We start today with a new Hollywood production that must be seen to be believed for its crass dramatization and phony caricaturization of the war by the actor Zelensky:
Correct, not only are these islands not worthless, they are strategically vital.
It is why the USSR had very detailed plans for taking them back in the days, and presumably Russia retains those.
Also, further east you have Bornholm, and it too is so worthless that the Soviets held it for more than year after WWII and then threatened war if NATO stationed troops on it for quite some time after that.
It might be easier for Russia to overrun the Baltic states by land than try and take and hold those islands from a logistics standpoint. The issue is more peace time interdiction to mess with Russian trade that is the problem.
I didn't say that Russia wanted to overrun the Baltics. I just meant that if military force was required to open that waterway, it would probably be easier to overrun the Baltics. Those islands are small and easy targets of missiles and drones.
Those islands are 1000 km away from the nearest Chinese land. Furthermore, what China wants there isn't to cut SLOC (shipping lines of communication), it's to drill the sea floor for resources, and perhaps sink other people's warships, or prevent other people from claiming that area as their own.
In contrast, Baltic Sea is ~200 km wide. This compares to the range of Harpoons of ~190 km.
I am not a military officer, if that's what you're after. However, I'm able to do basic arithmetic, which puts me above 90% of the commentariat. :) I also know how to look up stats on military hardware and can even measure distances on a map, which altogether means I'm a force to be reckoned with. xD
But I'm not a military officer and have had no operational training, no.
Imagine you go to an outdoor paintball range for a friend's birthday party something, and you meet the biggest douchebags in the world there who go there every single day and have invested thousands of $$ on gear. That's basically your average freelance merc in terms of personality and disposition.
Sorry, not my experience. True, these guys aren't the smartest I have ever run into, but they usually have valid experience in the forever wars. They've been under fire and seen death. They don't jump at explosions.
That all said, it probably isn't good prep for the conditions on the ground in Ukraine. Being in the maw of the Russian Army is pretty close to the maximal challenge offered on this planet. The scale of the indirect fire threat is different and worse. Getting a few mortar rounds lobbed at you and a Soviet small rocket here and there is one thing, and dealing with two or three 152 shells buried under the road as an IED...quite another to have those same shells being fired at you consistently.
You missed the most important piece of news - another Voronezh-M strategic early warning radar was attacked, this time in Orsk.
There was no damage this time - the drone fell some distance away from it - but the intent is clear.
Also, Orsk is 1,500 km away from Ukraine, and by straight line the drone would have to fly over Kazakhstan territory. So quite likely it was in fact launched from Kazakhstan. This was a large airplane-type drone. Just as the drone that hit the radar in Armavir may well have been launched from Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, or even ships in the Black Sea.
Given that there was no immediate response to the attack in Armavir, what immediately followed was another attack. Who would have guessed...
Next on the menu presumably are the radars in Kaliningrad, Leningrad oblast, and perhaps even the one in Belarus. Given that drones (the source of which continues to not be established) have hit objects as far from Ukraine as Vyborg, there is no technical barrier to it.
1) Militarily it only makes sense for those systems to be attacked as a preparation for first strike.
2) Because of that, the attacked side is supposed to consider this a launch-on-warning trigger
3) The side that attacks knows this, thus such an act is incredibly risky, and would only be done as a true preparation for a first strike.
Which reinforces the whole loop.
Where this breaks down is if the leadership of the attacked side is compromised and is not actually ready to strike back. Then you can use such attacks as a political tool to force submission.
Or it could be a faint just to make the Russians panic and strike first. Your stunts and disinfo noise are not going to modify Russias industrial war approach. Suck it up.
An actual nuclear attack (tactical and otherwise) generally occurs almost immediately after nuclear early warning systems and nuclear radars have been taken out. One attack immediately follows the next. This is based on Cold War military war games conducted during the 1950s.
With all the technological development that has gone in the past 70-years, taking out air defense early warning systems has become imperative. Even with hypersonic missiles you still have to provide a defense.
No, for one this is underestimating the sheer amount of equipment Russia has. Russia has lost less then 2% of its S-400 systems. It is producing them faster then they are being destroyed.
Even if a narrow window was opened for a "first strike" it wouldn't prevent Russia from launching thousands of nukes back at the USA.
It would be a mistake for NATO to do this as it would guarantee Russia wins the nuclear war.
Nope, it is absolutely stupid and guaranteed suicide. Even if they destroy all such radars, Russia will still be able to launch a retaliatory nuclear strike. Actually they just continue their stupid escalation game. They are trying to provoke Russia to overreact, most likely for a tactical nuclear strike on Ukraine. The US really wants to drag Europe into a war with Russia. They need Russia to do something serious that will make a lot of noise and cause significant damage to Ukraine. They will use this as a justification for allowing Ukraine to launch long-range Western missiles on old Russian territory, as well as for sending some more or less significant NATO troops into Ukraine.
Well, that's mostly why I ignored it: because the attack failed and thus is not entirely verifiable if it even happened.
If true, though, it does obviously present quite a problem, but could also conversely be evidence of Russian MOD finally learning from mistakes and protecting these valuable assets successfully.
It is also part of the distraction-panic reaction to Russian interference with star link, lest a head of verbal steam on that issue be allowed to undermine the confidence of Ukrainian front line troops in their own eyes in the skies protection.
Never forget the mirroring tactic which is being used all over the place now, so pervasively you can get a handy glimpse of what is going on simply by reversing the named parties! Narrative has always played the western lead in this conflict and the object is still to TALK Russia into submission/internal collapse.
Propaganda saturation has thickened considerably since Russia swept down to Lyptsi & Volchansk--spiked up a bit too w/ fog of war. Concern Trolls & the chatterati are callousing their fingertips, hitting the keyboard so hard. Kind of reminiscent of the early days of the SMO, that tsunami of sanctimony & righteous condemnation.
There is a special new class of brainwashed dummies that the SMO has spawned. The ones that will comment "it is no big deal, just a pin prick" even after Moscow is a pile of radioactive ashes.
Do you have any idea what has happened since Thursday? Clearly not. So let me explain it to you in simple terms -- this is much much worse than even the events of October 1962. If that strike in Armavir had happened in October 1962, we would not be here today, with me having to educate you. Fortunately that line was not crossed back then.
Yeah, that's what I thought also. Where is this sanctimonious drivel going? So Putin is a idiot, because he doesn't strike with nuclear bombs first which will end us all? Putin is an idiot, because he can't control and protect thousands of miles of borders? Newsflash for GM, nobody can.
Is this all they have to offer? First it was, Russia is going down because of fake GDP numbers, then Russia is going to loose because all their advantages are null because corruption, against an opponent who is far more corrupt? And now its what, talking them more into submission? Making them nervous? Doesn't work it seems ^^
I wish they would hurry. The CIA/MI6/Mossad Dr. Strangeloves are losing control of their Frankenstein monsters, as usual. That these are drone strikes, and not missile strikes, against Russian strategic missile defense systems would indicate to me that the tail is trying to wag the dog and start a wider war. There are diabolical forces at work here. Please... Russia... end this thing before one of the various lunatics starts World War III.
I think a lot of people think Russia is fighting Ukraine. It is fighting NATO. Ukrainian dead don't matter. Getting Russia does, and they aren't going to stop. They aren't afraid of war. They want to kill people, and they aren't afraid of Putin or God.
the problem with the TALK strategy is that it is echo-chamber situation. if 'west' is not talking TO Russia but instead constantly talking ABOUT Russia, it is totally meaningless. Along with pincushion 'strikes' that 'will bring Russian will to fight down to their knees and they will surrender', really? REALLY?
I have heard so much of it (including from GM here which is either totally pessimistic-depressed follower of Girkin/etc or UA asset) over few years that 'Russia is losing', 'Russia has lost', 'Russia will surrender <insert date here>'. I have heard from such folks that on summer of 2022, no, fall of 2022, winter of 2022, summer of 2023, etc. 'Just about now'...
Guys/gals, the TALK strategy (we will say mean things about them to ourselves without them even knowing that happen) is totally stupid as strategic plan.
Objectively the situation is much worse now than it was in 2022, so yes, Russia is losing.
If Russia can get to the Polish border in the next 6 months, then we can talk about Russia winning. How realistic is that?
In the real world Russia is gradually losing its long-range strike advantage, the US is moving into Sweden and Finland, Russian cities are bombed daily, strategic systems are attacked, etc. etc.
And the front is a stalemate because of drones.
It is a much, much more unfavorable situation than when the SMO started. And the SMO started precisely in order to prevent that situation from developing.
P.S. Everything Strelkov said in March 2022 - about the need to mobilize fully immediately, about how the window of opportunity is being missed, and how Ukraine will counterattack turned out to be true. But since then the Kremlin has done nothing beyond what was needed to stabilize things along the existing front lines. Even though it was clear to everyone with a realistic understanding of the situation that what had to be immediately done was to mobilize fully and to severe the connection between Ukraine and NATO, so that this does not spiral into Putin having to start WW3 or be the last Russian leader in history.
I think you are extremely biased and very off base here. especially relying on bipolar personality disorder like Strelkov information. EVERYTHING he said was wrong. Instead, i suggest you turn on Ishenko and listen for a little bit as he talks plenty just about what you are talking about
- 'get to the Polish border'. WHY???? the very intent and communicated by NATO was 'we will create a new Afganistan for Russia in Ukraine'. No, no , no. You only want to ever come into the territory that wants to be with you and even then, very slowly so you do not overextend yourself. Do not play into NATO hands and forget the whole 'Polish border by day X' BS. No, that is good way to kill your economy
- 'nuke one small country and USA would back down'. Really? and what is not? what if USA decides to nuke 'one small oblast', just to show it also has 5 thousand nuclear warheads (plus France and UK ,etc). Then what? Stupid, irresponsible, and suicidal for Russia to do that. absolutely not
- 'mass mobilization in 2022'. total insanity, especially from economic perspective. same for 'sever the connection between Ukraine and NATO', that is total BS that Russia cannot (and absolutely should not be involved in).
Please turn off the BS artists of doom and gloom and hear a little bit of realists. поспешай не торопясь is the name of the game. not about 'rushing to Polish border' or whatever. build your economy. maintain social and economic stability. maintain massive diplomatic advantage that global majority (85% of the world support), encourage development. and lastly, all of these 'gurus' are incredibly arrogant to be telling 'Kremlin has done nothing'. Listen to Truhan for a little bit, listen to actual real military, no manic depressive 'experts' on the coaches in momma's basement that tell Russia to destroy lives in tens of millions of people in Russia, destroy its economy completely and shutter as a country.
Turn off 'total mobilizations' and 'limited nuclear strike' idiots, they do nothing for you.
> - 'get to the Polish border'. WHY???? the very intent and communicated by NATO was 'we will create a new Afganistan for Russia in Ukraine'.
Why? Because you have no choice. Afghanistan is much better than the current situation in which Ukraine is used as a fig leaf from behind which to launch attacks into Russia. Were missiles hitting Moscow from Afghanistan in the 1980s? No. Not even Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan were affected in any real way. Well, very soon missiles will be flying towards core Russia from Ukraine. Just as drones already are in mass quantities.
And they will be doing so even if Ukraine is reduced to Lvov and the surroundings.
The military-technical realities mandate that Russia takes over the whole thing. And then it will have to convert the people there into being Russians, however long it takes, and just end the whole Ukrainian project once and forever; whoever doesn't like it can go to Canada. If the Kremlin doesn't do that, it will be in a world of hurt in perpetuity. That the current Kremlin doesn't have the stomach for it does not change the strategic imperative.
BTW, among the whole constellation of "experts" on the war that were spawned shortly after February 2022, one of the few realistic voices has been Mark Sleboda. Note that for a long time he was saying western Ukraine is too much trouble to bother with, but in the last few weeks/months he has changed his tune (and freely admits he was in error previously too) -- "all the way to the Polish border it is, there is no other choice left" is what he says now. I knew that on the morning of the initial invasion, it is taking time for people to understand it, but some of them gradually are. You might see the light one day too.
