementing genetic legacies of the warrior bloodline which will keep Russia strong”.
That is far, far from the last bastion of Christianity. It is a Blood Cult and the only generic you gets is Evil.
I have lived a life where I have seen the consequences of watering with blood and what happens with the bloodline. It is not a happy ending.
Simplicius wrote about 4500-6000 KIA and 10 000 - 12 000 maimed/month. Thats 50-70k KIA/year and another 120 000 - 150 000 handicapped for life.
It is inexcuseable if Russia has means to end the War sooner than later.
They probably cant.
Mikey, war is like entering a dark room, fighting and killing, offence and defence, gives you real information how strong you and your opponent are.
This war is seriously asymmetrical, as Russia is obviously stronger, but if the West is willing to support Ukraine 100%, war could end in stalemate. Could.
A stalemate could be interpreted as a victory.
But let's look at the war from another point.
When all is over, who will know, understand deep inside, that he had made a mistake?
US and the West entered this war as a luxury war, a non existential war, and are faced with a Russia that is willing to fight a war as existential, to the end.
It was a mistake.
Whatever the West does now, it is difficult to turn this war into existential- that means be ready to send soldiers to die in Ukraine.
And if West is not ready to send soldiers to die in Ukraine, the war will be lost on the battlefield
Creating a NATO army out of Ukrainians is possible, but still does not guarantee victory, just exhausting the Ukrainian population.
Even with full NATO support, as is being provided right now, in weapons, information, there is no way to win, for Ukraine.
In my judgement, raising the stakes, by creating a bigger, larger Ukrainian army creates a risk that Russia will be obliged to form an even stronger army.
Why would Russia accept any ceasefire if it has to create an army that is capable of winning against Ukrainian army just to be offered negotiations on ceasefire.
The moment West offers negotiations, is the moment West admits Ukraine is losing, and then there is no point in negotiations.
West has created a monster in Ukraine that is going to destroy Ukraine. Millions more will die.
I agree with you Korkyrian.
This war is existential for Russia and the only way they won't win it is if NATO goes all-in and I can't see it.
This isn't the war they want to fight. They are far more invested in Israel and Taiwan than Ukraine.
Countries like Hungary, Turkey and Slovakia are actively against escalation, the populations in most Western countries are bored with 'Slava Ukraini' and even in the USA, the Pentagon isn't keen.
I certainly hope the War will end with a decisive Russian victory. Just now it is hard to see that Putin can survive if he isnt creating miracles. 600 000 and more to come is nothing the population will forget unless they take half of Ukraine and then can create a economic boost and ever increasing living standards. A ceasefire and a stalemate will be perceived as a Western victory.
There are only two pathways forward for the West
either escalate and be ready for nuclear exchange, frankly, with all the bravado, MI6 and assorted personnel Kaja Kallas, Mark Rutte etc. are showing, there is not a solid majority in the West for this approach
keep supporting Ukraine until victory, propping up financially, and sending all war materiel except soldiers. West has been pursuing this strategy for three years, and it does not seem to lead to success. There is a hope, until the war ends that suddenly Russia might collapse, that is a hope and we have no serious predictive abilities how much more Russians can suffer. But what we definitely see collapsing are Western governments, because Western citizens are fed up with this war. Trump is a genius of marketing, and when he says both Putin and Zelensky want, need the war to stop, it is a beautiful presentation but the truth is really the opposite, it is western smart leaders, that sense, understand the deep opposition to this war in western public, and it is them that want the war to stop.
Because this road lead to defeat.
Talking about ending the war has to start with recognizing Ukrainian, Russian and western legitimate interests, and the actual power to support its interests, at this moment and in the future.
Arrangement similar to Shanghai communique would have to be produced, but even Kissinger himself would find it difficult.
I tend to agree with Prof. Mearsheimer, US is simply unable for first class diplomacy, today.
I wish, but doubt, it is enough smart leaders in the West with enough integrity to admit defeat and end their participation in this futile War against Russia. Frankly, it is a real test of how deep is the Deep State in the West?
Annuling the Romanian election was an eery reminder from deep under…
To quote a famous statesman
If I am sanguine on this point, it is because of a conviction that men and nations do behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives. Surely the other alternatives of war and belligerency have now been exhausted.
But you are right, it will be a second rate diplomacy
(An improvement after Blinken, and his third rate work.)
