There isn’t one big development today, but a series of smaller but still relevant items to update on to keep things within scope as the overall picture continues to escalate in the war in Ukraine and elsewhere. So, this report will be a bit scattershot as I cover many topics.
This aspect of sanctions is very rarely mentioned – but it is well known that sanctions not authorised by the UN are indeed illegal, if they are not countermeasures, if they are secondary sanctions, if the intent/effect is anti humanitarian and coercive
Just as it is well established that Central Bank and State assets are protected under international law
With regard to both issues international legal norms have been flouted by the US and the EU, with all manner of specious arguments
And have back fired against the perpetrators, even if in the case of the CBR assets the stolen plunder/booty is not yet quite carried off
Perhaps it is time to recognise that international laws are well founded
May 17, 2024 Unilateral sanctions against China do not conform with a broad number of international legal norms : UN expert
Alena Douhan, UN Special Rapporteur, Press Conference
Yet another example of Western sanctions back firing – not only economically, but politically - the US gvmt might be proud to have the UN condemn their sanctions, but everyone else is prouder
Of special note – the declaration of illegality of US sanctions to the Xingjiang region, which the US gvmt persists as describing subjected to a ‘genocide’, and picks out for special sanctions via the Uyghur Forced Labour Prevention Act, which applies the illegal notion of ‘rebuttal presumption’ (placing the burden of proving otherwise – to US contentions unbacked with evidence- on the companies or states involved)
« Any unlateral sanctions taken without or beyond authorization of the UN Security Council, and which cannot be qualified as retortions (unfriendly but legal under international law) or wrongfulness of which is not excluded as countermeasures in accordance with law of international responsibility, are illegal. Application of secondary sanctions to Chinese companies, civil and criminal charges for (alleged) circumvention of sanctions regimes against third countries, individuals or entities is also illegal under international law as a means of enforcement of illegal unilateral coercive measures. Secondary sanctions also constitute violation of the prohibition of punishments for acts, which did not constitute crimes at the moment of their committing. »
« Unilateral targeted sanctions as a punitive action violate, at the very least, obligations arising from universal and regional human rights instruments, many of which have a peremptory character, including procedural guarantees, the presumption of innocence, due process, access to justice and right to remedy. »
« It thus follows that unilateral sanctions against China do not conform with a broad number of international legal norms, are introduced to apply pressure on the state, cannot be justified as countermeasures under the law of international responsibility, and therefore can be qualified as unilateral coercive measures. »
The US has been taking illegal actions that are an affront to international law for decades. The ability to deflect and cover up is failing. The imploding western financial ponzi is the canary as US debt goes parabolic - I mean look at the numbers. Defacto default? Retreat into garrison statehood with its chihuahua satellites?
America was created in a lab experiment of European ideals known as the New World. Age of Enlightenment philosophies about Man collided w/ Magna Carta dicta about Law in a crucible of rich natural resources & pitiless genocidal encounters w/ indigenous peoples. The British, the French, the Spanish, the Dutch, the Portuguese--Europe claimed this place so hard there was no way to assert 'what might have been' an actual American personality, demeanor or vision apart from what was dominantly Continental. The land was such a conquest bauble, like free money found lying around--and the stewards of the land, the stewards of this treasure, could not stave off the greedy conquest. As in any lab experiment, unexpected things happened, unpredictable catalysts violently announced themselves. The Dutch brought the first African slaves to Virginia in 1619. Slavery became both an institution and economic necessity. The native people got liquidated. Born in conquest, born in greed, born of violence, of high-minded ideals enacted @ the point of a bayonet, inheritor of harsh Puritan edicts, forged in revolution--how long would this experiment stay docilely in its lab? Eventually the lab experiment stood up to its full grown height, knocked over a couple Erdenmeyer flasks, and it kicked the 'scientists' out.
Is it any wonder we're the kind of nation that we are?
Such phrasing perfectly depicts the mindset - factually not judgmentally - the spirit which cannot bring any other fruit than the ones being witnessed.
13Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
A Tree and its Fruits
15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
If I am the Iranians, I would be seriously pissed at Putin too.
Of course the Iranians are to blame themselves in the first place -- they never answered these hits sufficiently forcefully, all these years, only symbolically, but at least they did bomb Israel once.
Putin hasn't sent a single missile on London, Paris, Berlin and DC, even symbolically.
And that has emboldened the people who did this sufficiently much that they crossed the red line of assassinating heads of state. It's a single war in the minds of those people, never forget that.
Sorry, but even hinting at blaming Russia is totally off. Doing as you suggest, "even symbolically", would wreak havoc. For one, the time do so has not yet come, not even close; the first and last symbolic target with a blind load would more likely be a NATO base in Germany anyways (logistics and command hub).
And Israel? We must assume there are certain gentlemen's agreements in place.
IMV the best possible retaliation would be knocking out all of NATO's spy satellites. Russia of course will lose theirs, but it gives Russia a net gain in Ukraine, while China will be laughing all the way to space dominance... :)
You do NOT even realize you are just like your western masters. Everything is Putin's fault. When you wrote that, I am sure you felt so righteous, like I thought of this all on my own and I want to post this for all to see. In reality you are just repeating exactly what you have been brainwashed into saying by the corrupt media.
The war is continuation of politics by other means, and political objective number one for Russia must be to maintain and gain allies in the ongoing economic war. There are many important countries in the middle who do not want the war to escalate and will join the west if Russia appears the aggressor. These countries must feel respected if Russia is to be successful.
For me, the breath-robbing pivot point was the sabotage of NordStream 2: when Europe stayed mute, never uttered a peep. The silent aquiescence spoke such volumes, one understood in an eye-blink that there are no bumpers, guardrails or norms.
They don't have to hide what they do.
Emboldened, they amp the thrill by going after heads of state.
They're held under the sway of an addictive violence which, like their security guarantees, has "no limits"
I still can't get over that, Cheeto. The US condemned the Euro economy to ruin and its people to US-owned slavery with that act, and nobody said a frigging thing. Scholz is a complete shitbag.
The situation slowly spirals downward, and sadly, out of control. Watch out for gaslighting and chaos in the information space. A lot of spin is gonna go into this before it goes down.
I guess it depends upon whom you are asked to fight. In this case, if the Ukrainians refuse to fight, nothing will happen to them. Do you think Russia is going to create a holodomor? Will they send in Einsatzgruppen to massacre Jews and Gypsies? Maybe they will ban the Ukrainian language? Or perhaps they will abolish the Orthodox Church? Maybe cancel elections? Orchestrate a coup d'etat to remove Zelensky from power? Maybe sell off all the Ukrainian land and assets to oligarchs or hedge funds? Ciphon all the public funds off to shell companies and grifters? How about sweep all the men from the streets and ship them off to die in wet, muddy trenches?
I don't think that the Russian will do any of these things, and I think that the Ukrainians would be much better off with peace at any price.
I wasn't talking about the Ukrainians, but about Iran, Russia and China being presented with the choice I described.
The Ukrainian war isn't even a war between Ukraine and Russia, it is NATO against Russia with Ukrainian soldiers doing the fighting and under extremely unfair rules of engagement that for some reason the Kremlin has accepted.
But yes, there has never been a war in which people fought so viciously against their own self-interests.
What will Ukraine be like for the average person if Russia takes over?
People will have a thriving economy, well maintained infrastructure, will be able to vote, will have freedom of expression, will be able to speak whatever language they want (the official languages in Crimea are Russian, Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar, in Kherson and the Zaporozhye Ukrainian is official language too; in the LDNR it is not, but that dates back to before 2022), and most importantly, will be alive and not maimed.
They have none of these things now. And are fighting to the death for not ever having them again, plus the privileges of hosting American missiles pointed at Moscow at point blank range.
I would describe it more as a civil war which the CIA and MI6 have facilitated by handing power in Ukraine to the radicals and then supplying them with arms.
As to your question about when has there ever been such a war? Most, though not all wars are similar. Why would a bunch of poor dirt farmers and trade workers fight to the death for the right of oligarchs to farm massive plantations with slaves? Why did Canadians die on the fields of Flanders fighting in a war between the French, Germans, Austrians, and Russians? Why did Americans die there to ensure that loans were repaid to American bankers? What stake did the French peasantry have invading Russia under Napoleon? Did any Welshman derive any benefit from the Crimean War and was there any possible benefit for any Welshman? What Chinese soldier had any interest in fight in Korea or Vietnam? What interest did any American soldier have in either of these wars?
Some things never change. Young men, full of testosterone, are easily convinced to risk their lives for "glory" or whatever. 9 times of 10, all they are really risking their lives for is to preserve the power and prestige of old rich men.