>- 'nuke one small country and USA would back down'. Really? and what is not? what if USA decides to nuke 'one small oblast', just to show it also has 5 thousand nuclear warheads (plus France and UK ,etc). Then what? Stupid, irresponsible, and suicidal for Russia to do that. absolutely not
Do you have other solutions? Currently Putin has three possible active moves:
1) Fold. In which case he will be the last Russian leader, the country will be broken up and the pieces occupied by the Americans.
2) Launch an all-out preemptive nuclear strike hoping he has enough BMD for sufficiently much of Russia to survive somehow at the end of it. Problem is the S-500s are late with the rollout, and so are the Sarmats, and most other of the latest strategic systems.
3) A Hail-Mary escalate-to-deescalate move, to show lethal intent without striking the US directly and giving them a chance to stand down. The Karaganov option. This also has practical benefits in terms of finishing the war by destroying NATO logistics.
The fourth option is to continue with not doing anything. In which case what he will get is a strategic decapitating first strike from the US. That is quite certain at this point.
What do you propose to do?
>- 'mass mobilization in 2022'. total insanity, especially from economic perspective. same for 'sever the connection between Ukraine and NATO', that is total BS that Russia cannot (and absolutely should not be involved in).
This is the problem -- Russia is governed by economists. What you think was a "total insanity" and what the situation mandated are totally different things. It was absolutely vital to immediately mobilize all available resources, come down from Belarus and take control of the Polish border.
Guess what would have happened if that had been done? We would not be about to have NATO missiles launched towards Moscow soon.
Guess what happened because this was not done? We are now about the have NATO missiles launched towards Moscow soon.
If Ukraine had been decisively defeated and fully occupied before NATO got involved, there would have been a lot of teeth gnashing, sanctions, etc., but no WW3. If there are any historians left to analyze what happened in the future, Putin will be evaluated as the same kind of naive idiot that the three cousins who launched WWI were.
>maintain massive diplomatic advantage
What does the "massive diplomatic advantage" mean if you are a pile of radioactive ashes?
You are completetely incorrect and once again misrepresenting reality for your cutesy little troll game.
Launch on warning only holds with real damage to Russia's warning system. This has not happened, not even remotely close. The Russian systems are robust, less then 1% have been damaged.
Since you predicted the collapse of Russia in 3-6 months, we will soon see if you were correct or more likely full of hot air.
The west is evidently attacking as many early ICBM warning radars so it can launch a first strike on Russia. Putin and friends should stop being nice and launch a first strike on US/NATO forces and cities and get it over with. I know he doesn't want to burn the globe while there's a chance to resolve it without getting to that, but his "mercy and prudence" does not telegraph well to westoid elites who do not think in such terms.
The westoid elites might only, and its -might- only feel something when all their cities, relatives and offspring are incinerated as they are incinerated too. They do not care about their own people for they view themselves as superior over the peons they rule over.
Putin and co should just come out on national TV, state that the west has attacked Russia's nuclear deterrent infrastructure multiple times, and that with the conclusion of his telecast the strategic missile forces will launch all their weapons. And then follow through with it. The amount of panic that will strike the NATO command shall then be the last thing they know as megaton warheads rain down on all their cities and military bases. The west is then fully purified with atomic flame, thereby allowing true freedom and democracy to return as the globe burns for a short while.
But Putin will never do the above. Too calm, restrained and deliberate he is. He will wait for the westoid elites to conduct their WMD attacks on Russia first, which is too late.
Don't yet launch everything, just wipe out one of the more rabidly Russophobic NATO countries, and in such a way that it will not trigger automatic launch-on-warning strike from the US. Poland, Romania, Finland, those are good candidates. You can do it with hypersonics flying very fast, it will be over with in 10-15 minutes. No nuclear winter, it's too small of a scale, etc.
Then you give the US the choice to stand down, or everything gets launched and we all die.
That's kind of what the likes of Karaganov are calling for.
The problem is that you are not sure that the lunatics in DC are not crazy enough to not hear even that warning. And Russia is not prepared for nuclear war. The last two years should have been spent doing that, but they were wasted. North Korea is presumably ready -- with bunkers for the population and stockpiles of food and other necessities. Russia isn't.
They are most at risk. They know they are defenseless and there is no way that anyone is wasting much effort on defending them. Despite what they say. I don't know why they were admitted to NATO. It was foolish without Russia itself.
Yes, due to Putin's prudence, he is probably going with that.
But you see, if Russia isn't prepared for nuclear war. The entire west definitely isn't.
In either case, with megaton nukes hitting major and minor cities, as well as military bases or stockpiles, most of a population will die from the lack of infrastructure to support them after the explosions anyway.
But I'm sure surviving westoid elites will somehow frame it as a victory for themselves anyway.
The elites presumably plan on launching first, giving them time to board their private jets towards their mansions and bunkers in Australia and New Zealand.
If they ever dare to launch the first strike then them and their families will be forever branded by the most of humanity as a malign cancerours tumor that needs to be treated by any means possible. They wouldn't dare, it's a provocation to either pressure Putin into negotiations or unbalance and make him do the first move. That would allow them to agitate their golem nations against Russia over a few years to launch a real war later.
Additionally, wiping out a country as you propose would make Russia's allies reconsider their partnership by various degrees.
"Don't yet launch everything, just wipe out one of the more rabidly Russophobic NATO countries, and in such a way that it will not trigger automatic launch-on-warning strike from the US. Poland, Romania, Finland, those are good candidates. "
you sound like lindsay graham, or sikorski or the little french corporal (that is in the process of losing new caldonia to CN) or the estonian "let's go get em" choir or the "i love the smell of napalm in the morning" fool.
Everything gets launched or nothing gets launched. You are completely ignorant of nuclear strategy. So ignorant in fact, you have to be paid by someone. I can tell you aren't a stupid person, so why act like one unless there is a motive?
May I ask you where you live? I mean your geographic address. In one of the places (or close to them) which you want Russia to pulverize and turn into radioactive mounts of ash?
Western warmongers who forget that attacks on Russia can result on annihilation of their own homes are one of the driving factors for the West's rush to WW3. It's like that idiot Congressman Mike McCaul's map of Russian territory to hit from Ukraine. Here's an updated map that shows Russian targets in his home congressional district:
Why is it that I don't need to be shown such a map to know the reality of this? I live in the US. So many idiots here. They need comeuppance and a proper sense of humility.
"The west is evidently attacking as many early ICBM warning radars so it can launch a first strike on Russia." Abject nonsense. For starters, it's not "the west" that's attacking a warning radar, it is Kiev, trying to get escalate the current, relatively cold, WW3 into city-killing heat by baiting Russia into a major attack on the west.
The idea of absolutely any attack on an early warning radar being a trigger for unlimited WW3 is the idea of a fool. For example, if some drunk decides to drive by the radar and take shots at it, that's not a trigger for WW3. Likewise, if a well-organized terrorist group, as used to operate out of Chechnya, attacks such a radar that too is not a trigger for WW3. And if a bunch of nazi losers attack such a radar to try to bait Russia into a full-on nuclear escalation, that too is not a trigger.
As for taking out those particular radars so the US could launch a first strike on Russia, that's also the delusion of somebody who doesn't understand the practical details of modern nuclear war at the level of the US and Russia.
ICBMs from the US will detonate over their targets in Russia 30 minutes or less after launch and the same for Russian ICBMs launched at US targets. That time is so short that Russia, like the US, depends on satellites to detect the launch plumes of those ICBMS, detecting launches within seconds of the launch. Russia does not depend on radars that cannot see any ICBMs until they are already in space with only 15 minutes or less before their warheads incinerate their targets.
Those radars also don't do much to help guard against decapitation strikes launched from subs on suborbital trajectories, with a flight time of 9 minutes or less to Moscow for launches from the Baltic Sea in Estonian waters.
Nine minutes is too short a time to get the leadership to safety assuming the first strike is launched when the leadership is known to be at least five minutes away from a very deeply underground bunker. Ripple fire from a sub in Estonian waters would also allow multiple strikes, ten if necessary, one after another, to drill down and kill even a very deeply underground installation. Or, one of the nukes the US could pre-position at its embassy could simply detonate, with zero warning at all.
What those warning radars do is track aircraft that could be delivering tactical or strategic nukes, or the equivalent in relatively low speed nuclear tipped cruise missiles. Those radars also serve as secondary confirmation of inbound ICBMs after initial launch detection by satellite, which is their main function as far as the US is concerned. In the event of a limited strike by the US aimed only at a few military targets, having precise knowledge of the target set would enable Russia to answer in kind without immediately escalating to city killing. That's an important factor of essential interest to the US.
That's a key reason why back when US nuclear policy was run by intelligent, sane adults it was unthinkable for the US to attack those radars. It was strongly in the US's interest that Russia could see limited attacks and not be forced by any launch at all into immediate mass city-killing escalation. That the US allows such attacks now by Kiev proves that the US is no longer run by people who have either the smarts or the sane connection with reality to be trusted with nuclear weapons.
As for any response by the Russian leadership to a nuclear attack by the West or a genuine attack by the West on Russia's nuclear assets, Russia has a very varied and rich choice of options other than mutually assured destruction. It will choose whichever of those many options that work best for Russia.
I concluded my own article on the topic with: "On this Memorial Day, and if we’re going down, let us, keyword & monitor warriors of doom, be as brave as the sinking ‘Titanic’ musicians and enjoy some music from this reminder of America that seems as it has never been." (cue in some Doris Day)
I've seen a "conventional" war. The horrors of it are unimaginable. And since Hiroshima has no more living witnesses of the real hell, we can discuss it as we would the Alekhine's Defense: Scandinavian Variation and its "concept of luring the opponent into creating a liability in the form of a large pawn structure." We're lured and lulled into madness without even being aware of it.
Thanks for the link to that article. It's a good overview, but the author goes a bit too far in not distinguishing strategic from intermediate range situations. For example, he writes "These locations are chosen to optimize the radar’s detection capabilities and ensure that any missile launch can be detected as early as possible."
"Any" missile launch? Since when can a 6,000 km radar see over 8,000 km away to detect a launch from a US silo in Wyoming? Russia's Voronezh system plays the same role as US strategic early warning radars: confirming launches spotted by satellite and getting better tracking info to confirm the targets of those launches.
I should have added, confirming the targets of launches is not so easy given that Voronezh (and the US equivalent) radars don't get visibility of the launched payloads until they are far enough along in their trajectories to have ejected their shrouds and possibly even until the reentry vehicles (RVs, the conical package containing the warhead and protecting it during reentry with ablative materials) start being flicked off the bus carrying them. Those warheads are relatively small objects, less than a meter and a half long and much less than half a meter wide, which also have a low radar cross section as a side effect of the ablative materials that cover them, so they're not so easy to track.
In addition, US warheads are not as maneuverable as current generation Russian warheads, but they're maneuverable enough for Voronezh tracking to be a big help in predicting their final targets.
On the plus side, it's good that the Voronezh teams are being given a lot of on the job training by Ukrainian launches of ATACMS and other missiles at targets in Russia, both old territories and new. That will be good preparation if the war escalates to US and NATO attacks, either with conventional weapons or with nuclear packages carried by aircraft-launched missiles or by intermediate range ballistic missiles.
The Voronezh sites will almost certainly be targets for any tactical nukes so they might not have a very long time to use the experience they gain today, but I suppose every bit helps in such situations.
I have a very bad feeling about where all this is going. Here's hoping that if there are tactical nuclear strikes on military targets those will bring the West to its senses before the city killing starts.