These people will not stop killing once the war officially stops. They'll turn into terrorists. So it's better to have them croaked in the open field than hunt down in a crowd later. I don't hold my breath about any kind of negotiations up till mid-30s. They wanted an all out war until the last Ukrainian, they should have it. And Russians should simply keep up the 1:6 ratio and grind. This kind of conflict can only end for good.
If you look at successful insurgencies in recent years, the one thing all of them have in common is a young population.
The median age in Yemen is 19. That in Ukraine - over 40, and that statistic is from before the war.
Insurgency is a phenomenon of young rebellious populations. I think of a deathly suicidal terrorist rampage without any constructive goal, simply wanton opportunistic destruction.
Ukrainians are neither young nor particualrly rebellious.
Yes. That's why it will be the latter.
50k to 70K Russian casualties a year - The US is losing a similar proportion of its population just to opioids.
That's just the fentanyl deaths, about 75k a year since 2022. The deaths from other drugs amount to a doubling of that.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/nchs_press_releases/2024/20240515.htm
So yeah, losing 50k to 70k a year fighting Nazis seems not quite as terrible as all that.
Yes. But US lost staggering 55 000 KIA in 13 years war in Vietnam. Russia manage that in one year.
I reference an Aurelien article in a different reply to you.
Read it to understand the difference between Russian sacrifice for the defense of its homeland vs. US foreign adventures like Vietnam.
Yes, Aurelien is good.
But the article does not say so much about the Russian way of wasting lifes as the Western way to sacrifice young men for nothing. Very good article but not about this topic. I dont believe for a second that Russian kids/men want to die in a trench or for that matter be in a war year after year.
What is significant is that US soldiers has died all over the Earth but not in the Homeland. Russian fought and sacrificed themselves in defense of the Homeland. That says a lot of propganda and naarrative working in the West.
Are you kidding?
The fighting in Vietnam bore no resemblance to what is happening in Ukraine, or any other war lately. Every time the NVA showed up with full units they were crushed by US firepower. So they stopped even trying, and instead did the insurgent thing. Tet was actually a huge defeat for the Viet Cong and they never reconstituted properly. The problem in Vietnam was that the penny-packet deployment of a massive amount of forces offered ample opportunity to kill Americans in small unit actions, which was the point. Body bags equaled protests, which equaled the ultimate US pull out.
This is why in Iraq, the force size was controlled from the outset. Instead of dropping 500,000 troops in country like what was done in Vietnam, the maximum size in-country was about 200k and drew down afterward. Fewer targets, and more concentrated. It reduced the wastage. Also, the US KIA count for things like Iraq and Afghanistan was relatively light, but the WIA count was high.
Vietnam: 58,281 KIA, 153,372 WIA
Afghanistan: 1,922 KIA, 20,769 WIA
Iraq: 4,431 KIA, 31,994 WIA
Note the altered ratios. It was way easier to survive in the latter two conflicts because the medical care was better, but you tell me whether you'd like to live with a TBI?
Also, there were more USNAT contractor dead in both of the latter conflicts than there were military dead. No figures on wounded, but probably same story there.
Now let's look at a direct comparison with Ukraine. WWII in Europe and Korea. Let's just look at the US contribution, because the Soviet front will really make things look good in Ukraine today.
WWII ETO: 318,274 KIA, 565,861 WIA ~4M serving
Korea: 29,856 KIA, 77,596 WIA ~2M serving over 3 years
Now why are these numbers so high? Because they were fighting in real fronts and advancing against real soldiers who were well armed, in particular with artillery. The Korean War numbers are really kind of low, and part of the reason is that the ROKs absorbed a lot of casualties, and the last 2/3 of the war was all in fortification lines and very little movement.
I can trot out the Eastern Front of WWII if you want to see just how parsimonious the Russian MOD is being with casualties.
Clearly you still don't understand the term "sacrifice" or what the article actually talked about - measuring sacrifice against that which said sacrifice is supposed to be for.
Sacrifice does not mean giving up the things you don't care about, or that you can easily afford. It means losing that which is precious to you - and doing so only because the end goal is worthy of the sacrifice.
The West doesn't know shit about sacrifice.
It is all magnetic yellow ribbons and puffery and Smedley Butlerian corporate strong arming.
They can end it sooner---but at a much greater cost in lives. That sort of puts your argument on its head.
Contrary. They could have ended it by now with greater casulties in 2022.