The diminutive Kingdom of Sardinia entered the Crimean War late but the event itself had sufficient impact that the mechanics of the Risorgimento, Unification of Italy, got energized. Victor Emmanuel II, the King of Sardinia, became Italy's first king. Count Cavour, another Major Player in the Risorgimento, was his Prime Minister in Sardinia.
I'm not saying that war is desirable--just that it activates weirdly unforeseen events.
So the Crimean War was peculiarly a factor in how Italy unified--& the heroes of the Kingdom of Sardinia found their mojo during that time. [Uncle Mo, we call it]
There is a monument in Crimea, on the road to Bakhchysarai, commemorating the sacrifice of Sardinia in the Crimean War
Thank you for that walk down memory lane. I had forgotten all about Piedmont-Sardinia's participation and its importance for Italian unification. I am certain that I have forgotten more European history than I now know.
Canadians as a whole reaped huge benefits from WWII, as did the Welshmen from the Crimean war.
Remember that the West has been living way above its means since WWII at least, and in the case of Britain, since the Napoleonic wars (Britain stopped being self-sufficient in agriculture and other natural resources shortly after that time, and has been sucking real wealth from the rest of the world ever since).
This is the whole reason they have been on the warpath against Russia all these centuries, and are trying again now -- they need to keep that going.
Yes, most of the benefits go the oligarchy, but a lot has trickled down to the masses too.
If Britain had been forced to live within its means, what would have happened there around the time of the Crimean war is the same thing that happened in neighboring Ireland -- overpopulation leading to a Malthusian disaster. It never happened, and that is what the regular people gained as benefits from all the imperial wars. The choices were shitty life plus some of them die fighting wars for the masters, or a much shittier life and death of starvation for a lot more of them.
That in the 19th century.
In the 20th century the choices were fighting those wars and most people living a middle class lifestyle, or not fighting them and having to live within whatever material means were available on the territory. Which would have looked something like Romania in the 1970s.
Agricultural protection (the Corn Laws) were a subsidy to shitbag landowners, their repeal was a subsidy to shitbag industrial capitalists. Because of Britain's importance as a grain buyer, India, Argentina, the US and Canada made bundles on the export trade. No doubt the British rigged the market in their favour where they could but they needed the food as much as the foreigners needed to sell it.
“It was only a section of the ownership class – and especially the big banking families – who were the true winners from imperialism… effectively persuading the state and – as the franchise widened – the people to support military interventions on their behalf.”?
Malthusianism is the delusion that has propelled the Western oligarchs into much of their madness.
The Crimean War was a disaster for all parties. No one "won" or benefitted. The British goal of denying Russia access to the Mediterranean was very short-lived as the Treaty of Paris was almost immediately torn up and tossed in the rubbish with German support and French acquiescence. It was pure military adventurism by all parties. No one had a good reason to enter into this war.
The Crimean was was also very instructive for the current situation in Ukraine. England's goal in the Crimean War was to ensure that Russia did not have access to the Mediterranean. They wanted to preserve their trade privileges with the Ottomans. The were keen, above all, to destroy the Russian Black Sea fleet.
The current focus on Crimea the Black Sea fleet is not purely for propaganda purposes. Much like the Crimean War, the object is to destroy the Black Sea fleet if Crimea and Sevastapol cannot be separated from Russia. The question arises, however, why would England or the U.S. be particularly concerned with the Russian Black Sea fleet and Russian access to the Mediterranean at this juncture in history? There are no special trade privileges to protect. The Med is not nearly as vital as it once was to England and has never been especially important to the U.S.
Aside from Turkey, there is one other interested party, however, for whom the Eastern Mediterranean is vital: Israel. I think it is impossible to understand the origins of the Ukraine War without understanding who the architects were: Nuland; the Kagan clan; the CIA and neo-cons in general; and Zalensky. Since 2000, the neo-con cabal and the Kagan clan have run U.S. foreign policy, and this crowd is, without question or doubt, much more concerned with Israel's interests than with the U.S.'s interests.
I think the best way to view the Ukraine War is as an attempt to prevent the Russian navy open access to the Eastern Mediterranean. It makes no difference to England or the U.S. if Russia has access to the Eastern Med or no, but for Israel, it could be a question of life and death, especially if they desire a free hand to deal with the Palestinians, Hezbollah, and Iran.
Wars are never fought by farmers or peasants, they are just lured into it to fight it for those that profit from it.
There has NEVER been a war between Germans, Austrians, Russians .... it IS always THE SYNAGOGUE OF SATAN'S (allowed) failed attempt to pry away GOD ALMIGHTY'S CREATION from GOD ALMIGHTY ... since EVE in THE GARDEN OF EDEN!
It appears that we are in the final round ... GOD ALMIGHTY holding ALL THE CARDS since THE BEGINNING!
As a general philosophical point "If your choice is either war, or total strategic defeat if you stubbornly refuse to fight it, then what happens if you don't fight the war?" then the best plan is to go Sun Tsu and fight without fighting Taoist style. Move into the terrain (physical or metaphysical) that is to your advantage and match fullness with emptiness, Yang with Yin or vice versa.
For example, Beijing isn't fighting Washington with guided missiles and destroyers in the Pacific, it's fighting them with factory workers on production lines in their interior and with salesmen in supermarkets and shopping malls in Latin America and Africa.
As perfect as your analogy appears at the surface, ANY mind believing it is profound will be equally dumbfounded, as ANYONE BELIEVING fighting - by whatever means - is necessary at all, once REALITY - GOD ALMIGHTY - reveals HIMSELF.
HELL IS WAITING FOR ALL THOSE WHO REFUSE THE LORD JESUS CHRIST'S OFFER OF SALVATION!
They're the ones who should worry; their actors in office carry out their orders and the western oligarchy thinks that they're untouchable because "it wasn't me", like look at my proxy.
Didn't Ukraine do more than ask? Is anyone showing up? They burned through the 1 million young fanatics who bought into the whole Banderite nonsense, and another 1 million who begrudgingly did their "patriotic duty." Now there is no one left who will show up to Zelensky and Blackrock's war. That's why the streets are empty.
Yup. And as far as Washington, Brussels and Kiev are concerned, if those dumb scrotes can soak up Russian munitions, then they have served their sole purpose in life.
Anyway, Ukraine is not out of men. More get press-ganged every day.
The FFL is formed of regular French Army Officers, but rank and file of any country mercenaries
What distinguishes a national army, with or without conscription, is that it is formed by the nationals of that country ; this constitutes an implicit and very useful agreement that the army fights in and because of the interests of their country
To revert to mercenary armies is to revert to a time before national armies - when countries hired mercenary armies to fight, as was common until the 18th century in Europe
If wars are to be fought by mercenaries the nation as a whole loses implication in and control of the conduct of war, not only obviously for they are not the ones fighting, but also because the mercenaries you hired can turn against you
It might be observed that, in the Ukraine war, the EU and the US have hired a mercenary army to fight on their behalf – the results have been disastrous for the Ukrainian country and army, and very unsatisfactory for the EUUS
Even so various US policians boast that this is the cheapest way to fight a war – ‘at least our boys are not being killed’
In similar fashion, if the French government choses to send the FFL into Ukraine to fight, rather than regular troops, it is because their purpose is similar – to not kill Frenchmen, and, by not declaring war as would have constutionally to be the case if regular troops were used, to not ‘provoke’ any RF reaction against the country of France
The RF knows this, and takes care, as with all NATO country undercover ‘soldiers’ or ‘advisors’ currently present in Ukraine, to both call and treat them as mercenaries
Russia used to harbour some fondness for France, not sure why. The most common language to be quoted in much Russian literature is likely French, I guess. It used to be considered that France had some culture , in the past,not merely yoghurt and baggetttes, as Garland Nixon calls them. Baggettte eaters. Funny, I am not even sure I know what a baguette is,,spell check. Is a bagghette a small bag?
"The most common language to be quoted in much Russian literature is likely French, I guess. It used to be considered that France had some culture , "
It is my understanding that before the Bolsheviks took over it was an affectation of the Russian court and upper class there to be fluent in French. Probably a desire to emulate the French as a nod to their nominal 'European sophistication'. As a side note, the Russians were much more accepting of the radical painting coming out of late 19th C. France from the likes of Matisse, et al, than the French even were. (source: Hilary Spurling: The Unknown Matisse.)
When Mom took us out of Russia as a small child , she brought us to France for vacation. Eventually they allowed her to bring us to scAmerica, after she begged for months at the scAmerican embassy
Before the Catholic church was faced with Protestant kingdoms in Europe, just about EVERY diplomat and other highly educated persons gad Latin in common.