Your comments in this thread are truly brilliant. Your last sentence, "Here's hoping that if there are tactical nuclear strikes on military targets, those will bring the West to its senses before the city killing starts," inevitably brought The Godfather to mind:
"Who's being naive, Kay?"
I mean this with all respect and a touch of gallows humor.
I have worked with radios based on this technology, probably pretty similar to the Voronezh-DM in mode of operation. They have a high power consumption and rely on the bouncing effect off the troposphere for the long range, the over the horizon effect. We used to call the effect "skipland" on CB radios and AM radio. It doesn't always work, so you can't rely on this kind of thing in exclusion of other technologies.
Upvoted because you're basically right but still... when you pick a dog breed for its viciousness because that suits your purpose, you can train the heck out of it for it to be the point and click killer you want, but still, sometimes it will go out and attack whatever it wants regardless of what you want.
I don't believe this and I have good reasons for not believing it. If you think we had full control over the Afghan puppet regime of Karzai or the Diem or Thieu or other South Vietnamese regimes, or the Iraqi governments post-2003, I am here to say you are wrong. We certainly do not have control over the RoKs or Japanese or Taiwanese or certainly the Israelis. There is a degree of control, but only a degree, and the moment that these regimes saw/see a survival benefit in acting against US interests, they would take it. The Ukrainians are a particularly pathological case. I've watched some of the internecine arguments and I know what we withhold from some of these countries. The belief we can force them to do 'anything' is misplaced. The art of the possible remains paramount.
I couldn't have ever said that better. Well done. Other than the comments about Kiev. The US doesn't have the control you assume it does. The nutbars in Kiev, the dead-enders, are now out of control. The US, to regain control, would have to assure them on some reasonable basis that Ukraine would survive. They cannot. Therefore, this kind of thing is going to continue until the end comes. Then i'm afraid that crushing the Bandera will have to be repeated again, hopefully more succinctly this time.
Where are you planning to be when this happens? The "westoid elites" know exactly where they'll be, and they're fairly sure they'll be safe. But I don't think they're planning to let people like you and me in. Yet you sound as if you think you'll be here to enjoy the "freedom and democracy"...
It is clear that Nato doesn't want to slug it out on the battle field where they don't stand a chance . They are training for the kill shot . It has been two years free education, for the entire western military establishment, to learn everything about the Russian defenses. With the aid of AI analysis and targeting solutions, the Russians can be in big trouble. The western military used to say for a long time "it is not going to be a fair fight" Wake up!
The West is a bunch of dwarf, peacetime armies following the lead of a very large US military establishment that has been corrupted by 30 years of doctrine and practice focused on fighting insurgencies, not combat with a first world peer. Changing what the huge US military establishment does is like trying to steer an oil tanker: move the wheel and after many minutes it changes course, slightly.
That's not something you can change overnight by changing software. It will take many months of trial and error to make even relatively small changes, and fixing institutional blind spots could take years. For example, if you look at the recent NATO military exercises in detail, it's just amazing that they are so unrealistic: they assume NATO's and the US's rear areas and command and control won't be wiped out in moments. They assume that command posts that have the radio electronic signatures of a super nova will somehow go unnoticed and will survive the first few minutes of a real war with Russia.
The US has not remotely internalized what it means to fight an adversary who can shoot back, and shoot back in a situation where the US does not have overwhelming control of the skies and the battlefield. Their plans are based on the idea that the airfield at Dover, Delaware, will continue to exist so that superheavy cargo aircraft can take off and, without being shot down despite their huge radar cross sections, lack of defenses and very slow speeds, waddle safely across the Atlantic to reprovision US forces in Europe.
No, it's not going to be a fair fight, for the same reason all those American veterans of Iraq who were fighting in Ukraine were shocked at the reality of Russian battlefield supremacy, with the Americans being the ones cowering in trenches as everyone around them was being killed by Russian shelling. The US's bloated, inexperienced army will be facing by far the most combat ready and most experienced army in the world, the Russian army. The US and NATO will get cut to pieces and no belief in magic wands or mythological kill shots will save them.
I find it odd that military exercises have not adjusted to the realities of war. Its not like western military commanders are unaware, in fact the NCO's are mostly screaming about it since they are the ones who will be actually involved in the fighting.
NATO's "armies" for a long time have been parade ground toy armies. They're basically props for the occasional propaganda-driven "military exercises" to fool their absurdly unmilitary citizenry. Really, what are you going to do with an "army" like Estonia's that has, what? 6,000 active duty soldiers? Russia kills that many men in Ukraine in three days during active assaults, and that's against a Ukrainian army where there remain a significant number of men who have survived for years and know a thing or two about not dying in minutes.
With the exception of the US (which lives in its own alternate universe) the larger the NATO army, the less the nation wants war with Russia. A good example is Poland, which has a respectably large army of 200,000. That's enough men with military training to know down to the marrow of their bones they'll be annihilated in a direct war with Russia, so that's why Poland does all it can to press right to the edge of conflict with Russia while carefully trying to make sure a direct conflict with Russia won't happen.
And then you have countries like the UK, where (to his credit) Sunak understands that the war with Russia the UK is cooking up does indeed require full mobilization and universal conscription. But he's lacking the sense of reality to think he has years of time to get that done.
I find the whole "NATO trainers" at this stage to be absurd. A ukrainian officer who is still alive is worth 1000 NATO trainers at this stage. In fact the NATO countries should be pulling these guys OUT of Ukraine to help train their own guys.
Add to the fact that western military commanders "have not adjusted to the realities of war" an additional fact, which is that no economy in the west has ramped up its war-footing or weapons industries or has engaged in any kind of ramping at all, except of the lip-flapping hand-wringing variety. They've been thinking Enola Gay & Little Boy the whole way
Alas, the U.S.'s bloated, inexperienced army will end up firing the missiles.
To me, even scarier than Dr. Strangelove's Major T.J. "King" Kong howling "Wooo-hoo" as he's riding The Bomb toward Russian territory is President Kennedy's line from "13 Days": "And they fire their missiles... And we fire ours."
The most interesting thing about the Cuban missile crisis (called the "Caribbean" crisis in the USSR) is all the details they don't teach in the US. For example, not one American in 10,000 knows that the USSR moved nuclear missiles into Cuba in answer to the US moving of nuclear missiles into Turkey, which at the time bordered the USSR. They also don't know the crisis was resolved when the US agreed to remove its nuclear missiles from Turkey in exchange for the USSR removing its nuclear missiles from Cuba, a part of the agreement that Khrushchev agreed to keep secret so the US would not lose face.
Americans also don't know that Soviet submarine captains were authorized to fire nuclear weapons to break the blockade and that the choice of a single captain not to use the nuke he normally would saved the day.
And... last but not least almost nobody knows that during the crisis there supposedly were four nuclear explosions in space: two by the US and two by the USSR, said to be "routine" tests that for some insane reason proceeded despite the hair trigger circumstances. That's a revelation from a recent book by an American author which in general is said to be very well researched and sourced, but I've not see confirmation of that elsewhere (nor have I had time to look).
Nuclear tests were common in the early 60s. Test ban treaties were in the future - the next year in fact. It didn't seem as provocative then as it would now.
Khrushchev won that exchange, he didn't need to gloat. Between that and the Bay of Pigs, it was probably an encouragement to take out Kennedy by the deep state.
No one is idiot enough to buy the Oswald story by now, hopefully. Imagine using a Soviet defector who defected back as your purported assassin, put him in a really bad spot to make the kill shots, have Kennedy's head blown out from a front shot that knocked out the occipital bone at the back of the skull that Oswald could not have fired, and then having Oswald shot on national TV to shut him up. Then the key records are sealed for 75 years, that doesn't smell like a coverup to me.
We have been privy, to a very small extent, to what it has taken the Russian military to become a wartime military. The US will have to go through the same process as will the rest of NATO. The RU military has the advantage of being "one people" for lack of a better phrase. NATO doesn't have that luxury. We have already been witness to the expertise and coordinated command ability of NATO embedded in the UA and leading UA troops. Is there any reason to believe things would be different if it was officially announced that NATO is crossing the borders. Is there any reason to believe that the US would be a trusted leader after its mid-east debacles? The panic of the west is evident everywhere. If NATO were a professional military org. this panic would not be there.
It seems like a somewhat childish answer to me. The fact that it didn't succeed, as well as the previous one. is secondary to the fact that they launched an attack (if confirmed) on a site over 1500 km away from Ukraine without too many problems. They have been launching drone attacks for 2 months, for example in the Tatarstan region, again 1500 km away, with damage to plants, but Simplicius has never mentioned it. The mainstream made vulgar propaganda for two years painting the Russians as crazy, incapable, inept and weak, but the "counterinformation" then made propaganda painting the US as crazy, incapable, inept and weak. Two stadium fans who profess to be "balanced". And BTW very short-sighted, The Ukraine-Russia war outcome is marginal compared to the objectives, and the very probable Russian victory on the field will not change them.
Actually it makes perfect sense for them to not be protected.
Because any attack on these is supposed to be a launch-on-warning trigger, and the enemy knows that, thus would only attack them in the opening phases of a real attack, thus making it all the more vital for such attacks to be a launch-on-warning trigger.
But if leadership does nothing after the first such attack, then they become easy soft targets.
And the first such attack was in fact a month ago, against the "Container" radar in Mordovia. Then we had the hit on the Voronezh-M in Armavir, the attempt on the Voronezh-M in Orsk, and reportedly another attempt on Armavir (to finish it off because it may not have been fully disabled). Those three attacks happened in a span of 4-5 days.
The Kremlin isn't even acknowledging they are happening...
The military is really not to blame here, this is entirely on the political leadership/
Seems this site has been recently invaded by a small cadre of self-important armchair generals whose delusion tells them they are of greater stuff than Russia's General Staff. If only Putin would listen to them and take the first step to wipe out the world - perhaps "anti-West neocons" would be an adequate term for them as they exhibit all the characteristics and temperament of Western neocons.
LOL exactly, it would be comical if it wasn't sad to see how easy it is to manipulate with a fresh push of propaganda. I mean the actual battlefield is catastrophic for "The West" so now what? Yes, Russia has lost the nuclear war already, just read the comments. The biggest "don't look here, look over there" I have seen since the beginning of this mess.
I agree with you that this attack should not be omitted in a fresh report of the situation. You could be anti-western or pro-russia (same but different) all as much as you want but to ignore this type of operations is either wishful thinking or pure ignorance. The truth is that neither the good Simplicius or the Gerasimov Stavka knows to handle this threat right now. The Alliance has stepped up their ”strategic ambiguety” aimed at creating uncertainty and confusion yet harming or exhausting the Russian side. I do no think West is so stupid to prepare a first strike. Russias spies would have knowledge of such a plan or discussions. It could be a Ukrainian initiative to poke the Bear into nuke response or it could be a dual-plan with US support to harm the early-warning structure without starting WW3 and blind the southern eyes covering Iran. And we all know what that latter mean. I also see the same provocative manners from late 2021 and early 2022 when US called out Russia: dont you dare attack Ukraine - we will crush you. When Russia invaded the Western trap fell with massiva sanctions and theft/freezing of Russia assets in West. They were rather smug and self-confident those days. These operation are both provocations, show of ”strength”, test of russian will/patience/fear and at the sam time doing substantial damage. I am thankful that Putin and the Russian MoD are not responding in hasty way.
I see it differently - the whole Ukraine operation was designed to get us to this point, where the US is striking at Russian strategic systems hiding from behind the Ukrainian proxy's back.
Because doing it openly and suddenly would have resulted in WWIII.
But if you slowly boil the frog, you can achieve strategic superiority.
So far Putin has been masterfully played at each step. Go back to early 2022 - did you think that in the third year of this Russian cities will be bombed daily (and it isn't even just the immediate border areas -- today there was a mass UAV attack on Oryol, with civilians killed) and the Kremlin will just pretend it isn't happening and will not do anything in response? Let alone nearly daily attacks on the absolutely most critical strategic systems.