Simple. The alt media has mislead it's audience about the strength of Russia. Yes, Russia is winning against the Ukraine, and yes if the Ukraine were fighting alone this war would have ended in the spring months of 2022. But for 2 plus years we've been fed bs about Putin and co playing 5D chess, etc. It's all bunk. The worst of the lot is Martyanov. At least Simplicius tries to maintain some impartiality and admits when he doesn't know something.
Anyway, I hope Russia finally kicks things into overdrive in 2025 and wins a decisive victory. One can only hope...
Both sides have been hard-coping. The truth was always in the middle. And what was obvious from may 2022 was that the US and China were the big winners, while Europe and Russia the big losers, and Ukraine the graveyard
If Ukraine ends up capitulating, which seems more likely by the day, then Russia will at the least end up with the 4 oblasts they have annexed. These happen to be the 4 top oblasts in Ukrainian GDP. They are the powerhouse of the Ukrainian economy with a sizeable industrial base, large populations (though many are displaced) and loads of primary resources. I wouldn't be calling Russia a big loser just yet. Let's wait and see if they push past the massive lithium deposit west of Kurhakove.
https://global.espreso.tv/russia-ukraine-war-russian-appointees-grant-permission-to-extract-lithium-in-ukraine-controlled-territory-of-donetsk-region-andriushchenko
Of course they will! 😉
Yes. And I hope the Chinese and Americans have a nice blow out in the western Pacific or Korea. The Chinese have done just enough to keep Russia afloat, and not enough to truly bring about a new world geopolitical order. Perpetual merchants. And the American empire has got to come to an end; it is evil.
The Chinese have played their hand a bit badly. On paper its smart and safe, low risk max reward. In reality, fortune favors the bold and they are anything but
Agree!
If the casualties of war would be that bad Russia would not be thriving economically and sitting in 4th place behind India in the global standings. Winning wars for a just cause strengthens a nation greatly, even with the human losses involved. These men are celebrated as heroes and their familes treated with the utmost respect by the populace. Also don't forget that the battle hardened Donbas militias incorporated into the RAF have contributed greatly to the fighting at the front and are liberating their own lands from the banderite occupation which again is heroic in itself.
I always think that it is the Troops in the Donbas Militias, and now regular Russian Army, that are the ones that are truly fighting for their homeland. While Kyiv's Soldiers from central and western Ukraine likely don't even care what goes on in eastern Ukraine.
Intentionally assassinating the enemy's leadership is beyond the pale of decency in war. Just because Ukraine stoops to that level doesn't mean Russia will follow.
The Allies could have killed Hitler or Mussolini during the war, but they didn't. Like Julius Caesar, they wanted to strangle those men in a public spectacle after the war was won.
Puh-lease. War is hell and you win by running the other guy over. There is no decency in war. If Moscow could end the war by killing half a dozen of Z & his buddies rather than 200,000 boys who want to be anywhere but there, then they should do it. What kind of rationale is this.
And no the allies couldn’t kill hitler or mussolini but not for lack of trying.
No lie. Talk about hard cope.
You need to look up the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich. The Brits performed that operation, using Czech cutouts for the action on the ground. He was essentially the deputy governor of Bohemia-Moravia, modern day Czechia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinhard_Heydrich
Hitler and Mussolini were harder targets than they look from this angle. With a lack of precision munitions, they were mainly only susceptible to the kind of operation that brought down Heydrich.
My capstone on my history degree was about the internal German resistance to the Nazis. Interesting topic. They were ineffectual in the end, except for the Valkyrie attack on 20 July 1944 at Rastenburg, that was depicted in the movie. But it wasn't for lack of trying. They pretty much came to the same conclusion I am coming to - they needed to perform a small-scale attack using a bomb somehow. Some ideas they tried out were putting a bomb inside of a liquor bottle on HItler's plane, and having a soldier modeling a new Wehrmacht uniform have a suicide vest on and leap atop Hitler when he was checking it out. None ever worked out until they got Stauffenberg involved, who was a pretty committed person and actually performed the bomb attack.
Please re-read history. Many plots were hatched to kill the various leaders of the warring parties during WWII. In Tehran, 1943, the Germans almost got the Big Three. A Soviet-Armenian spy thwarted their plans.
And, zelensky is no longer the legitimate president of the Ukraine. He is fair game, even by your pacifistic standards.
Wrong.
Russia has gained 10 million plus population from the 4 oblasts.
This more than offsets any losses.