After that, EVERY European diplomat and most scientists & educated people could communicate in FRENCH. Have you never heard the term "lingua franca" used to mean a language that many people with different native tongues have in common (as in "Swahili is a hybrid trade language, the lingua franca of East Africa")?
There is a REASON that up until the 1980s nearly every USA highschool had a minimum 2 semesters of foreign language as a graduation requirement and their curriculum ALWAYS included a French class (it was not so we could be tourists in Quebec).
Point taken Billy but I maintain that I'm specifically speaking of a Russian upper class at a specific point in history that was aspirational re French culture. You're generalizing from the one specific case that I'm suggesting.
You know how many Kings of England (and most of their court) did not speak English from 1066 until the battle of Bosworth Field? Bunch of transplanted frogs.
Latin was taught in the high schools even in the early 70s. My dad took it many years before that, it wasn't available by the time I made it to high school in the 80s. 5 years of French and all I remember is how to say "I drink beer" and voulez-vous coucher avec moi. Oh and not to say the "d" in mademoiselle.
Pre-Vatican II, ecclesiastical Latin was a part of life for those who were Catholic. There was no such thing as a vernacular Mass. Admittedly he went to a Catholic school.
Most foreign legionnaires are not French, which is why the unit's name is the "Foreign Legion." I would guess that the is speaking Russian and fighting in Ukraine because he is Ukrainian.
A Ukrainian citizen who returns home to fight in the Ukrainian army is not controversial. I assume he was wearing a Ukrainian and not a French uniform.
He's COMPLETELY under French command if he is still an active and serving FFL member. Most people mistakenly think that the FFL is some kind of mercenary outfit, but it is a fully-integrated part of the French army.
Which doesn't surprise me, simply based on casual observation of the common man and the rhetoric of the political slave (pun intended), carrying out the algorithm that has been programmed into it.
Because a large swathe of the FFL is made up of Russians and Ukrainians recruits. I've heard it said that if you want to fit in, it's best to forget about French and learn Russian.
Clown World Cavoli was humilated in the Iraq and Afghanistan, (just as was the U.S. in fiasco of Vietnam), all, of which were COIN, Low Intensity Conflicts. The ROTC wannabe never attended a military academy and never fought a Conventional War of attrition against a peer. (He also did not heed my warning to wear a full body condom while being sodomized by NATO, and appears to have been inflicted with AIDS and as a consequence; suffering a severe, and delusional mental incapacitation). He takes no heed of the fundemental military tenet’s: “Tactics may win some battles, Logistics wins wars” and Sustainment is a Strategic Imperative”. The U.S. NATO proxy, maneuver warfare in Ukraine vs Russia is a lost cause, as it is not to sustainable given Military Industrial Capacity alone. Russia is fighting a war of attrion and defeating not only Ukraine with an SMO, but the NATO and the Collective West militarily, politically, economically, technologically, and industrially as well. Get a clue Cavoli; Do the math…
I have my doubts about the arrogance. I remember the Iraqi information minister. Was he arrogant? Not really - just doing a job for which there were 100 replacements waiting in the wings. So is there someone defining this worldview Cavalli represents? Not really, it’s a consensus view the same way the Union consensus was generated in the 1860s. You can read what happened then and see the same kinds of blind obedience to narrative you see today. Nothing has really changed except the battlefields. Any attempt to shift the narrative gets you thrown out of the club. They need actual defeat to change.
I had a feeling that airbase strike was a bit off! Great analysis
Re: ATACMS and others; there is no 100% missile shield, Russian AD has to win every day, missiles have to get through once. And they always will. While there aren't enough missiles to actually affect the battlefield i.e. target rear areas en masse, interdict supply, etc, there ARE enough to constantly target these fixed point targets (ports, bridges, etc) and so from time to time these hits will always happen.
Ru had a better time interdicting Storm Shadow, they haven't been able to hit the ATACM depots - those M270 are a pita, no doubt.
Storm Shadows are ALCMs, meaning that the missiles have to be at the airfield and can be hit (unless they have indeed been doing the whole taking off from Poland/Romania, landing to refuel in Ukraine, then taking off again to launch thing as rumored).
ATACMS is a ground-based TEL that can be hidden anywhere. It's a needle in a haystack problem.
And this is where the Kremlin should have absolutely drawn the red line, because there are also rumored to be much longer range versions of these (just as the official Iskander range may well be an INF-legacy legal fiction), and they can definitely fit nuclear warheads. So who says one day you won't get a salvo of 50-100 of these, combined with ALCMs at the same time (which can also carry nukes in principle) against all major cities in European Russia carrying 300 Kt each, after the Kremlin has also accepted them being fired at Bryansk, Kursk, Belgorod, and Rostov too and air defense has been accustomed to not seeing them as a strategic threat that triggers the launch-on-warning systems? Because that is where we are headed.
The Russian MoD officially announced that French AASM Hammers have been repeatedly launched towards Belgorod in its daily interception report.
That was supposed to be an absolute red line, but I don't see anything in France having been hit in response.
Which logically has to make us think that the Kremlin will fold when additional red lines are crossed too...
Russian red lines have been a joke, better if they just stayed silent. Tbh am amazed there aren't 100k nato soldiers already in theatre, it appears a risk free proposition
I call BS on the claim of 150 KIA. Maybe 150 were there in some capacity but I would guess a handful dead, not more. A mass casualty event like that would be impossible to keep quiet
What Russia seems to be doing is trying to bait out a specific response from Ukraine. Based on their initial 2022 invasion, it wouldn't shock me to see Russia open a front on Sumy with the hope that Ukraine moves resources there from Kiev. Then Russia sends a massive force from Belarus to Kiev to force a surrender. However, Russia has been very cautious so far so that plan might be more risky than they're willing to take. It does feel like they are trying to set up some predefined set of conditions on the field.
Thank you for yet another superbly comprehensive analysis.
On the destruction of that (natural) gas storage facility - oddly enough, Ukraine doesn't produce any gas of its own (due to lack of investment, not potential). But it does have stupendously gigantic storage facilities for gas thanks to the Soviet Union. This gas isn't just for Ukraine's use but many, many European countries also pay Ukraine to store "their" gas in there as well. I know for a fact that Moldova has parked a few million cubic meters there, for instance.
Blasting these kinds of facilities, assuming they're permanently offline, is a pretty major deal, in other words. Gonna be a mighty cold winter for some folks!
>Recall that the only two real cities Russia could possibly use Belarus as a staging area and springboard for are either Kiev or Chernigov:
The real war winning move is actually going down south from Brest and taking control of the border. Then you deal with the rest as you wish. Unless NATO dares enter the war directly.
Arguably this should have been done on February 24th 2022, but that required 300-400K people. Those 300-400K should then have been immediately mobilized, trained and equipped ASAP in April 2022, to complete this task by the end of 2022. Combined with daily strikes on the border crossings commencing immediately after Putin was once again "deceived" in Istanbul, to block movement of stuff from Poland. These are such obvious things, and yet...
>In short: Zelensky is desperate to use any excuse in escalating the war and inviting NATO into it. He knows the only way he can stop Russia is by embroiling the U.S. into the conflict, and he can do that by repeatedly pushing red lines against Russia in order to force Russia to react against NATO. But there is little chance it will work, as NATO has thus far demonstrated surprising risk aversion to the prospect of facing off with Russia.
NATO entering directly would at this point actually be a good thing. Currently they have the luxury of striking at Russia under the fig leaf of Ukraine doing it. If they enter directly, then Russia can actually fight back. Of course, it should have started fighting back a long time ago regardless, but with the current leadership we have what we have. Empty posturing about striking "decision making centers" is all the "response" has amounted to so far. A bluff that was called and now Putin doesn't even go there anymore.
With NATO openly entering the war, there is a scenario in which all of the NATO infrastructure in Eastern and Central Europe can be evaporated in the first day, and then the US, the UK and France face the choice of leaving things there or being annihilated if they continue the war. Political leadership might be crazy enough to try to respond, but at that point the military might take over and put an end to it.
If they don't, we were all doomed anyway regardless of any attempts of "escalation management" on the Kremlin side.
Because where the current escalation trajectory takes us is that "Ukraine" will eventually take out enough of the Russian strategic systems to enable a NATO first strike.
>A large-scale attack on Novorossiysk was likewise reflected with dozens—or, according to some reports, hundreds—of drones shot down. This was the only known damage done:
Ukraine sent hundreds of drones two days in a row.
When did Russia send hundreds of Gerans towards Ukraine? I don't recall that ever happening. And they were flying in the other direction at the same time, in low double digit numbers.
So Ukraine now has superiority in long-range strike drones...