And it isn't just drones, there is an important radar station in Crimea too, which was attacked with US missiles last week, but you don't hear much about it at all.
When the open strikes on "official" Russian territory begin, and no nukes fly in the other direction, you can just write off Russia and start preparing for how your are going to live in the kind of world in which the evil empire has conquered everything and there is no escape from it (except perhaps in North Korea). Because that will mean that the Kremlin has made the final decision to fold instead of fighting back.
I share your concern over the boiling frog developments. Leaders, people, you and me, Simplicious we all get accustomed to new events that have not been experienced before. That US/NATO provoked Russia's invasion of Ukraine should have been more shocking than the invasion itself. As you and others have written before, it all started much earlier - already when Putin became president in 2000. The kettle was stirred in Chechnya and Georgia. Increased temperature in Ukraine in 2004 and has continued since then. Maidan and Syria were also temperature risers. Nordstream 2 was a red line. So was the bombings of Crimea bridge and attacks on Nuclear plants in Ukraine. When we see attacks on Belgorod, russian airfields in Motherland and now even attacks on strategic installations for early warning of nuclear attacks we should be concerned and ”wake up”. But it has not been a US policy to achieve a first strike on Russia or do it behind the proxy of Ukraine war. It was all,a strategy of” containment”. I called it strangulation. The US goal has been, and still is, a break up of Russia in smaller states they later can pick one after another. I think US/NATO did a big miscalculation and now they are trying to find other ways to get the upper hand. I think Gerasimov is more concerend than Simplicius about the Atacms wiping out AD-systems and radarinstalations on Crimea, although Simplicious lifted the issue in an earlier article. I give you that I would never have thought that US proxys would get away with bombing Russian motherland. But I rather have Putin at the rudder than Medvedev….
You wrote, "I rather have Putin at the rudder than Medvedev…." which hints at my deepest fear since 2017, the last time I was in Russia (and Ukraine, for that matter). I've been there when the elections were getting ready, with people funding Yury Luzhkov, and were 100% sure their money would make that Mayor of Moscow the Russian president when Yeltsin appointed Putin.
I always worried that Putin might end up being perceived as too meek, too mild, almost like a pussy by the more aggressive, militant parts of his military and be replaced. At this point in time, this seems highly unlikely, but had the attack on the Voronezh-M radar, designed to detect and track ballistic and cruise missiles, providing early warning and strategic missile defense capabilities for Russia, succeeded in destroying it (one of the 8 or 10 Russia possesses), everything is possible.
Again, the entire war strategy must always be graded using the scale provided by Putin himself. Russia has neither demilitarized Ukraine, denazified Ukraine, nor made the Donbass safe. In fact at one point Putin aid Russia must denazify Europe and today the opposite is occurring. It is getting late in the day for Russia to begin the war in earnest. Body counts mean nothing, absolutely nothing. When the bombs stop falling on Russian territory and the last Nazi insignia is seen on video, and the Kievan leadership is dangling by meat hooks, then Russia can ease up and pro-Russian spectators can sleep easily. At BEST Russia has currently drawn a stalemate.
I have written a lot of the Russian window of opportunity. They dont have all the time in the world to expect everything going there way. Changes happen. And you are absolutely right about the goals. Bombs are falling inside Russia, there are cocainefueled nazis in Kiev and Ukraine is propped up with weapons from the West. I think a stalemate Korean-style is coming if West pour in troops in Ukraine. And it will be presented as a US victory over the Dark forces. Therefore Russia should step up. But I do care of the body counts. On both sides. It is all so meaningless. We know the Culprits but I also accuse the people and common citizens of the West. They are so ignorant at their own fate.
Nobody in EU pr USA would cry about the residents of Moscow or Sankt Petersburg. Anyone who had ever been in contact with the western elites knows this. Only Putin does not understand and does not want to understand this. In any war, if you are afraid of your opponent, you shall be crushed.
Putin even didn't dare to destroy 750 KV network in Ukraine and win the war by that single move.
Whatever metrics the West is using to decide if they're winning or not are managed to hell and back - now completely useless for figuring out the situation on the ground.
The German initiative to collect Patriot systems even the Germans admit fell flat, the Spanish gvmt promised three, but appear to have backed down
This reminds one of the famous bla bla the Czech screetched about having sourced 800,000 (+) artillery shells from 'anonymous', only to see this fade from the newscycle and no shells delivered, as far as I know
What about those Israeli systems which they wish to dump on some poor unsuspecting customer? Would these not do? Or can they not be sent to Ukraine?
In all fairness, Gotland is not a worthless island, it's been a focal point for trade and defense for many centuries. Anyone knowing the history of the area should agree. That being said, obviously it's not a Russian target.
I think you should read more about Gotland strategic significance. US admirals call it a unsinkable Carrier. It was never an offensive Russian target, more a defensive in case NATO closed of Baltic Sea or moved into Sweden. Russia has no means to invade Gotland and even less possibilities to support troops on the ground. If or when US/NATO militarize Gotland with new har ours and airfields it will become a target of Russian missile barrages.
In real life you can't just type in chat "Attack the A point!" and then rush head first into T-80s, then complain about "Russian bias" as you get shot and die like in War Thunder.
The Baltic States saying they will send troops into Ukraine
As these countries are part of NATO - I understand these troops to be subject to NATO control, and that the countries would have to ask NATO to send the troops, or for NATO authorisation to send the troops
Ok, but in that case no NATO Article 5 as they appear to think would apply according to the report S posted, so their 3 and half soldiers and half a barrel of ammunition would all be in vain
Besides as S pointed out, should they not pay attention to their own border with RF, rather than worrying about some one else's
Yes, you are referring to Tobol which has them all bawling - there was a report on this in the previous post
But obviously the Baltics ruling class is not only deeply suspect for it's Nazi collaborationist past, but they have been co opted by the EUUS thinktank academic MIC, and are paid to be as stupid as they can be
Passive aggressive is right, don't mind us we're just live testing our new gadget, please contact customer service
No way NATO countries are going to get anywhere near 300,000, volunteers, conscripts, mercenaries, cash, kenyans, or pressganging
Even if -300, 000 active duty is an absolute minimum, estimates of the numbers of NATO's required for any effective action go up to 1M
Plus 5/6 times this number in support staff
That'll take them many years to put together, plus logistics etc etc
Plus - EU Parliament vote is coming up soon, polls are not looking great for the current EU régime - and very bad for warfighting, will get worse with every RF advance
No article 5 if Poland officially moved troops into Ukraine and engages Russian troops. Same deal if Poland fires at Russian troops from Poland into Ukraine. Article 5 only gets triggered if Russia strikes first and into Poland.
Yes, the Balts appear to be totally delusional. Also, even if Russia invaded NATO, Article 5 is pretty voluntary and entails each country sending whatever they feel like sending.
It seems that the Balts are fulfilling some sort of unstated agreement to 'say out loud' what other NATO countries are careful not to
This appears to have given them the idea they can say what they want, with no reference to reality
If they are afraid of RF invading the Baltics etc as they claim, and that they are 'building a barrier' to prevent this, and putting in arms factories etc, why send some of your very scarce troops out of country ? Unless of course this is merely tokenism
Read the Russian newspaper articles I quoted in another comment - they say these countries are broke, are fighting amongst themselves, competing for EU fvours, are de industrialising rapidly, are being invaded by 'Russian' dissidents, many of whom come from the Ukraine......(ironically) so much so that they fear for their culture and want to force these invaders to learn Baltic and to send their children to Baltic schools and worship....sounds familiar doesn't it
"no NATO Article 5 " NATO Article 5 doesn't mean anything at all. Google it and read it: it's short and to the point.
Contrary to warmonger propaganda, Article 5 does NOT say that an attack on any NATO member MUST result in answering attacks by other NATO members. All it does is require other NATO members to consider the situation and to react as they see fit. That's all. If Russia attacks Estonia, other NATO members are perfectly free to say "We've considered this grave escalation by Russia and we feel the correct response is a harsh condemnation of Russia's action and the recall of our ambassador for consultation." There is nothing at all in Article 5 that requires any NATO country to undertake military action in that situation.
You are right - but they, the EU countries, have to go on pretending article 5 has some value, in order to impress their submissive but soon to vote populations that NATO is an united and effective alliance which will come to the help of the poor small victim countries as well as the rich big etc
The problem is not only can not NATO in general and the bigger countries admit the truth, they pay the Batics to lie, but by this process they all delude themselves as to what they can or can not do, or think they can do
They are still trying to steal the CBR assets, they are still defying ICJ and ICC, they are pretending the RF has a powerful anti EU disinformation campaign, with spies everywhere, who are also burning down armaments factories...and so on
Try it one time! Lie about everything for a day and see what happens
There's a piece which quotes the Finnish MoD which may have some bearing, the author evidently is sincere, but I feel he does not appreciate quite how insincere his and NATO politicians are
"On March 4, our Minister of Defense, Antti Häkkänen, said in a speech he held at the opening of the National Defense Course that “It’s time to recognize the facts. Russia is a threat to the whole democratic world”. Coming from a Finnish Minister of Defense, this is as close as we can get to a declaration of war without actually declaring it.
I consider that this speech was a marker, signaling that Finland is committed to a war against Russia. I naturally sincerely hope that I am wrong about this. However, this is so exceptional coming from a Finnish Minister of Defense that I am having difficulties explaining it by any other motive (I don’t, for example, buy the extreme stupidity argument)."
If you understand how geopolitics, international relations and decision-making at the state level work, then you can come to the conclusion that, in principle, no agreement, no matter what is written in it, guarantees its compliance. There is no higher magical power that will make this happen. Even if this Article 5 had written that if any NATO member was attacked, the United States would immediately launch a nuclear strike on the aggressor, in reality this would never have happened. In reality, no one will create problems for themselves just for the sake of not breaking some kind of agreement in order to solve the problems of another country. Any agreement is respected only if there is some benefit from it. And if it is more profitable not to comply with the agreement, then so be it.
It is only Estonia, Poland and Sweden talking of putting troops in Ukraine, not the whole Baltikum. And of course uncle Sammwould make them a call if they try. I see it as a sign that they either is crumbling NATO into pieces or just doing some good old disinformation/propaganda/test ballons against Russia AND their own people. I think the latter. Whenever chief-evil Stoltenberg talks you can rely that it is NATO talking. All others are either playing individual games or are part of clandestine operations.
The article quoted by S only refers to those three countries
But they all have, well I have'nt counted, but many others have said they will send troops, it's a kind of competition to see who can be the most daringly conformist - Lithuania does so every month, Latvia sometimes says it will sometimes says it won't, but more often yes than no, Finland copies Latvia, but more no so far than yes
These countries are all competing for the same EU and NATO pieces of the pie, and the pie is only so big, not that big at all
They have all the new expenses of NATO adherence and regulations, plus they have to spend more on defence, they have to build fences barriers and protections, they have to pay more for their fuels - so it's only normal that get a return on their investment from the EU
Part of the price is saying what EU/NATO tells them to say, they do not have to mean it, whatever meaning it means to those who are obliged to lie
Whether under NATO aegis or independently, the deployment of troops openly into a country at war is asking for those troops to be targeted for destruction. While the actual stepping foot over the Ukrainian border would not be an act of war, it is likely that the countries in question would treat the deaths of their armed forces while within Ukraine to be a casus belli. With that said, considering we're dealing with Russia here, they'd probably have to either fire on Russian forces or declare war openly to be subject to Russian attack on their home countries. And lets be clear: it would be only the home countries of those who declared war against Russia either by bringing Russian forces under fire or alternatively declaring war against Russia. Technically, moving bodies of foreign troops into one of the annexed oblasts would be enough, also.