“Since day one, this war has stunk to high Heaven,” Douglas MacKinnon says, writing in The Hill about Project Ukraine. “The biggest *mystery* is, why some do not want to stop the almost instantly stoppable killing in Ukraine. Another mystery is why some are so anxious to lead the world to the edge of World War III. Another is why some want no accountability for the hundreds of billions sent into Ukraine. And the last *mystery* is why so many in the media and in leadership positions in the U.S., the United Kingdom and France have deliberately ignored or downplayed the horrific casualty counts in Ukraine?”
McKinnon’s outrage is that of someone who has swallowed all the lies he was fed and now discovers what a stump he is for doing so. As recently as October McKinnon was cheerleading for Project Ukraine. It’s not a stretch, oddly, to imagine that McKinnon always knew a high percentage of the actual truth—that at no point was Ukraine capable of winning this war—and McKinnon fell into that big mysterious group of supposedly responsible witnesses to this horror who stood by & said nothing.
While Zelya claims only 83,000 Ukrainian soldier have died, the Western media at large has begun to report more realistic numbers in the high-100 thousands, which may in fact be a low-ball figure.
“Three men instantly opposed the war,” McKinnon writes, “while warning of the ultimate horror it could spawn — Trump, Vice President-elect JD Vance, and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.” He speaks of how all three guys were vilified for deigning to interrogate the casualty numbers, for instance, which always seemed too pie-in-the-sky unbelievable. “There are a great many questions some powerful people don’t want answered under any circumstances,” according to McKinnon.
He himself is on the verge of accepting that “the Obama White House and State Department played a role in the overthrow of the legitimately elected Ukrainian president Yanukovych in 2014.” Which means McKinnon is on the ground floor of jettisoning the propaganda. Jettisoning the propaganda is *not* nothing. But many of us less well-connected than McKinnon *saw,* believed and understood that the State Department played a role in the Euromaidan street coup which deposed Yanukovych. We ‘jettisoned the propaganda’ 10 years ago. Which means McKinnon is dramatically late. In a rush to laud DJT, JD & RFKjr and give them their flowers, he wants to bask opportunistically now in their glow. Something has happened for the media, something has happened for McKinnon. Even in the midst of ‘jettisoning the propaganda,’ he remains unconvincing.
Replace Ukraine with Gaza in your text, and it is equally applicable...
One question about Syria : The SAA was decisively defeated, but it hardly seems DESTROYED, with evidence that many, if not most, retreated into Iraq. Mahar al-assad, Bashar's brother, also seems to still be with SAA units in Iraq.
Despite the current jubilation over HTS rule, once Syria evolves into a free for all like in Libya, would an Iranian-sponsored invasion of Syria be on the cards in the future?
Probably not. that's not Iran's general modus operandi. However, you can't discount the possibility of Iran heavily sponsoring the SAA remnants in Iraq to cause trouble in whatever is left of Syria, esp if the numbers of troops justify the investment.
You just know the fundies will grow to be as big a headache to Israel as Hamas are.
Exactly so. I don't think anyone really wanted Joulani to be in power, but now that he is... He's definitely going to be a loose cannon.
It is now very clear that the SAA was not defeated - it simply did not fight.
Bashir gave up and apparently even ordered the SAA to not fight.
@Bryan Goh
I would bet the newer, kinder, rainbow diverse al Queda franchises/Suni anti Alawites/anti Baathists coalition can't maintain their unity without an active enemy and soon enough myst degenerate into infighting with various ethnic (and other) factions all vying for control & a lion's share of available loot or at least to carve out personal little sheikhdoms. Once THAT chaos gets well under way, perhaps those SAA units will come home and clean up any survivors?
That is something I was wondering about too. If Gaddafi wasn't killed in Libya, but escaped with a large part of his army intact, would he be able to retake power today?
@Bryan Goh
Gadaffi is not available, also, he would be rather elderly now for a hard campaign. But quite a few in Libya are now likely nostalgic for the stability his regime once provided their society, plus free education & health care?
As far as taking back power, depends on how much blood and treasure "The West(©) could invest to oppose. I think we are getting way overdrawn on the treasure account lately, blood wouldn't be available much either.