When you engage in "fig leaf" warfare against an adversary to whom you don't under any circumstances speak, you've foreclosed typical options. You've left yourself no operating space.
The only question: do we get to the MAD fast or slow?
Churchillensky targets Belgorod's civilian spaces, launches cluster munition-spewing ATACMS toward Crimea, trying to goad VVP into an overreaction, thereby ensnaring VVP in the stereotypically baited trap: that of the "brutal unprovoked aggressor."
An overreaction assures more weapons, more money, more PR & 'media' wins, more grift, all of which seal the deal on another season of scripts for producing The Show.
But it's as if we're in a writer's strike now: the scripts are hackneyed & chock-a-block w/ retread storylines: send trainers, don't send trainers; send trainers; don't send trainers. Whisking troops willy-nilly, as S writes, from Chasof Yar or Krynky [ Krynky! ] to plug gaps in the LOC near Volchansk or Lyptsi mirrors the shambolic & peripetetic character of NATO: dither, flail, gesticulate madly then flop down on the Fainting Couch.
The Major Players in The Show garishly overact their parts, chewing on the scenery & upstaging each other so that the klieg light will find them.
The war is so Plug 'n Play in its essence that a Ukrainian soldier who was slogging through raputitsa in Krynky is now suddenly clearing cellars & backyard sheds in Volchansk while being targeted by FPV drones. The war is User Friendly. It's out-of-the-box ready. Moving the components erratically, without rhyme or reason, changes game-play not a wit. Put the bottom rail on the top & the top rail on the bottom--you still have a top & bottom rail. Is that what happens in This Man's Army? You can as easily die as cannon fodder in Krynky as in Lyptsi.
While the Threat Environment bristles around Project Ukraine NATO seems hellbent on proving itself & its strategies [ sic ] "brain dead."
And so the blather from the west about what it could and might do, chunters on, along with finger pointing at Russia's failure to escalate in response to its escalating provision of weaponry. "See, we can do what we like, nah, nah, nah."
BUT RUSSIA IS WINNING, numbskulls. Why would Russia need to escalate beyond the careful expansion of operations it is already progressing as part of the SMO? And as for the increasing provision of western weaponry failing to provoke an attack on Warsaw or Berlin or whatever, has the west not noticed that it is being bled out militarily.
As the old saying goes: never interrupt the enemy when he is making a mistake. Russian insouciance is the privilege of dominance of the entire field of operation. "Send in your weapons, we will blow them up. Send in your troops and we will treat them exactly as we treat Ukrainian troops.
This is what escalatory dominance looks like. It is what defeat for the west looks like, too.
It hasn't gotten to the general public in the US that the war is lost. That's the point. They're trying to avoid that moment where they have to admit they lost to the general public back here, particularly in an election year.
I agree that this slo mo defeat for the west, which it hopes can be glossed over in some muddy negotiated settlement, must be the plan now, in which cause periodic chest thumping western declarations of endless escalations and long term plans for the war, are being pressed into service.
As if Russia cares about any of this noise, any more. Fool me once.... etc etc
Russia has its interests. They are being prosecuted and will continue to be prosecuted until the whole of Ukraine is under Russian control and wholly demilitarised, if that is what becomes necessary to protect those interests. It no longer takes any western pronouncements seriously. It just responds to what the west actually does, seeking to turn those interventions to its advantage, rather than engage in mindless, costly retaliations.
So far the carefully calibrated retaliations have been far from that.
The fact that Yankeeland is buying 155mm artillery shells from South Korea for practice and training as well as limiting what it sends to Ukraine and Israel says a lot.
Totally agree, the Russian are wise to not be goaded by the CIA/MI6 machinations. They have their plans and they seem to be working out for them. Some on this chat have spent too many days watching Hollywood war movies. This won't be over in a 2 hr timeframe. Their will be no over the top response. That's not how the escalation dominance works, as you say, Julianne.
The west is desperate for some lurid escalation opening up threats of WWIII/nuclear holocaust to fracture the iron clad Alliance of Russia sympathisers and supporters, causing China say, to pressure Russia into some panicky deal to freeze everything and avoid armageddon! But the Russians have to start it which is why all we have is western verbiage and cranking out escalations Russia has managed perfectly well within the terms of its preferred engagement. The Russians are studiously not playing the western game. Why would they? Slowly, slowly catchy monkey..... as the saying goes. Meanwhile Russia periodically reminds the west that if it uses its tool , say, to bomb Moscow it must expect a proportionate response.
Too many have been watching Hollywood SPECIAL FORCES movies. You know, where you send in a gang of hard-asses, preferably led by a non-binary trannie, who kill thousands of the enemy without having to change mazazines.
Reading your comment made me think, what is the short version of it?
COGNITIVE DISSONANCE!
And there is no other way but to prove it piecemeal for everyone to see - exactly as THE TRUTH - GOD ALMIGHTY - is doing it meticulously and diligently since THE BEGINNING OF TIME!
Khodorkovsky sounded really intelligent but what was his conclusion? Does he prefer dividing up Ukraine or a World War in the farce of "free democratic" world? Kallas was more clear, even if she sounded completely unintelligent 😀
With respect to S - this UN Rapporteur report on illegal US sanctions is pretty big news
20 May 2024 UN Report on illegal US-China Unilateral Sanctions
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/ucm/statements/20240517-eom-statement-sr-ucm-china.pdf
With thanks to Karl Sanchez for link to this coverage of the Press Conference of the Speical rapporteur : from the Global Times
https://karlof1.substack.com/p/harbin-opening-ceremony-of-the-russian
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202405/1312519.shtml
This aspect of sanctions is very rarely mentioned – but it is well known that sanctions not authorised by the UN are indeed illegal, if they are not countermeasures, if they are secondary sanctions, if the intent/effect is anti humanitarian and coercive
Just as it is well established that Central Bank and State assets are protected under international law
With regard to both issues international legal norms have been flouted by the US and the EU, with all manner of specious arguments
And have back fired against the perpetrators, even if in the case of the CBR assets the stolen plunder/booty is not yet quite carried off
Perhaps it is time to recognise that international laws are well founded
May 17, 2024 Unilateral sanctions against China do not conform with a broad number of international legal norms : UN expert
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202405/1312519.shtml
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/05/china-un-expert-says-unilateral-sanctions-must-not-be-used-foreign-policy
Alena Douhan, UN Special Rapporteur, Press Conference
Yet another example of Western sanctions back firing – not only economically, but politically - the US gvmt might be proud to have the UN condemn their sanctions, but everyone else is prouder
Of special note – the declaration of illegality of US sanctions to the Xingjiang region, which the US gvmt persists as describing subjected to a ‘genocide’, and picks out for special sanctions via the Uyghur Forced Labour Prevention Act, which applies the illegal notion of ‘rebuttal presumption’ (placing the burden of proving otherwise – to US contentions unbacked with evidence- on the companies or states involved)
Quotes from the report in the Annexe
Annexe
The Preliminary Report
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/ucm/statements/20240517-eom-statement-sr-ucm-china.pdf
« Any unlateral sanctions taken without or beyond authorization of the UN Security Council, and which cannot be qualified as retortions (unfriendly but legal under international law) or wrongfulness of which is not excluded as countermeasures in accordance with law of international responsibility, are illegal. Application of secondary sanctions to Chinese companies, civil and criminal charges for (alleged) circumvention of sanctions regimes against third countries, individuals or entities is also illegal under international law as a means of enforcement of illegal unilateral coercive measures. Secondary sanctions also constitute violation of the prohibition of punishments for acts, which did not constitute crimes at the moment of their committing. »
« Unilateral targeted sanctions as a punitive action violate, at the very least, obligations arising from universal and regional human rights instruments, many of which have a peremptory character, including procedural guarantees, the presumption of innocence, due process, access to justice and right to remedy. »
« It thus follows that unilateral sanctions against China do not conform with a broad number of international legal norms, are introduced to apply pressure on the state, cannot be justified as countermeasures under the law of international responsibility, and therefore can be qualified as unilateral coercive measures. »
History
https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/sanctions/information
As with the CBR confiscations various publications have sought to excuse the non UN sanctioned sanctions on Russia and China
These invariably neglect to list all the sanctions imposed without UN authorisation
https://globalchallenges.ch/issue/12/sanctions-against-russia-and-the-role-of-the-united-nations/#:~:text=The%20most%20common%20types%20of,committee%20and%20a%20monitoring%20group.
https://www.sanctionsmap.eu/#/main
https://guide-humanitarian-law.org/content/article/3/sanctions-diplomatic-economic-or-military/#:~:text=Therefore%2C%20a%20military%20sanction%20can,42%2C%20UN%20Charter).