Indeed. And here is the ambiguity. If France, Poland and Estonia deploy troops in Western Ukraine and never is attacked and attack no one they will anyway help Ukraine free some reserves to the East. Both US/NATO have excluded boots on ground in Ukraine so I dont think any of the Chihuaha-states will go against it. The missiles are the problem. We have evidence that Brits and Frogs are helping Ukraine to attack Crimea with Storm Shadow/Scalps. We noted one or two attacks deep into Russia and damaging one Radar in Armavir. Those ”helpers” are probably both inside and outside Ukraine. Russia has probably attacked those Command center if they are within Ukraine. This day EU (how they can decide such thing is beyond my understanding) gave green light to Member-state to allow their weapons to be used against target in all of Russia. It will be a decision for each state. Putin declared that ”small states” should think about wich country they are up against. Britain and France is bigger than small so one can assume that Russia will allow Storm Shadows and Atacms to be launched against them? No. I think the answers from Russia will be harsh if suddenly cities bordering Ukraine will be attacked. The problem is that Russia ”allowed” attacks on Crimea. And now comes next step from West.
The problem is that if they come into range of Russian troops they have a choice - either bring their home countries into a war with Russia or flee with their tails between their legs. It's a desperation strategy.
The armaments remain irrelevant. We found this out during the Cold War. Supplying arms to an insurgency by no means affects the outcome much.
This also demonstrates Putin's wisdom in confining the war to the annexed oblasts for the last 2 years or so. At least an argument could be made that foreign troops entering one of them would involve them in a shooting war with Russia. The fact that things are no longer confined there means that Russia feels strong enough to take on all comers.
What most people still don't realize, which should be obvious but it is always misrepresented by all of us, and the media, especially. Article 5 is just saying each member country must get together and make a decision on IF they will use military force, economic force, or do nothing at all. What makes me chuckle is everyone is concerned about any agreement the US is a party to, they have not honored any contract or agreement that did not directly benefit them. If a Chihuahua State gets crushed I will bet my net worth the scumbags in DC will do nothing except send trillions more of taxpayer money. They know for a fact they cannot defeat Russia in a conventional war. End of Story
NATO charter should clearly outline the procedure for suspending a member of the alliance which unilaterally, without permission of member statates, engages in military conflict. Wishful thinking I know.
I still believe this is a war of attrition - Russia bogged down with NATO while Israel continues to poke the bear with Iran - ALL OF THIS boils down to the middle east trade corridors and who in the end will conquer - Russia China Iran (allies in the middle east) versus Israel, USA and NATO.
Surprisingly China's Belt & Road Initiative factors into Israel's war on Hamas in that the hegemon wants to destroy China's ability to get a viable BRI going, which would include Gaza, because the hegemon cannot permit China's ascendancy in trade. Israel is the hegemon's back-stop against China's success
Agree - what this is all about - USA using NATO attempting to block Russia from moving on to the middle east. Israel pokes Iran - Iran attacks Israel the USA attacks Iran and along comes Russia and China and all their new allies. This is where this is all headed. WWIII. In the interim NATO and the USA have been virtually depleted - while China Russia et al are the polar opposite, brilliant chess move by Putin - I also believe nuclear is nothing more than a threat - no one is going to do it.
Exactly. And I think Simplicius has missed all the actions that are being prepared to heighteing the tensions in the Baltic Sea, The goal is of course to strangle St Petersburg and Kaliningrad if Russia gain even more victories in Ukraine.
Have you got a substack covering everything happening in the wider arena regarding the baltics, southern border zones and the wider geopolitical situation? Could you do a 1 or 2 part stack that would take us all 3 days to read please.
:-) Ironic… I dont. And I dont expect Simplicius to manage what an assembled NATO HQ cant fulfill. All I say is that Simplicius are more concerned with the positive signs in Russias warfare than the threats from the West. You can ridicule US/NATO and their minions but they can stir quite a mess if they dare/ get there acts together. We havent seen the last actions in Baltic Sea.
No, he HAS mentioned the tensions in the area a couple of times over the past year or two, and how the Baltics & Finland are playing games with lawfare and geography.
Why would they need islands to interdict trade ships? o.O This isn't the 17th century anymore. You have long-range radars and even longer-range anti-ship missiles.
Or did Ansar Allah not blocade the Red Sea? Bab-el-Mandeb is ~25 km while the distance from Helsinki to Tallin is ~70 km. If Ansar can do it unidirectionally across 25 km (and they mostly don't even hit ships there but they hit them further out, probably for the sake of afterwar peace), then surely Finland and Estonia can do it bidirectionally across 70 km.
I have to critique President Putin for his exceptionally poor performance compared to Mr Zelensky. After more than two years since the start of the SMO, he's managed to burn only 50,000 Ukrainian books. At that rate, it's going to take him another five or six centuries to catch up to Mr Zelensky's 13 million Russian books.
Come on Vlad, get with the program! Target those libraries!
Zelensky has been objectively a much better wartime president than Putin.
Zelensky is out there every night on TV, addressing the country, commenting on current events, maintaining the fighting spirit (sure, it's fake, but it is also fairly effective), and, most importantly, defining clear objectives.
Meanwhile Putin is keeping silent, even as NATO bombs are falling on Russian cities, and has never defined clear objectives, with the only fairly clear message coming from him being that he is looking for a deal, not for actual victory. Which is leaving the Russian public guessing whether there will be yet another betrayal from the Kremlin after an endless series of such treasonous acts going back to the 1960s. All the momentum from the first month of the SMO has long been lost.
Putin clearly stated objectives at the beginning of the SMO and has repeated them since, and they remain unchanged. Wars aren't won on social media, but on the battlefield.
I think we ought to be more charitable to a spectrum of views. The last thing I want in the comments section is a unitary set of opinions or interpretations. Just because someone may say something far out doesn't mean I want them to stop commenting. In the end its part of a vigorous debate and its whats missing from our current leaderships' decision making
One might accept a questioning of Putin's approach, but what really counts as a troll, is saying "Z is a better wartime president than P".
That is not "looking from a different perspective", that is just pie-in-the-sky nearing insanity levels, lol.
Z is an ACTOR, playing at a role. P is a decades-long hard-bitten and hard-fought for Leader of a Superpower, who brought his country back from the brink of destruction and rebuilt it enough to face down the entire collective West and NATO.
"Zelensky has been objectively a much better wartime president than Putin."
If the growing "meat mountain" of dead Ukes is your barometer of "success", I guess you could say the Big Z is way ahead if that's your metric. The heartbroken mothers and girlfriends of DEAD Uke soldiers might quarrel with your insights/conclusions.
A man that plays the piano with his cocktail is a better leader than a man that rides bears and actually communicates with people without using tiktok. I think someone has done too many lines.
Because the first rule of succeeding in something is showing up.
And Putin isn't showing up.
Dozens killed on New Year's even in an act of terror shelling in Belgorod and all we got from him as even an acknowledgement it happened was in response to a question a few weeks later that was really a "what can we do?" shrug off.
I also appreciate having GM around to keep things from getting too Pollyannaish in this forum.
---
If people ever look at a GM post and wonder "Who the heck clicked the Like button on this?", there's a fair chance it was me. (Although not on the one immediately above.)
The facts are irrelevant. Control of the narrative is what matters.
Putin could throw away a restaurant napkin with some Ukrainian scribblings on it and this would be treated as the greatest crime against literature since the burning of the Library At Alexandria, while Ukraine can burn books by the millions and nobody raises a peep.
One small correction. If Poland goes into Ukraine off its own bat that does not bring in NATO. Nor does it invoke any article 5 protection if Polish territory gets bombed as a result. The US has already vetoed NATO troops on the ground and has also restated the article 5 exclusion here- lest any nutty Baltic nation decide to try to bounce old europe-America into real direct combat.
Right! If Estonia and Poland send troops into Ukraine under command of a French contignent it will not trigger any article 5. And we can be sure that no one wants to trigger anything. What it will trigger is a grand rift in the NATO. We can note that Latvia and Lithaunia is rather silent. Sweden as a new member makes a lot posturing and has a warmonger as Chief of Staff. It was interesting to see him make statements about international maritime boundaries for which he has no responsibility. It is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that can comment on Swedish borders. Instead, there was talk of militarizing Åland and starting freedom of navigation operations. Actions, that belong to Finland respective to Estonia, to make decisions about.
Interestingly, that's precisely what John Mearsheimer argues: that the USA won't go to nuclear war over Ukraine; or, indeed anything else in Europe that's not existential. He may be right; or he may be overestimating US rationality. ;)
Go ahead Little Vassal State, step in there and fight the bear so we can learn more of their weak points….assume that is the prevailing wisdom. Such middle school tactics. It’s funny because that is probably going to be what gets us all killed.
Russia's secret weapon is to turn its adversaries into ghastly caricatures of snarlingly vituperative crawlers. Estonia's president Alar Karis wants all the smoke @ the barbecue. OTAN's system is so decrepit, so hollowed-out, so over-hyped, so toothless that it must rely on stunts, propaganda, 'media' wins & posh peace summits in alpine resorts, the point of which is to hand the winning military the terms of capitulation, instead of employing robust & logical battlefield tactics. OTAN's downward trajectory, swift, steep & hypersonic, ensures that it corkscrew into the ground @ Mach 7.
Correct, not only are these islands not worthless, they are strategically vital.
It is why the USSR had very detailed plans for taking them back in the days, and presumably Russia retains those.
Also, further east you have Bornholm, and it too is so worthless that the Soviets held it for more than year after WWII and then threatened war if NATO stationed troops on it for quite some time after that.
Presumably, those USSR plans involved ships of the line.
It might be easier for Russia to overrun the Baltic states by land than try and take and hold those islands from a logistics standpoint. The issue is more peace time interdiction to mess with Russian trade that is the problem.
If they send troops to Ukraine, they are going to be technically at war with Russia and that calculus could change.
As with the sanctions war, these Baltic chihuahuas continue to demonstrate the meaning of "Hoist by his own petard".
I didn't say that Russia wanted to overrun the Baltics. I just meant that if military force was required to open that waterway, it would probably be easier to overrun the Baltics. Those islands are small and easy targets of missiles and drones.
It's not the 17th century anymore. Long-range radar + long-range anti-shipping missiles = naval blocade. Just look at what Ansar Allah did.
Those islands are 1000 km away from the nearest Chinese land. Furthermore, what China wants there isn't to cut SLOC (shipping lines of communication), it's to drill the sea floor for resources, and perhaps sink other people's warships, or prevent other people from claiming that area as their own.
In contrast, Baltic Sea is ~200 km wide. This compares to the range of Harpoons of ~190 km.
I am not a military officer, if that's what you're after. However, I'm able to do basic arithmetic, which puts me above 90% of the commentariat. :) I also know how to look up stats on military hardware and can even measure distances on a map, which altogether means I'm a force to be reckoned with. xD
But I'm not a military officer and have had no operational training, no.
Western merc's:
"We do not do this because it is easy... But because we thought it was easy."
Imagine you go to an outdoor paintball range for a friend's birthday party something, and you meet the biggest douchebags in the world there who go there every single day and have invested thousands of $$ on gear. That's basically your average freelance merc in terms of personality and disposition.
And one of them is wearing a ghilly suit
Yeah and they only ever play against newbies so they seem really good.
Sorry, not my experience. True, these guys aren't the smartest I have ever run into, but they usually have valid experience in the forever wars. They've been under fire and seen death. They don't jump at explosions.
That all said, it probably isn't good prep for the conditions on the ground in Ukraine. Being in the maw of the Russian Army is pretty close to the maximal challenge offered on this planet. The scale of the indirect fire threat is different and worse. Getting a few mortar rounds lobbed at you and a Soviet small rocket here and there is one thing, and dealing with two or three 152 shells buried under the road as an IED...quite another to have those same shells being fired at you consistently.