The war’s current trajectory highlights a significant shift in the nature of modern conflict: it is no longer about quick, decisive victories but rather prolonged, grinding battles that test not only military strength but also societal and political endurance. Russia’s approach reflects more than just its military capabilities—it demonstrates an ability to adapt to sustained pressure and rethink its strategic methods. By attacking infrastructure, decentralizing supply lines, and focusing on slow, incremental territorial gains, Russia isn’t seeking dramatic breakthroughs. Instead, it’s pursuing a strategy of gradual attrition, aiming to wear down Ukraine’s capacity to resist over time. This deliberate, patient approach echoes historical wars of attrition, but with modern tools like drones, electronic warfare, and precision strikes replacing brute-force tactics.
What makes Ukraine’s situation particularly precarious isn’t just its manpower challenges or logistical strains, but its heavy dependence on external support. Unlike Russia, which can rely on its internal resources and has largely weathered sanctions, Ukraine’s war effort is tied to the political and economic priorities of Western allies. This creates a largely unspoken vulnerability: Ukraine is effectively fighting two wars—one on the battlefield and another to keep international support intact. If Western governments shift their attention, face domestic political pressures, or prioritize other global issues, Ukraine’s ability to continue the fight could weaken dramatically.
For Russia, the conflict carries a broader geopolitical message that extends beyond Ukraine’s borders. By demonstrating its capacity to endure and adapt against the collective West, Russia is signaling to other nations that Western influence and military dominance have limits. This has far-reaching implications, particularly for countries viewing the war as a test case for a multipolar world order. For the Kremlin, the conflict is as much about reasserting Russia’s position on the global stage as it is about achieving specific military objectives.
At the same time, Ukraine’s leadership faces a difficult balancing act: projecting confidence and strength while contending with the very real risk of exhaustion—both militarily and within society. The rhetoric surrounding future offensives serves a dual purpose: maintaining domestic morale and convincing Western supporters that Ukraine can still achieve meaningful victories. But this strategy carries risks. If optimism fades and gives way to disillusionment, sustaining both domestic and international support will become even harder as the war drags on.
Ultimately, the war reveals an uncomfortable reality for modern military planners: advanced technology and tactical superiority cannot always overcome demographic challenges, industrial capacity, and the ability to adapt to prolonged conflict. Ukraine’s reliance on external lifelines places it in a precarious position where its survival depends as much on the endurance of its Western backers as on its own capabilities. Meanwhile, despite setbacks, Russia appears to be playing a long game, betting that it can outlast Ukraine and the resolve of its supporters. In this sense, the conflict is more than just a test of military strength—it’s a test of systems and resilience, a contest to see who can endure the strain the longest.
Yes and no.
It is not clear that the SMO represents a fundamental new era of warfare.
Among many things:
1) The West's behavior in Ukraine is beyond reckless.
2) As part of this recklessness, the West has literally demilitarized itself. Russia could likely take on all of Europe's armies right now and win due to this, not that it wants or needs to.
3) It is not clear that any other entity will be as stupid as Ukraine for a generation. Ukraine is literally destroyed as a society regardless of the lines on the post-SMO map.
4) Russia has not only proven it has a superior army, one which keeps getting stronger and more experienced, it has demonstrated superior technology, superior weapons systems development, superior adaptability. Each of these strengths shown by the Russian military is literally the opposite for the West.
5) Ukrainian "leadership" has demonstrated that it does not give a shit about its people: soldiers or otherwise. Clearly, so long as they can collectively steal Western aid, they are perfectly fine feeding their fellow countrymen into the meat grinder.
I also continue to be of the opinion that the Russian priority is minimizing at least their own and civilian casualties. Absent that, we'd be seeing a very different form of warfare.
Agreed.
One outcome of an attrition war is that only the most deluded buttheads in Ukraine will believe that Ukraine ever had a prayer of success.
Hope Putin goes way of Assad after Ukraine gets to Moscow. Putin is not a wartime leader and 100-200 day is too many. He should have invaded right not with a piddly 100,000 and should have mobilized every day since instead of letting Ukraine/NATO bleed Russia out.
Ooh. We have a contender right here.
For the most ignorant comment of the thread.
Early days yet, though. Plenty of time yet for someone to show *greater* ignorance.
prigozin almost made Moscow with far less troops than Simp says is assembling
You don't have to double down on your ignorance, you've proven enough already.
Critical Thinkers Question: How far toward *Kursk* did Ukraine get, with far MORE troops than Prigozin had... and how much further is Moscow???
He ‘should’, he ‘must’, ‘i told you so’ lalala
Wow, you are an incredible dumbass.