The US has been taking illegal actions that are an affront to international law for decades. The ability to deflect and cover up is failing. The imploding western financial ponzi is the canary as US debt goes parabolic - I mean look at the numbers. Defacto default? Retreat into garrison statehood with its chihuahua satellites?
You can say since the first Mayflowers arrived this settler society has been illegal in thought word and deed
But lately more so, if that is possible
Spot-on.
America was created in a lab experiment of European ideals known as the New World. Age of Enlightenment philosophies about Man collided w/ Magna Carta dicta about Law in a crucible of rich natural resources & pitiless genocidal encounters w/ indigenous peoples. The British, the French, the Spanish, the Dutch, the Portuguese--Europe claimed this place so hard there was no way to assert 'what might have been' an actual American personality, demeanor or vision apart from what was dominantly Continental. The land was such a conquest bauble, like free money found lying around--and the stewards of the land, the stewards of this treasure, could not stave off the greedy conquest. As in any lab experiment, unexpected things happened, unpredictable catalysts violently announced themselves. The Dutch brought the first African slaves to Virginia in 1619. Slavery became both an institution and economic necessity. The native people got liquidated. Born in conquest, born in greed, born of violence, of high-minded ideals enacted @ the point of a bayonet, inheritor of harsh Puritan edicts, forged in revolution--how long would this experiment stay docilely in its lab? Eventually the lab experiment stood up to its full grown height, knocked over a couple Erdenmeyer flasks, and it kicked the 'scientists' out.
Is it any wonder we're the kind of nation that we are?
America's genesis hinged on a zero sum mentality
" ... of high-minded ideals enacted..."
Such phrasing perfectly depicts the mindset - factually not judgmentally - the spirit which cannot bring any other fruit than the ones being witnessed.
13Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
A Tree and its Fruits
15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Matt 7, 13-21
Thank you for this exposition - it must have taken some work to assemble! :)
The other big development is Iranian President Riasi is dead in a helicopter crash.
Wow. Just wow.
https://apnews.com/article/iran-helicopter-raisi-b483ba75e4339cfb0fe00c7349d023b8
If I am the Iranians, I would be seriously pissed at Putin too.
Of course the Iranians are to blame themselves in the first place -- they never answered these hits sufficiently forcefully, all these years, only symbolically, but at least they did bomb Israel once.
Putin hasn't sent a single missile on London, Paris, Berlin and DC, even symbolically.
And that has emboldened the people who did this sufficiently much that they crossed the red line of assassinating heads of state. It's a single war in the minds of those people, never forget that.
Sorry, but even hinting at blaming Russia is totally off. Doing as you suggest, "even symbolically", would wreak havoc. For one, the time do so has not yet come, not even close; the first and last symbolic target with a blind load would more likely be a NATO base in Germany anyways (logistics and command hub).
And Israel? We must assume there are certain gentlemen's agreements in place.
IMV the best possible retaliation would be knocking out all of NATO's spy satellites. Russia of course will lose theirs, but it gives Russia a net gain in Ukraine, while China will be laughing all the way to space dominance... :)
You do NOT even realize you are just like your western masters. Everything is Putin's fault. When you wrote that, I am sure you felt so righteous, like I thought of this all on my own and I want to post this for all to see. In reality you are just repeating exactly what you have been brainwashed into saying by the corrupt media.
General Moron is a know-it-all that knows nothing doomer. Ignore him/her/it.
And as such he outs himself before the third sentence is penned….
Yawn….next
Helicopters with Jews need to start crashing immediately.
Any big time Jew like soros should be drone struck wherever they are.
Delete the head of the beast
Give it a miss.
The war is continuation of politics by other means, and political objective number one for Russia must be to maintain and gain allies in the ongoing economic war. There are many important countries in the middle who do not want the war to escalate and will join the west if Russia appears the aggressor. These countries must feel respected if Russia is to be successful.
For me, the breath-robbing pivot point was the sabotage of NordStream 2: when Europe stayed mute, never uttered a peep. The silent aquiescence spoke such volumes, one understood in an eye-blink that there are no bumpers, guardrails or norms.
They don't have to hide what they do.
Emboldened, they amp the thrill by going after heads of state.
They're held under the sway of an addictive violence which, like their security guarantees, has "no limits"
I still can't get over that, Cheeto. The US condemned the Euro economy to ruin and its people to US-owned slavery with that act, and nobody said a frigging thing. Scholz is a complete shitbag.
And apparently all the other officials in the chopper....
The Foreign Minister is a very big loss. He was young, very smart, personable, and very effective.
Letting the president and the FM ride in the same helicopter was foolhardy.
One would think that such prestigious passengers would opt for a state of art Kamov rather than antique ….
It doesn't seem like foul play. He was foolish to fly in fog.
The situation slowly spirals downward, and sadly, out of control. Watch out for gaslighting and chaos in the information space. A lot of spin is gonna go into this before it goes down.
https://argomend.substack.com/p/the-totalitarian-organizing-principle
it's been gaslighting the whole way
And it’s only going to get worse.
We're doomed, I tell you, doomed!
absolutely doompilled
really though I don't think we're that bad off but there's always the chance
What if the Western oligarchs decided to throw a war, and no one showed up?
There is such a line of thinking, but what is the other side to do?
If your choice is either war, or total strategic defeat if you stubbornly refuse to fight it, then what happens if you don't fight the war?
I guess it depends upon whom you are asked to fight. In this case, if the Ukrainians refuse to fight, nothing will happen to them. Do you think Russia is going to create a holodomor? Will they send in Einsatzgruppen to massacre Jews and Gypsies? Maybe they will ban the Ukrainian language? Or perhaps they will abolish the Orthodox Church? Maybe cancel elections? Orchestrate a coup d'etat to remove Zelensky from power? Maybe sell off all the Ukrainian land and assets to oligarchs or hedge funds? Ciphon all the public funds off to shell companies and grifters? How about sweep all the men from the streets and ship them off to die in wet, muddy trenches?
I don't think that the Russian will do any of these things, and I think that the Ukrainians would be much better off with peace at any price.
I wasn't talking about the Ukrainians, but about Iran, Russia and China being presented with the choice I described.
The Ukrainian war isn't even a war between Ukraine and Russia, it is NATO against Russia with Ukrainian soldiers doing the fighting and under extremely unfair rules of engagement that for some reason the Kremlin has accepted.
But yes, there has never been a war in which people fought so viciously against their own self-interests.
What will Ukraine be like for the average person if Russia takes over?
People will have a thriving economy, well maintained infrastructure, will be able to vote, will have freedom of expression, will be able to speak whatever language they want (the official languages in Crimea are Russian, Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar, in Kherson and the Zaporozhye Ukrainian is official language too; in the LDNR it is not, but that dates back to before 2022), and most importantly, will be alive and not maimed.
They have none of these things now. And are fighting to the death for not ever having them again, plus the privileges of hosting American missiles pointed at Moscow at point blank range.
Again, when has there ever been such a war?
I would describe it more as a civil war which the CIA and MI6 have facilitated by handing power in Ukraine to the radicals and then supplying them with arms.
As to your question about when has there ever been such a war? Most, though not all wars are similar. Why would a bunch of poor dirt farmers and trade workers fight to the death for the right of oligarchs to farm massive plantations with slaves? Why did Canadians die on the fields of Flanders fighting in a war between the French, Germans, Austrians, and Russians? Why did Americans die there to ensure that loans were repaid to American bankers? What stake did the French peasantry have invading Russia under Napoleon? Did any Welshman derive any benefit from the Crimean War and was there any possible benefit for any Welshman? What Chinese soldier had any interest in fight in Korea or Vietnam? What interest did any American soldier have in either of these wars?
Some things never change. Young men, full of testosterone, are easily convinced to risk their lives for "glory" or whatever. 9 times of 10, all they are really risking their lives for is to preserve the power and prestige of old rich men.
The diminutive Kingdom of Sardinia entered the Crimean War late but the event itself had sufficient impact that the mechanics of the Risorgimento, Unification of Italy, got energized. Victor Emmanuel II, the King of Sardinia, became Italy's first king. Count Cavour, another Major Player in the Risorgimento, was his Prime Minister in Sardinia.
I'm not saying that war is desirable--just that it activates weirdly unforeseen events.
So the Crimean War was peculiarly a factor in how Italy unified--& the heroes of the Kingdom of Sardinia found their mojo during that time. [Uncle Mo, we call it]
There is a monument in Crimea, on the road to Bakhchysarai, commemorating the sacrifice of Sardinia in the Crimean War
Thank you for that walk down memory lane. I had forgotten all about Piedmont-Sardinia's participation and its importance for Italian unification. I am certain that I have forgotten more European history than I now know.