You missed the most important piece of news - another Voronezh-M strategic early warning radar was attacked, this time in Orsk.
There was no damage this time - the drone fell some distance away from it - but the intent is clear.
Also, Orsk is 1,500 km away from Ukraine, and by straight line the drone would have to fly over Kazakhstan territory. So quite likely it was in fact launched from Kazakhstan. This was a large airplane-type drone. Just as the drone that hit the radar in Armavir may well have been launched from Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, or even ships in the Black Sea.
Given that there was no immediate response to the attack in Armavir, what immediately followed was another attack. Who would have guessed...
Next on the menu presumably are the radars in Kaliningrad, Leningrad oblast, and perhaps even the one in Belarus. Given that drones (the source of which continues to not be established) have hit objects as far from Ukraine as Vyborg, there is no technical barrier to it.
Prepping for first strike?
Almost certainly.
The classic logic on this issue goes like this:
1) Militarily it only makes sense for those systems to be attacked as a preparation for first strike.
2) Because of that, the attacked side is supposed to consider this a launch-on-warning trigger
3) The side that attacks knows this, thus such an act is incredibly risky, and would only be done as a true preparation for a first strike.
Which reinforces the whole loop.
Where this breaks down is if the leadership of the attacked side is compromised and is not actually ready to strike back. Then you can use such attacks as a political tool to force submission.
Or it could be a faint just to make the Russians panic and strike first. Your stunts and disinfo noise are not going to modify Russias industrial war approach. Suck it up.
First strike? No chance.
It's an escalatory measure. If you understand Russian nuclear policy you will see why this is the case.
based on your theory, when would the 1st strike occur?
an hour later, a day later, a week later?
what's the point of showing your hand and then not following up?
An actual nuclear attack (tactical and otherwise) generally occurs almost immediately after nuclear early warning systems and nuclear radars have been taken out. One attack immediately follows the next. This is based on Cold War military war games conducted during the 1950s.
With all the technological development that has gone in the past 70-years, taking out air defense early warning systems has become imperative. Even with hypersonic missiles you still have to provide a defense.
No, for one this is underestimating the sheer amount of equipment Russia has. Russia has lost less then 2% of its S-400 systems. It is producing them faster then they are being destroyed.
Even if a narrow window was opened for a "first strike" it wouldn't prevent Russia from launching thousands of nukes back at the USA.
It would be a mistake for NATO to do this as it would guarantee Russia wins the nuclear war.
>It is producing them faster then they are being destroyed.
It isn't though, neither is it training crews fast enough.
They lost 3 S-400 in a couple weeks. With the massive attacks yet to come.
Great Moron how do you have any idea what the training rate or the production rate actually is? You need to stop watching the liars at cnn.
lol
"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play."
Nope, it is absolutely stupid and guaranteed suicide. Even if they destroy all such radars, Russia will still be able to launch a retaliatory nuclear strike. Actually they just continue their stupid escalation game. They are trying to provoke Russia to overreact, most likely for a tactical nuclear strike on Ukraine. The US really wants to drag Europe into a war with Russia. They need Russia to do something serious that will make a lot of noise and cause significant damage to Ukraine. They will use this as a justification for allowing Ukraine to launch long-range Western missiles on old Russian territory, as well as for sending some more or less significant NATO troops into Ukraine.
Well, that's mostly why I ignored it: because the attack failed and thus is not entirely verifiable if it even happened.
If true, though, it does obviously present quite a problem, but could also conversely be evidence of Russian MOD finally learning from mistakes and protecting these valuable assets successfully.
It is also part of the distraction-panic reaction to Russian interference with star link, lest a head of verbal steam on that issue be allowed to undermine the confidence of Ukrainian front line troops in their own eyes in the skies protection.
Never forget the mirroring tactic which is being used all over the place now, so pervasively you can get a handy glimpse of what is going on simply by reversing the named parties! Narrative has always played the western lead in this conflict and the object is still to TALK Russia into submission/internal collapse.
Propaganda saturation has thickened considerably since Russia swept down to Lyptsi & Volchansk--spiked up a bit too w/ fog of war. Concern Trolls & the chatterati are callousing their fingertips, hitting the keyboard so hard. Kind of reminiscent of the early days of the SMO, that tsunami of sanctimony & righteous condemnation.
Yep, we are immersed in a new propaganda wave.
General Moron seems to lead them... here at least.
There is a special new class of brainwashed dummies that the SMO has spawned. The ones that will comment "it is no big deal, just a pin prick" even after Moscow is a pile of radioactive ashes.
Do you have any idea what has happened since Thursday? Clearly not. So let me explain it to you in simple terms -- this is much much worse than even the events of October 1962. If that strike in Armavir had happened in October 1962, we would not be here today, with me having to educate you. Fortunately that line was not crossed back then.
But it was crossed on Thursday.
And again yesterday...
GM, I read your comments to myself in a cigar-chomping, Jack Nicholson, "You can't handle the truth!!" voice. Just saying.
you educate nobody as you are just in charge of slandering Russia and Putin incrusted here. No lessons from you.
What will the trolls, the liars, and the ignorant such as General Moron going to do with their time when Russia ends this?
Probably go back to masturbating over Rambo movies....
Yeah, that's what I thought also. Where is this sanctimonious drivel going? So Putin is a idiot, because he doesn't strike with nuclear bombs first which will end us all? Putin is an idiot, because he can't control and protect thousands of miles of borders? Newsflash for GM, nobody can.
Is this all they have to offer? First it was, Russia is going down because of fake GDP numbers, then Russia is going to loose because all their advantages are null because corruption, against an opponent who is far more corrupt? And now its what, talking them more into submission? Making them nervous? Doesn't work it seems ^^
I wish they would hurry. The CIA/MI6/Mossad Dr. Strangeloves are losing control of their Frankenstein monsters, as usual. That these are drone strikes, and not missile strikes, against Russian strategic missile defense systems would indicate to me that the tail is trying to wag the dog and start a wider war. There are diabolical forces at work here. Please... Russia... end this thing before one of the various lunatics starts World War III.
well now that you've gotten down to name calling you've lost your credibility.
"So let me explain it to you in simple terms "---i'm waiting for your simple explanation. when can it be expected?
We're waiting for your simple explanation...
I think a lot of people think Russia is fighting Ukraine. It is fighting NATO. Ukrainian dead don't matter. Getting Russia does, and they aren't going to stop. They aren't afraid of war. They want to kill people, and they aren't afraid of Putin or God.
No you have very clearly always been a special class of brainwashed dummy. Nothing new here.
the problem with the TALK strategy is that it is echo-chamber situation. if 'west' is not talking TO Russia but instead constantly talking ABOUT Russia, it is totally meaningless. Along with pincushion 'strikes' that 'will bring Russian will to fight down to their knees and they will surrender', really? REALLY?
I have heard so much of it (including from GM here which is either totally pessimistic-depressed follower of Girkin/etc or UA asset) over few years that 'Russia is losing', 'Russia has lost', 'Russia will surrender <insert date here>'. I have heard from such folks that on summer of 2022, no, fall of 2022, winter of 2022, summer of 2023, etc. 'Just about now'...
Guys/gals, the TALK strategy (we will say mean things about them to ourselves without them even knowing that happen) is totally stupid as strategic plan.
Objectively the situation is much worse now than it was in 2022, so yes, Russia is losing.
If Russia can get to the Polish border in the next 6 months, then we can talk about Russia winning. How realistic is that?
In the real world Russia is gradually losing its long-range strike advantage, the US is moving into Sweden and Finland, Russian cities are bombed daily, strategic systems are attacked, etc. etc.
And the front is a stalemate because of drones.
It is a much, much more unfavorable situation than when the SMO started. And the SMO started precisely in order to prevent that situation from developing.
P.S. Everything Strelkov said in March 2022 - about the need to mobilize fully immediately, about how the window of opportunity is being missed, and how Ukraine will counterattack turned out to be true. But since then the Kremlin has done nothing beyond what was needed to stabilize things along the existing front lines. Even though it was clear to everyone with a realistic understanding of the situation that what had to be immediately done was to mobilize fully and to severe the connection between Ukraine and NATO, so that this does not spiral into Putin having to start WW3 or be the last Russian leader in history.
attrition warfare, dude.
Nuclear war, dude.
Who is attriting whose strategic systems?
The Donbass front is a sideshow here.
I think you are extremely biased and very off base here. especially relying on bipolar personality disorder like Strelkov information. EVERYTHING he said was wrong. Instead, i suggest you turn on Ishenko and listen for a little bit as he talks plenty just about what you are talking about
- 'get to the Polish border'. WHY???? the very intent and communicated by NATO was 'we will create a new Afganistan for Russia in Ukraine'. No, no , no. You only want to ever come into the territory that wants to be with you and even then, very slowly so you do not overextend yourself. Do not play into NATO hands and forget the whole 'Polish border by day X' BS. No, that is good way to kill your economy
- 'nuke one small country and USA would back down'. Really? and what is not? what if USA decides to nuke 'one small oblast', just to show it also has 5 thousand nuclear warheads (plus France and UK ,etc). Then what? Stupid, irresponsible, and suicidal for Russia to do that. absolutely not
- 'mass mobilization in 2022'. total insanity, especially from economic perspective. same for 'sever the connection between Ukraine and NATO', that is total BS that Russia cannot (and absolutely should not be involved in).
Please turn off the BS artists of doom and gloom and hear a little bit of realists. поспешай не торопясь is the name of the game. not about 'rushing to Polish border' or whatever. build your economy. maintain social and economic stability. maintain massive diplomatic advantage that global majority (85% of the world support), encourage development. and lastly, all of these 'gurus' are incredibly arrogant to be telling 'Kremlin has done nothing'. Listen to Truhan for a little bit, listen to actual real military, no manic depressive 'experts' on the coaches in momma's basement that tell Russia to destroy lives in tens of millions of people in Russia, destroy its economy completely and shutter as a country.
Turn off 'total mobilizations' and 'limited nuclear strike' idiots, they do nothing for you.
> - 'get to the Polish border'. WHY???? the very intent and communicated by NATO was 'we will create a new Afganistan for Russia in Ukraine'.
Why? Because you have no choice. Afghanistan is much better than the current situation in which Ukraine is used as a fig leaf from behind which to launch attacks into Russia. Were missiles hitting Moscow from Afghanistan in the 1980s? No. Not even Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan were affected in any real way. Well, very soon missiles will be flying towards core Russia from Ukraine. Just as drones already are in mass quantities.
And they will be doing so even if Ukraine is reduced to Lvov and the surroundings.
The military-technical realities mandate that Russia takes over the whole thing. And then it will have to convert the people there into being Russians, however long it takes, and just end the whole Ukrainian project once and forever; whoever doesn't like it can go to Canada. If the Kremlin doesn't do that, it will be in a world of hurt in perpetuity. That the current Kremlin doesn't have the stomach for it does not change the strategic imperative.
BTW, among the whole constellation of "experts" on the war that were spawned shortly after February 2022, one of the few realistic voices has been Mark Sleboda. Note that for a long time he was saying western Ukraine is too much trouble to bother with, but in the last few weeks/months he has changed his tune (and freely admits he was in error previously too) -- "all the way to the Polish border it is, there is no other choice left" is what he says now. I knew that on the morning of the initial invasion, it is taking time for people to understand it, but some of them gradually are. You might see the light one day too.
>- 'nuke one small country and USA would back down'. Really? and what is not? what if USA decides to nuke 'one small oblast', just to show it also has 5 thousand nuclear warheads (plus France and UK ,etc). Then what? Stupid, irresponsible, and suicidal for Russia to do that. absolutely not
Do you have other solutions? Currently Putin has three possible active moves:
1) Fold. In which case he will be the last Russian leader, the country will be broken up and the pieces occupied by the Americans.
2) Launch an all-out preemptive nuclear strike hoping he has enough BMD for sufficiently much of Russia to survive somehow at the end of it. Problem is the S-500s are late with the rollout, and so are the Sarmats, and most other of the latest strategic systems.
3) A Hail-Mary escalate-to-deescalate move, to show lethal intent without striking the US directly and giving them a chance to stand down. The Karaganov option. This also has practical benefits in terms of finishing the war by destroying NATO logistics.
The fourth option is to continue with not doing anything. In which case what he will get is a strategic decapitating first strike from the US. That is quite certain at this point.
What do you propose to do?
>- 'mass mobilization in 2022'. total insanity, especially from economic perspective. same for 'sever the connection between Ukraine and NATO', that is total BS that Russia cannot (and absolutely should not be involved in).
This is the problem -- Russia is governed by economists. What you think was a "total insanity" and what the situation mandated are totally different things. It was absolutely vital to immediately mobilize all available resources, come down from Belarus and take control of the Polish border.
Guess what would have happened if that had been done? We would not be about to have NATO missiles launched towards Moscow soon.
Guess what happened because this was not done? We are now about the have NATO missiles launched towards Moscow soon.
If Ukraine had been decisively defeated and fully occupied before NATO got involved, there would have been a lot of teeth gnashing, sanctions, etc., but no WW3. If there are any historians left to analyze what happened in the future, Putin will be evaluated as the same kind of naive idiot that the three cousins who launched WWI were.
>maintain massive diplomatic advantage
What does the "massive diplomatic advantage" mean if you are a pile of radioactive ashes?
Then you have no clue what's really going on. Ukraine is merely the location not the objective.
It really doesn't matter if it succeeded, the attempt itself is a grave violation on its own.
Also, these assets are not protected by design. The MoD has zero blame in this case for not putting AD around them.
Because the very fact of an attack on them is supposed to be a launch-on-warning trigger.
It's when there is no launch after the first attack that they become easy prey.
"the attempt itself is a grave violation on its own"
nothing is just black and white
everything is shades of gray
you don't have a clue about any of the decision processes
all you've got is what we all have got
only what they (in this case RF) want you to know.
pressing the button on an almost hit is plain idiocy.
chill out dude
You are completetely incorrect and once again misrepresenting reality for your cutesy little troll game.
Launch on warning only holds with real damage to Russia's warning system. This has not happened, not even remotely close. The Russian systems are robust, less then 1% have been damaged.
Since you predicted the collapse of Russia in 3-6 months, we will soon see if you were correct or more likely full of hot air.
The west is evidently attacking as many early ICBM warning radars so it can launch a first strike on Russia. Putin and friends should stop being nice and launch a first strike on US/NATO forces and cities and get it over with. I know he doesn't want to burn the globe while there's a chance to resolve it without getting to that, but his "mercy and prudence" does not telegraph well to westoid elites who do not think in such terms.
The westoid elites might only, and its -might- only feel something when all their cities, relatives and offspring are incinerated as they are incinerated too. They do not care about their own people for they view themselves as superior over the peons they rule over.
Putin and co should just come out on national TV, state that the west has attacked Russia's nuclear deterrent infrastructure multiple times, and that with the conclusion of his telecast the strategic missile forces will launch all their weapons. And then follow through with it. The amount of panic that will strike the NATO command shall then be the last thing they know as megaton warheads rain down on all their cities and military bases. The west is then fully purified with atomic flame, thereby allowing true freedom and democracy to return as the globe burns for a short while.
But Putin will never do the above. Too calm, restrained and deliberate he is. He will wait for the westoid elites to conduct their WMD attacks on Russia first, which is too late.
You sound like Paul Craig Roberts. What Putin is doing has been working like a charm.
Yeah, working so well that both strategic Russian installations and Russian cities are being bombed daily.
Precisely the thing the SMO was supposedly launched to prevent...
And he is barely even commenting on it, let alone doing something about it.
Bullshit
give it a rest
you're not getting anywhere with you obvious rants.
But yet doing no real damage to the system as a whole. He isn't commenting on it because he isn't a bedwetter.
If the time comes to launch, there will be no commentary.
Just because you are too stupid to see what is happening doesn't mean it's not.
PCR? lmao
yes, you picked the perfect example.
There is a possibly a "middle path" right now.
Don't yet launch everything, just wipe out one of the more rabidly Russophobic NATO countries, and in such a way that it will not trigger automatic launch-on-warning strike from the US. Poland, Romania, Finland, those are good candidates. You can do it with hypersonics flying very fast, it will be over with in 10-15 minutes. No nuclear winter, it's too small of a scale, etc.
Then you give the US the choice to stand down, or everything gets launched and we all die.
That's kind of what the likes of Karaganov are calling for.
The problem is that you are not sure that the lunatics in DC are not crazy enough to not hear even that warning. And Russia is not prepared for nuclear war. The last two years should have been spent doing that, but they were wasted. North Korea is presumably ready -- with bunkers for the population and stockpiles of food and other necessities. Russia isn't.
They are most at risk. They know they are defenseless and there is no way that anyone is wasting much effort on defending them. Despite what they say. I don't know why they were admitted to NATO. It was foolish without Russia itself.
Yes, due to Putin's prudence, he is probably going with that.
But you see, if Russia isn't prepared for nuclear war. The entire west definitely isn't.
In either case, with megaton nukes hitting major and minor cities, as well as military bases or stockpiles, most of a population will die from the lack of infrastructure to support them after the explosions anyway.
But I'm sure surviving westoid elites will somehow frame it as a victory for themselves anyway.
The elites presumably plan on launching first, giving them time to board their private jets towards their mansions and bunkers in Australia and New Zealand.
they'd be stupid. China knows where they are and their subs will nuke their bunkers. Anyway DU bunkers in an earthquake zone???
The elites will drown in their bunkers...
If they ever dare to launch the first strike then them and their families will be forever branded by the most of humanity as a malign cancerours tumor that needs to be treated by any means possible. They wouldn't dare, it's a provocation to either pressure Putin into negotiations or unbalance and make him do the first move. That would allow them to agitate their golem nations against Russia over a few years to launch a real war later.
Additionally, wiping out a country as you propose would make Russia's allies reconsider their partnership by various degrees.
There won't be time for that. Do you not understand the logistics and timing?
Presumably is doing a lot of work in this comment.
Australia and New Zealand? Just how stupid are you? Really?
tell me how do you prepare for nuclear war?
...and i would think that surviving would be anything but survival.
"Don't yet launch everything, just wipe out one of the more rabidly Russophobic NATO countries, and in such a way that it will not trigger automatic launch-on-warning strike from the US. Poland, Romania, Finland, those are good candidates. "
you sound like lindsay graham, or sikorski or the little french corporal (that is in the process of losing new caldonia to CN) or the estonian "let's go get em" choir or the "i love the smell of napalm in the morning" fool.
That is pure stupidity, Shadowbanned,.
Everything gets launched or nothing gets launched. You are completely ignorant of nuclear strategy. So ignorant in fact, you have to be paid by someone. I can tell you aren't a stupid person, so why act like one unless there is a motive?
You know what they say about feeding trolls.
Umm…
"Russia isn't."
Yes they are. They had a drill last year.
The dumbest thing you've said yet.
AGREE!
May I ask you where you live? I mean your geographic address. In one of the places (or close to them) which you want Russia to pulverize and turn into radioactive mounts of ash?
Western warmongers who forget that attacks on Russia can result on annihilation of their own homes are one of the driving factors for the West's rush to WW3. It's like that idiot Congressman Mike McCaul's map of Russian territory to hit from Ukraine. Here's an updated map that shows Russian targets in his home congressional district:
https://pasteboard.co/WDd3pnSnvOT2.png
Why is it that I don't need to be shown such a map to know the reality of this? I live in the US. So many idiots here. They need comeuppance and a proper sense of humility.
He is an East Coast American.
"The west is evidently attacking as many early ICBM warning radars so it can launch a first strike on Russia." Abject nonsense. For starters, it's not "the west" that's attacking a warning radar, it is Kiev, trying to get escalate the current, relatively cold, WW3 into city-killing heat by baiting Russia into a major attack on the west.
The idea of absolutely any attack on an early warning radar being a trigger for unlimited WW3 is the idea of a fool. For example, if some drunk decides to drive by the radar and take shots at it, that's not a trigger for WW3. Likewise, if a well-organized terrorist group, as used to operate out of Chechnya, attacks such a radar that too is not a trigger for WW3. And if a bunch of nazi losers attack such a radar to try to bait Russia into a full-on nuclear escalation, that too is not a trigger.
As for taking out those particular radars so the US could launch a first strike on Russia, that's also the delusion of somebody who doesn't understand the practical details of modern nuclear war at the level of the US and Russia.
ICBMs from the US will detonate over their targets in Russia 30 minutes or less after launch and the same for Russian ICBMs launched at US targets. That time is so short that Russia, like the US, depends on satellites to detect the launch plumes of those ICBMS, detecting launches within seconds of the launch. Russia does not depend on radars that cannot see any ICBMs until they are already in space with only 15 minutes or less before their warheads incinerate their targets.
Those radars also don't do much to help guard against decapitation strikes launched from subs on suborbital trajectories, with a flight time of 9 minutes or less to Moscow for launches from the Baltic Sea in Estonian waters.
Nine minutes is too short a time to get the leadership to safety assuming the first strike is launched when the leadership is known to be at least five minutes away from a very deeply underground bunker. Ripple fire from a sub in Estonian waters would also allow multiple strikes, ten if necessary, one after another, to drill down and kill even a very deeply underground installation. Or, one of the nukes the US could pre-position at its embassy could simply detonate, with zero warning at all.
What those warning radars do is track aircraft that could be delivering tactical or strategic nukes, or the equivalent in relatively low speed nuclear tipped cruise missiles. Those radars also serve as secondary confirmation of inbound ICBMs after initial launch detection by satellite, which is their main function as far as the US is concerned. In the event of a limited strike by the US aimed only at a few military targets, having precise knowledge of the target set would enable Russia to answer in kind without immediately escalating to city killing. That's an important factor of essential interest to the US.
That's a key reason why back when US nuclear policy was run by intelligent, sane adults it was unthinkable for the US to attack those radars. It was strongly in the US's interest that Russia could see limited attacks and not be forced by any launch at all into immediate mass city-killing escalation. That the US allows such attacks now by Kiev proves that the US is no longer run by people who have either the smarts or the sane connection with reality to be trusted with nuclear weapons.
As for any response by the Russian leadership to a nuclear attack by the West or a genuine attack by the West on Russia's nuclear assets, Russia has a very varied and rich choice of options other than mutually assured destruction. It will choose whichever of those many options that work best for Russia.
John thanks for the explanation, I understand that the radar itself is not damaged, the 2 buildings are a command center and residential residence. The radar installation is a modular system and parts can be replaced quickly. https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2024/05/26/ukraine-tried-to-disable-a-russian-500-target-over-the-horizon-radar/
I concluded my own article on the topic with: "On this Memorial Day, and if we’re going down, let us, keyword & monitor warriors of doom, be as brave as the sinking ‘Titanic’ musicians and enjoy some music from this reminder of America that seems as it has never been." (cue in some Doris Day)
I've seen a "conventional" war. The horrors of it are unimaginable. And since Hiroshima has no more living witnesses of the real hell, we can discuss it as we would the Alekhine's Defense: Scandinavian Variation and its "concept of luring the opponent into creating a liability in the form of a large pawn structure." We're lured and lulled into madness without even being aware of it.
https://youtu.be/sqHjwWz4JN4?feature=shared
Thanks for the link to that article. It's a good overview, but the author goes a bit too far in not distinguishing strategic from intermediate range situations. For example, he writes "These locations are chosen to optimize the radar’s detection capabilities and ensure that any missile launch can be detected as early as possible."