Indeed. I've always thought the winners of the Crimean war were Sardinia-Piedmont, Prussia, and Austria. :)
Canadians as a whole reaped huge benefits from WWII, as did the Welshmen from the Crimean war.
Remember that the West has been living way above its means since WWII at least, and in the case of Britain, since the Napoleonic wars (Britain stopped being self-sufficient in agriculture and other natural resources shortly after that time, and has been sucking real wealth from the rest of the world ever since).
This is the whole reason they have been on the warpath against Russia all these centuries, and are trying again now -- they need to keep that going.
Yes, most of the benefits go the oligarchy, but a lot has trickled down to the masses too.
If Britain had been forced to live within its means, what would have happened there around the time of the Crimean war is the same thing that happened in neighboring Ireland -- overpopulation leading to a Malthusian disaster. It never happened, and that is what the regular people gained as benefits from all the imperial wars. The choices were shitty life plus some of them die fighting wars for the masters, or a much shittier life and death of starvation for a lot more of them.
That in the 19th century.
In the 20th century the choices were fighting those wars and most people living a middle class lifestyle, or not fighting them and having to live within whatever material means were available on the territory. Which would have looked something like Romania in the 1970s.
Great Britain finally paidoff the last of its debts for WW II to Yankeeland and Canada on December 28th 2006.
Britains also had rationing into the early 1960's They were hardly living above their means.
Agricultural protection (the Corn Laws) were a subsidy to shitbag landowners, their repeal was a subsidy to shitbag industrial capitalists. Because of Britain's importance as a grain buyer, India, Argentina, the US and Canada made bundles on the export trade. No doubt the British rigged the market in their favour where they could but they needed the food as much as the foreigners needed to sell it.
“It was only a section of the ownership class – and especially the big banking families – who were the true winners from imperialism… effectively persuading the state and – as the franchise widened – the people to support military interventions on their behalf.”?
https://consciousnessofsheep.co.uk/2024/05/18/killing-st-george/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR0z0TwRmJVYpdNg47BVXYNLPIuLhRN-WhAtSVPkYU3RDUNhYXSCkc5KoTg_aem_AUM_Yu4F3ZVhruHU7Y9mLGYvi8VWca3maRofx-ZXNT5Bar1HGLXvxm0m8Zag3OwqvIRYK5GRIC0waCsLICX1yTk0
romania in the `70s weren`t bad at all, the hard times started in the late `70 early `80s whith the recession.
source: i`m romanian :))
but you are correct.
Malthusianism is the delusion that has propelled the Western oligarchs into much of their madness.
The Crimean War was a disaster for all parties. No one "won" or benefitted. The British goal of denying Russia access to the Mediterranean was very short-lived as the Treaty of Paris was almost immediately torn up and tossed in the rubbish with German support and French acquiescence. It was pure military adventurism by all parties. No one had a good reason to enter into this war.
The Crimean was was also very instructive for the current situation in Ukraine. England's goal in the Crimean War was to ensure that Russia did not have access to the Mediterranean. They wanted to preserve their trade privileges with the Ottomans. The were keen, above all, to destroy the Russian Black Sea fleet.
The current focus on Crimea the Black Sea fleet is not purely for propaganda purposes. Much like the Crimean War, the object is to destroy the Black Sea fleet if Crimea and Sevastapol cannot be separated from Russia. The question arises, however, why would England or the U.S. be particularly concerned with the Russian Black Sea fleet and Russian access to the Mediterranean at this juncture in history? There are no special trade privileges to protect. The Med is not nearly as vital as it once was to England and has never been especially important to the U.S.
Aside from Turkey, there is one other interested party, however, for whom the Eastern Mediterranean is vital: Israel. I think it is impossible to understand the origins of the Ukraine War without understanding who the architects were: Nuland; the Kagan clan; the CIA and neo-cons in general; and Zalensky. Since 2000, the neo-con cabal and the Kagan clan have run U.S. foreign policy, and this crowd is, without question or doubt, much more concerned with Israel's interests than with the U.S.'s interests.
I think the best way to view the Ukraine War is as an attempt to prevent the Russian navy open access to the Eastern Mediterranean. It makes no difference to England or the U.S. if Russia has access to the Eastern Med or no, but for Israel, it could be a question of life and death, especially if they desire a free hand to deal with the Palestinians, Hezbollah, and Iran.
Wars are never fought by farmers or peasants, they are just lured into it to fight it for those that profit from it.
There has NEVER been a war between Germans, Austrians, Russians .... it IS always THE SYNAGOGUE OF SATAN'S (allowed) failed attempt to pry away GOD ALMIGHTY'S CREATION from GOD ALMIGHTY ... since EVE in THE GARDEN OF EDEN!
It appears that we are in the final round ... GOD ALMIGHTY holding ALL THE CARDS since THE BEGINNING!
GET READY EVERYONE!
You must be three years old - mentally speaking - ....
Here is some real news...
https://youtu.be/nf-7tbC6Nkc?si=d0Yjx5qgWkcFDqP1
For your own good, please spare me the usual knee jerk "killing the messenger" responses. Which would only further cement your"three year old status"!
As a general philosophical point "If your choice is either war, or total strategic defeat if you stubbornly refuse to fight it, then what happens if you don't fight the war?" then the best plan is to go Sun Tsu and fight without fighting Taoist style. Move into the terrain (physical or metaphysical) that is to your advantage and match fullness with emptiness, Yang with Yin or vice versa.
For example, Beijing isn't fighting Washington with guided missiles and destroyers in the Pacific, it's fighting them with factory workers on production lines in their interior and with salesmen in supermarkets and shopping malls in Latin America and Africa.
As perfect as your analogy appears at the surface, ANY mind believing it is profound will be equally dumbfounded, as ANYONE BELIEVING fighting - by whatever means - is necessary at all, once REALITY - GOD ALMIGHTY - reveals HIMSELF.
HELL IS WAITING FOR ALL THOSE WHO REFUSE THE LORD JESUS CHRIST'S OFFER OF SALVATION!
SOLI DEO GLORIA!
You may not be interested in war but war is interested in you
It generates its own momentum
Of course if you go to bed with SATAN you should not be surprised to wake up in HELL!
They're the ones who should worry; their actors in office carry out their orders and the western oligarchy thinks that they're untouchable because "it wasn't me", like look at my proxy.
And as such their hasty “retirement” complete with land holding and loot will be anything but safe….
Nobody will ask the cannon fodder whether or not they want to show up.
Didn't Ukraine do more than ask? Is anyone showing up? They burned through the 1 million young fanatics who bought into the whole Banderite nonsense, and another 1 million who begrudgingly did their "patriotic duty." Now there is no one left who will show up to Zelensky and Blackrock's war. That's why the streets are empty.
Yup. And as far as Washington, Brussels and Kiev are concerned, if those dumb scrotes can soak up Russian munitions, then they have served their sole purpose in life.
Anyway, Ukraine is not out of men. More get press-ganged every day.
That's a great site. At last, some people power!
>Ukrainians blowing up their decommissioned aircraft with ATACMS
consistent with them blowing up Ukrainian POWs with HIMARS
That was a good one eh? As though they were in a hurry to get rid of the captured Azov guys lest they give away the Golden NATO Goose….
Why is a member of the French Foreign Legion speaking Russian?
That video is a bit suspicious
FFL are mercenaries, even if the French claim they are part of the French Army
This could be a guy originally from Russia who signed up with the wrong side
I saw a comment where he is Ukrainian and most speak Russian
85% of 'ukranian' passport holders are russian language speakers. 'ukraine' is a more of the cult.
Nope. The FFL are fully part of the regular French army. That's like calling the Gurkhas in the British Army mercenaries.
This is not true
The FFL is formed of regular French Army Officers, but rank and file of any country mercenaries
What distinguishes a national army, with or without conscription, is that it is formed by the nationals of that country ; this constitutes an implicit and very useful agreement that the army fights in and because of the interests of their country
To revert to mercenary armies is to revert to a time before national armies - when countries hired mercenary armies to fight, as was common until the 18th century in Europe
If wars are to be fought by mercenaries the nation as a whole loses implication in and control of the conduct of war, not only obviously for they are not the ones fighting, but also because the mercenaries you hired can turn against you
It might be observed that, in the Ukraine war, the EU and the US have hired a mercenary army to fight on their behalf – the results have been disastrous for the Ukrainian country and army, and very unsatisfactory for the EUUS
Even so various US policians boast that this is the cheapest way to fight a war – ‘at least our boys are not being killed’
In similar fashion, if the French government choses to send the FFL into Ukraine to fight, rather than regular troops, it is because their purpose is similar – to not kill Frenchmen, and, by not declaring war as would have constutionally to be the case if regular troops were used, to not ‘provoke’ any RF reaction against the country of France
The RF knows this, and takes care, as with all NATO country undercover ‘soldiers’ or ‘advisors’ currently present in Ukraine, to both call and treat them as mercenaries
Russia used to harbour some fondness for France, not sure why. The most common language to be quoted in much Russian literature is likely French, I guess. It used to be considered that France had some culture , in the past,not merely yoghurt and baggetttes, as Garland Nixon calls them. Baggettte eaters. Funny, I am not even sure I know what a baguette is,,spell check. Is a bagghette a small bag?
"The most common language to be quoted in much Russian literature is likely French, I guess. It used to be considered that France had some culture , "
It is my understanding that before the Bolsheviks took over it was an affectation of the Russian court and upper class there to be fluent in French. Probably a desire to emulate the French as a nod to their nominal 'European sophistication'. As a side note, the Russians were much more accepting of the radical painting coming out of late 19th C. France from the likes of Matisse, et al, than the French even were. (source: Hilary Spurling: The Unknown Matisse.)
When Mom took us out of Russia as a small child , she brought us to France for vacation. Eventually they allowed her to bring us to scAmerica, after she begged for months at the scAmerican embassy
@occamsrazorback
Before the Catholic church was faced with Protestant kingdoms in Europe, just about EVERY diplomat and other highly educated persons gad Latin in common.
After that, EVERY European diplomat and most scientists & educated people could communicate in FRENCH. Have you never heard the term "lingua franca" used to mean a language that many people with different native tongues have in common (as in "Swahili is a hybrid trade language, the lingua franca of East Africa")?
There is a REASON that up until the 1980s nearly every USA highschool had a minimum 2 semesters of foreign language as a graduation requirement and their curriculum ALWAYS included a French class (it was not so we could be tourists in Quebec).
Point taken Billy but I maintain that I'm specifically speaking of a Russian upper class at a specific point in history that was aspirational re French culture. You're generalizing from the one specific case that I'm suggesting.
You know how many Kings of England (and most of their court) did not speak English from 1066 until the battle of Bosworth Field? Bunch of transplanted frogs.
Latin was taught in the high schools even in the early 70s. My dad took it many years before that, it wasn't available by the time I made it to high school in the 80s. 5 years of French and all I remember is how to say "I drink beer" and voulez-vous coucher avec moi. Oh and not to say the "d" in mademoiselle.
Pre-Vatican II, ecclesiastical Latin was a part of life for those who were Catholic. There was no such thing as a vernacular Mass. Admittedly he went to a Catholic school.
" There was no such thing as a vernacular Mass."
In hindsight not giving the impression of being unreasonable. While at the same time having to admit that it had to come to this.
The same as other abominations of desolation being perpetrated by those claiming to follow THE LORD JESUS CHRIST!
Most foreign legionnaires are not French, which is why the unit's name is the "Foreign Legion." I would guess that the is speaking Russian and fighting in Ukraine because he is Ukrainian.
A Ukrainian citizen who returns home to fight in the Ukrainian army is not controversial. I assume he was wearing a Ukrainian and not a French uniform.
It is controversial in that he is technically under French command a member of the French military, regardless of what uniform he wears.
He's COMPLETELY under French command if he is still an active and serving FFL member. Most people mistakenly think that the FFL is some kind of mercenary outfit, but it is a fully-integrated part of the French army.
"Foreign Legion" rings a bell? :D
His name is something Demetrenko if I recall, and he states that "70% of the Foreign Legion are slavs".
Poles compromise the largest national group in the Foreign Legion and have for some years.
Which doesn't surprise me, simply based on casual observation of the common man and the rhetoric of the political slave (pun intended), carrying out the algorithm that has been programmed into it.
Because he is a Slav who moved to France to join the French Foreign Legion. He also clearly stated that about 70% of the Legion were Slavs.
Slav slaves, I suppose!
My SWAG is that he is a Ukrainian. The FFL has quite a number of Ukrainians.
Because a large swathe of the FFL is made up of Russians and Ukrainians recruits. I've heard it said that if you want to fit in, it's best to forget about French and learn Russian.
Clown World Cavoli was humilated in the Iraq and Afghanistan, (just as was the U.S. in fiasco of Vietnam), all, of which were COIN, Low Intensity Conflicts. The ROTC wannabe never attended a military academy and never fought a Conventional War of attrition against a peer. (He also did not heed my warning to wear a full body condom while being sodomized by NATO, and appears to have been inflicted with AIDS and as a consequence; suffering a severe, and delusional mental incapacitation). He takes no heed of the fundemental military tenet’s: “Tactics may win some battles, Logistics wins wars” and Sustainment is a Strategic Imperative”. The U.S. NATO proxy, maneuver warfare in Ukraine vs Russia is a lost cause, as it is not to sustainable given Military Industrial Capacity alone. Russia is fighting a war of attrion and defeating not only Ukraine with an SMO, but the NATO and the Collective West militarily, politically, economically, technologically, and industrially as well. Get a clue Cavoli; Do the math…
https://www.politico.eu/article/top-nato-commander-christopher-cavoli-russian-offensive-war-in-ukraine/
I have a strong feeling that in two months that Politico article will read as comedy.
Looks like that shitbird had enough globalist education to forget about integrity.
Imagine thinking Russians wouldn't know about exploiting a breakthrough. Silly.
Their arrogance and naïveté will be their undoing…..
Good, let them.
I have my doubts about the arrogance. I remember the Iraqi information minister. Was he arrogant? Not really - just doing a job for which there were 100 replacements waiting in the wings. So is there someone defining this worldview Cavalli represents? Not really, it’s a consensus view the same way the Union consensus was generated in the 1860s. You can read what happened then and see the same kinds of blind obedience to narrative you see today. Nothing has really changed except the battlefields. Any attempt to shift the narrative gets you thrown out of the club. They need actual defeat to change.
I had a feeling that airbase strike was a bit off! Great analysis
Re: ATACMS and others; there is no 100% missile shield, Russian AD has to win every day, missiles have to get through once. And they always will. While there aren't enough missiles to actually affect the battlefield i.e. target rear areas en masse, interdict supply, etc, there ARE enough to constantly target these fixed point targets (ports, bridges, etc) and so from time to time these hits will always happen.
Ru had a better time interdicting Storm Shadow, they haven't been able to hit the ATACM depots - those M270 are a pita, no doubt.
Storm Shadows are ALCMs, meaning that the missiles have to be at the airfield and can be hit (unless they have indeed been doing the whole taking off from Poland/Romania, landing to refuel in Ukraine, then taking off again to launch thing as rumored).
ATACMS is a ground-based TEL that can be hidden anywhere. It's a needle in a haystack problem.
And this is where the Kremlin should have absolutely drawn the red line, because there are also rumored to be much longer range versions of these (just as the official Iskander range may well be an INF-legacy legal fiction), and they can definitely fit nuclear warheads. So who says one day you won't get a salvo of 50-100 of these, combined with ALCMs at the same time (which can also carry nukes in principle) against all major cities in European Russia carrying 300 Kt each, after the Kremlin has also accepted them being fired at Bryansk, Kursk, Belgorod, and Rostov too and air defense has been accustomed to not seeing them as a strategic threat that triggers the launch-on-warning systems? Because that is where we are headed.
The Russian MoD officially announced that French AASM Hammers have been repeatedly launched towards Belgorod in its daily interception report.
That was supposed to be an absolute red line, but I don't see anything in France having been hit in response.
Which logically has to make us think that the Kremlin will fold when additional red lines are crossed too...
Russian red lines have been a joke, better if they just stayed silent. Tbh am amazed there aren't 100k nato soldiers already in theatre, it appears a risk free proposition
Who said they are not there , in one form or an other ?
Some 150 senior NATO staff were killed in an underground bunker outside of Kyiv early last year or did you miss that? Really buggered up heirarchy.
I call BS on the claim of 150 KIA. Maybe 150 were there in some capacity but I would guess a handful dead, not more. A mass casualty event like that would be impossible to keep quiet
The government has been keeping things quiet since it killed JFK
What Russia seems to be doing is trying to bait out a specific response from Ukraine. Based on their initial 2022 invasion, it wouldn't shock me to see Russia open a front on Sumy with the hope that Ukraine moves resources there from Kiev. Then Russia sends a massive force from Belarus to Kiev to force a surrender. However, Russia has been very cautious so far so that plan might be more risky than they're willing to take. It does feel like they are trying to set up some predefined set of conditions on the field.
Thanks for you work Simplicius! I've linked in our report for today and tomorrow.
A Skeptic War Reports
https://open.substack.com/pub/askeptic/p/war-reports-2024-05-19
Thank you for yet another superbly comprehensive analysis.
On the destruction of that (natural) gas storage facility - oddly enough, Ukraine doesn't produce any gas of its own (due to lack of investment, not potential). But it does have stupendously gigantic storage facilities for gas thanks to the Soviet Union. This gas isn't just for Ukraine's use but many, many European countries also pay Ukraine to store "their" gas in there as well. I know for a fact that Moldova has parked a few million cubic meters there, for instance.
Blasting these kinds of facilities, assuming they're permanently offline, is a pretty major deal, in other words. Gonna be a mighty cold winter for some folks!
>Recall that the only two real cities Russia could possibly use Belarus as a staging area and springboard for are either Kiev or Chernigov:
The real war winning move is actually going down south from Brest and taking control of the border. Then you deal with the rest as you wish. Unless NATO dares enter the war directly.
Arguably this should have been done on February 24th 2022, but that required 300-400K people. Those 300-400K should then have been immediately mobilized, trained and equipped ASAP in April 2022, to complete this task by the end of 2022. Combined with daily strikes on the border crossings commencing immediately after Putin was once again "deceived" in Istanbul, to block movement of stuff from Poland. These are such obvious things, and yet...
>In short: Zelensky is desperate to use any excuse in escalating the war and inviting NATO into it. He knows the only way he can stop Russia is by embroiling the U.S. into the conflict, and he can do that by repeatedly pushing red lines against Russia in order to force Russia to react against NATO. But there is little chance it will work, as NATO has thus far demonstrated surprising risk aversion to the prospect of facing off with Russia.
NATO entering directly would at this point actually be a good thing. Currently they have the luxury of striking at Russia under the fig leaf of Ukraine doing it. If they enter directly, then Russia can actually fight back. Of course, it should have started fighting back a long time ago regardless, but with the current leadership we have what we have. Empty posturing about striking "decision making centers" is all the "response" has amounted to so far. A bluff that was called and now Putin doesn't even go there anymore.
With NATO openly entering the war, there is a scenario in which all of the NATO infrastructure in Eastern and Central Europe can be evaporated in the first day, and then the US, the UK and France face the choice of leaving things there or being annihilated if they continue the war. Political leadership might be crazy enough to try to respond, but at that point the military might take over and put an end to it.
If they don't, we were all doomed anyway regardless of any attempts of "escalation management" on the Kremlin side.
Because where the current escalation trajectory takes us is that "Ukraine" will eventually take out enough of the Russian strategic systems to enable a NATO first strike.
>A large-scale attack on Novorossiysk was likewise reflected with dozens—or, according to some reports, hundreds—of drones shot down. This was the only known damage done:
Ukraine sent hundreds of drones two days in a row.
When did Russia send hundreds of Gerans towards Ukraine? I don't recall that ever happening. And they were flying in the other direction at the same time, in low double digit numbers.
So Ukraine now has superiority in long-range strike drones...
When you engage in "fig leaf" warfare against an adversary to whom you don't under any circumstances speak, you've foreclosed typical options. You've left yourself no operating space.
The only question: do we get to the MAD fast or slow?
Do you watch Yankee T.V?
So wait….Ukraine has superiority in long range UAVs…ok yeah no.
Enjoyable Update! Awesome start of another week!
Churchillensky targets Belgorod's civilian spaces, launches cluster munition-spewing ATACMS toward Crimea, trying to goad VVP into an overreaction, thereby ensnaring VVP in the stereotypically baited trap: that of the "brutal unprovoked aggressor."
An overreaction assures more weapons, more money, more PR & 'media' wins, more grift, all of which seal the deal on another season of scripts for producing The Show.
But it's as if we're in a writer's strike now: the scripts are hackneyed & chock-a-block w/ retread storylines: send trainers, don't send trainers; send trainers; don't send trainers. Whisking troops willy-nilly, as S writes, from Chasof Yar or Krynky [ Krynky! ] to plug gaps in the LOC near Volchansk or Lyptsi mirrors the shambolic & peripetetic character of NATO: dither, flail, gesticulate madly then flop down on the Fainting Couch.
The Major Players in The Show garishly overact their parts, chewing on the scenery & upstaging each other so that the klieg light will find them.
The war is so Plug 'n Play in its essence that a Ukrainian soldier who was slogging through raputitsa in Krynky is now suddenly clearing cellars & backyard sheds in Volchansk while being targeted by FPV drones. The war is User Friendly. It's out-of-the-box ready. Moving the components erratically, without rhyme or reason, changes game-play not a wit. Put the bottom rail on the top & the top rail on the bottom--you still have a top & bottom rail. Is that what happens in This Man's Army? You can as easily die as cannon fodder in Krynky as in Lyptsi.
While the Threat Environment bristles around Project Ukraine NATO seems hellbent on proving itself & its strategies [ sic ] "brain dead."
And so the blather from the west about what it could and might do, chunters on, along with finger pointing at Russia's failure to escalate in response to its escalating provision of weaponry. "See, we can do what we like, nah, nah, nah."
BUT RUSSIA IS WINNING, numbskulls. Why would Russia need to escalate beyond the careful expansion of operations it is already progressing as part of the SMO? And as for the increasing provision of western weaponry failing to provoke an attack on Warsaw or Berlin or whatever, has the west not noticed that it is being bled out militarily.
As the old saying goes: never interrupt the enemy when he is making a mistake. Russian insouciance is the privilege of dominance of the entire field of operation. "Send in your weapons, we will blow them up. Send in your troops and we will treat them exactly as we treat Ukrainian troops.
This is what escalatory dominance looks like. It is what defeat for the west looks like, too.
It hasn't gotten to the general public in the US that the war is lost. That's the point. They're trying to avoid that moment where they have to admit they lost to the general public back here, particularly in an election year.
I agree that this slo mo defeat for the west, which it hopes can be glossed over in some muddy negotiated settlement, must be the plan now, in which cause periodic chest thumping western declarations of endless escalations and long term plans for the war, are being pressed into service.
As if Russia cares about any of this noise, any more. Fool me once.... etc etc
Russia has its interests. They are being prosecuted and will continue to be prosecuted until the whole of Ukraine is under Russian control and wholly demilitarised, if that is what becomes necessary to protect those interests. It no longer takes any western pronouncements seriously. It just responds to what the west actually does, seeking to turn those interventions to its advantage, rather than engage in mindless, costly retaliations.
So far the carefully calibrated retaliations have been far from that.
The fact that Yankeeland is buying 155mm artillery shells from South Korea for practice and training as well as limiting what it sends to Ukraine and Israel says a lot.
Totally agree, the Russian are wise to not be goaded by the CIA/MI6 machinations. They have their plans and they seem to be working out for them. Some on this chat have spent too many days watching Hollywood war movies. This won't be over in a 2 hr timeframe. Their will be no over the top response. That's not how the escalation dominance works, as you say, Julianne.
The west is desperate for some lurid escalation opening up threats of WWIII/nuclear holocaust to fracture the iron clad Alliance of Russia sympathisers and supporters, causing China say, to pressure Russia into some panicky deal to freeze everything and avoid armageddon! But the Russians have to start it which is why all we have is western verbiage and cranking out escalations Russia has managed perfectly well within the terms of its preferred engagement. The Russians are studiously not playing the western game. Why would they? Slowly, slowly catchy monkey..... as the saying goes. Meanwhile Russia periodically reminds the west that if it uses its tool , say, to bomb Moscow it must expect a proportionate response.
Histrionics, arm-flapping & domestic terrorism can't hold a candle to fundamental escalation dominance.
Victor's peace for Russia
Too many have been watching Hollywood SPECIAL FORCES movies. You know, where you send in a gang of hard-asses, preferably led by a non-binary trannie, who kill thousands of the enemy without having to change mazazines.
Reading your comment made me think, what is the short version of it?
COGNITIVE DISSONANCE!
And there is no other way but to prove it piecemeal for everyone to see - exactly as THE TRUTH - GOD ALMIGHTY - is doing it meticulously and diligently since THE BEGINNING OF TIME!
Khodorkovsky sounded really intelligent but what was his conclusion? Does he prefer dividing up Ukraine or a World War in the farce of "free democratic" world? Kallas was more clear, even if she sounded completely unintelligent 😀
KK is looking and sounding more and more like a clone of the First Lady VdL - they have the technology and it works
They have 'tools'
The KK clone tool missiles the Ukraine is begging for in order to guarantee Final Victory
He's just working the drama act, in hope for more aid. His opinion not really worth much tbh
He's an oligarch. 'Nuff said.