"Any" missile launch? Since when can a 6,000 km radar see over 8,000 km away to detect a launch from a US silo in Wyoming? Russia's Voronezh system plays the same role as US strategic early warning radars: confirming launches spotted by satellite and getting better tracking info to confirm the targets of those launches.
I should have added, confirming the targets of launches is not so easy given that Voronezh (and the US equivalent) radars don't get visibility of the launched payloads until they are far enough along in their trajectories to have ejected their shrouds and possibly even until the reentry vehicles (RVs, the conical package containing the warhead and protecting it during reentry with ablative materials) start being flicked off the bus carrying them. Those warheads are relatively small objects, less than a meter and a half long and much less than half a meter wide, which also have a low radar cross section as a side effect of the ablative materials that cover them, so they're not so easy to track.
In addition, US warheads are not as maneuverable as current generation Russian warheads, but they're maneuverable enough for Voronezh tracking to be a big help in predicting their final targets.
On the plus side, it's good that the Voronezh teams are being given a lot of on the job training by Ukrainian launches of ATACMS and other missiles at targets in Russia, both old territories and new. That will be good preparation if the war escalates to US and NATO attacks, either with conventional weapons or with nuclear packages carried by aircraft-launched missiles or by intermediate range ballistic missiles.
The Voronezh sites will almost certainly be targets for any tactical nukes so they might not have a very long time to use the experience they gain today, but I suppose every bit helps in such situations.
I have a very bad feeling about where all this is going. Here's hoping that if there are tactical nuclear strikes on military targets those will bring the West to its senses before the city killing starts.
Your comments in this thread are truly brilliant. Your last sentence, "Here's hoping that if there are tactical nuclear strikes on military targets, those will bring the West to its senses before the city killing starts," inevitably brought The Godfather to mind:
"Who's being naive, Kay?"
I mean this with all respect and a touch of gallows humor.
And keep in mind that Russia is dealing w/ an OG hegemon who went all Enola Gay & Little Boy on Hiroshima & Nagasaki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropospheric_propagation
I have worked with radios based on this technology, probably pretty similar to the Voronezh-DM in mode of operation. They have a high power consumption and rely on the bouncing effect off the troposphere for the long range, the over the horizon effect. We used to call the effect "skipland" on CB radios and AM radio. It doesn't always work, so you can't rely on this kind of thing in exclusion of other technologies.
Only the foolish believe the Ukrainian military isn't fully directed by NATO and the US. Kiev controls nothing.
Upvoted because you're basically right but still... when you pick a dog breed for its viciousness because that suits your purpose, you can train the heck out of it for it to be the point and click killer you want, but still, sometimes it will go out and attack whatever it wants regardless of what you want.
If Kiev were acting independently, the US would quickly bring it to heel.
I don't believe this and I have good reasons for not believing it. If you think we had full control over the Afghan puppet regime of Karzai or the Diem or Thieu or other South Vietnamese regimes, or the Iraqi governments post-2003, I am here to say you are wrong. We certainly do not have control over the RoKs or Japanese or Taiwanese or certainly the Israelis. There is a degree of control, but only a degree, and the moment that these regimes saw/see a survival benefit in acting against US interests, they would take it. The Ukrainians are a particularly pathological case. I've watched some of the internecine arguments and I know what we withhold from some of these countries. The belief we can force them to do 'anything' is misplaced. The art of the possible remains paramount.
thank you
>it's not "the west" that's attacking a warning radar, it is Kiev
Yeah, with British drones and NATO real-time targeting...
If you think that Kiev does anything without permission from its American master, then you are truly naive.
For that matter, you can be sure that Americans and not Ukrainians do all the real work, whether in theater or remotely.
I couldn't have ever said that better. Well done. Other than the comments about Kiev. The US doesn't have the control you assume it does. The nutbars in Kiev, the dead-enders, are now out of control. The US, to regain control, would have to assure them on some reasonable basis that Ukraine would survive. They cannot. Therefore, this kind of thing is going to continue until the end comes. Then i'm afraid that crushing the Bandera will have to be repeated again, hopefully more succinctly this time.
IOI some script for Hollywood.
"NATO forces and cities and get it over with"
implied in your flawless wisdom is that "get it over with" doesn't include where you are sitting nice and cozy playing god of the game, i'm sure. lol
Why would someone be afraid to die?
interesting point, Phil.
care to expand on it?
That is really stupid.
Where are you planning to be when this happens? The "westoid elites" know exactly where they'll be, and they're fairly sure they'll be safe. But I don't think they're planning to let people like you and me in. Yet you sound as if you think you'll be here to enjoy the "freedom and democracy"...
I was going to mention it in my only comment but didn’t want muddy all the good news.
Let’s hope you’re right and the MoD learned from their mistake.
Still think a response to the first drone was in order. Maybe it’s coming but we’ll never know about it .. I’m fine with that.
It is clear that Nato doesn't want to slug it out on the battle field where they don't stand a chance . They are training for the kill shot . It has been two years free education, for the entire western military establishment, to learn everything about the Russian defenses. With the aid of AI analysis and targeting solutions, the Russians can be in big trouble. The western military used to say for a long time "it is not going to be a fair fight" Wake up!
The West is a bunch of dwarf, peacetime armies following the lead of a very large US military establishment that has been corrupted by 30 years of doctrine and practice focused on fighting insurgencies, not combat with a first world peer. Changing what the huge US military establishment does is like trying to steer an oil tanker: move the wheel and after many minutes it changes course, slightly.
That's not something you can change overnight by changing software. It will take many months of trial and error to make even relatively small changes, and fixing institutional blind spots could take years. For example, if you look at the recent NATO military exercises in detail, it's just amazing that they are so unrealistic: they assume NATO's and the US's rear areas and command and control won't be wiped out in moments. They assume that command posts that have the radio electronic signatures of a super nova will somehow go unnoticed and will survive the first few minutes of a real war with Russia.
The US has not remotely internalized what it means to fight an adversary who can shoot back, and shoot back in a situation where the US does not have overwhelming control of the skies and the battlefield. Their plans are based on the idea that the airfield at Dover, Delaware, will continue to exist so that superheavy cargo aircraft can take off and, without being shot down despite their huge radar cross sections, lack of defenses and very slow speeds, waddle safely across the Atlantic to reprovision US forces in Europe.
No, it's not going to be a fair fight, for the same reason all those American veterans of Iraq who were fighting in Ukraine were shocked at the reality of Russian battlefield supremacy, with the Americans being the ones cowering in trenches as everyone around them was being killed by Russian shelling. The US's bloated, inexperienced army will be facing by far the most combat ready and most experienced army in the world, the Russian army. The US and NATO will get cut to pieces and no belief in magic wands or mythological kill shots will save them.
I find it odd that military exercises have not adjusted to the realities of war. Its not like western military commanders are unaware, in fact the NCO's are mostly screaming about it since they are the ones who will be actually involved in the fighting.
NATO's "armies" for a long time have been parade ground toy armies. They're basically props for the occasional propaganda-driven "military exercises" to fool their absurdly unmilitary citizenry. Really, what are you going to do with an "army" like Estonia's that has, what? 6,000 active duty soldiers? Russia kills that many men in Ukraine in three days during active assaults, and that's against a Ukrainian army where there remain a significant number of men who have survived for years and know a thing or two about not dying in minutes.
With the exception of the US (which lives in its own alternate universe) the larger the NATO army, the less the nation wants war with Russia. A good example is Poland, which has a respectably large army of 200,000. That's enough men with military training to know down to the marrow of their bones they'll be annihilated in a direct war with Russia, so that's why Poland does all it can to press right to the edge of conflict with Russia while carefully trying to make sure a direct conflict with Russia won't happen.
And then you have countries like the UK, where (to his credit) Sunak understands that the war with Russia the UK is cooking up does indeed require full mobilization and universal conscription. But he's lacking the sense of reality to think he has years of time to get that done.
I find the whole "NATO trainers" at this stage to be absurd. A ukrainian officer who is still alive is worth 1000 NATO trainers at this stage. In fact the NATO countries should be pulling these guys OUT of Ukraine to help train their own guys.
Allegedly, Sunak called the general election this early because he didn't want to bee seen as a 'war PM'
Add to the fact that western military commanders "have not adjusted to the realities of war" an additional fact, which is that no economy in the west has ramped up its war-footing or weapons industries or has engaged in any kind of ramping at all, except of the lip-flapping hand-wringing variety. They've been thinking Enola Gay & Little Boy the whole way
I think you're right over the target with your observations, CheetosSpring.
It's awfully quiet behind the all their orchestrated up-front shrieking and moaning. ...Too quiet, in fact.
They really do believe they can "win" a nuclear exchange!
Alas, the U.S.'s bloated, inexperienced army will end up firing the missiles.
To me, even scarier than Dr. Strangelove's Major T.J. "King" Kong howling "Wooo-hoo" as he's riding The Bomb toward Russian territory is President Kennedy's line from "13 Days": "And they fire their missiles... And we fire ours."
The most interesting thing about the Cuban missile crisis (called the "Caribbean" crisis in the USSR) is all the details they don't teach in the US. For example, not one American in 10,000 knows that the USSR moved nuclear missiles into Cuba in answer to the US moving of nuclear missiles into Turkey, which at the time bordered the USSR. They also don't know the crisis was resolved when the US agreed to remove its nuclear missiles from Turkey in exchange for the USSR removing its nuclear missiles from Cuba, a part of the agreement that Khrushchev agreed to keep secret so the US would not lose face.
Americans also don't know that Soviet submarine captains were authorized to fire nuclear weapons to break the blockade and that the choice of a single captain not to use the nuke he normally would saved the day.
And... last but not least almost nobody knows that during the crisis there supposedly were four nuclear explosions in space: two by the US and two by the USSR, said to be "routine" tests that for some insane reason proceeded despite the hair trigger circumstances. That's a revelation from a recent book by an American author which in general is said to be very well researched and sourced, but I've not see confirmation of that elsewhere (nor have I had time to look).
Yet there is still about 50 U.S. tactical nuclear weapons at Incirlik Air Base as part of NATO’s nuclear umbrella.
i've heard the same story a number of times regarding the cuban missile crisis. NPR carries the Turkey connection in its report.
Apparently i'm the one in 10,000. Yay me.
Nuclear tests were common in the early 60s. Test ban treaties were in the future - the next year in fact. It didn't seem as provocative then as it would now.
Khrushchev won that exchange, he didn't need to gloat. Between that and the Bay of Pigs, it was probably an encouragement to take out Kennedy by the deep state.
No one is idiot enough to buy the Oswald story by now, hopefully. Imagine using a Soviet defector who defected back as your purported assassin, put him in a really bad spot to make the kill shots, have Kennedy's head blown out from a front shot that knocked out the occipital bone at the back of the skull that Oswald could not have fired, and then having Oswald shot on national TV to shut him up. Then the key records are sealed for 75 years, that doesn't smell like a coverup to me.
We have been privy, to a very small extent, to what it has taken the Russian military to become a wartime military. The US will have to go through the same process as will the rest of NATO. The RU military has the advantage of being "one people" for lack of a better phrase. NATO doesn't have that luxury. We have already been witness to the expertise and coordinated command ability of NATO embedded in the UA and leading UA troops. Is there any reason to believe things would be different if it was officially announced that NATO is crossing the borders. Is there any reason to believe that the US would be a trusted leader after its mid-east debacles? The panic of the west is evident everywhere. If NATO were a professional military org. this panic would not be there.
It seems like a somewhat childish answer to me. The fact that it didn't succeed, as well as the previous one. is secondary to the fact that they launched an attack (if confirmed) on a site over 1500 km away from Ukraine without too many problems. They have been launching drone attacks for 2 months, for example in the Tatarstan region, again 1500 km away, with damage to plants, but Simplicius has never mentioned it. The mainstream made vulgar propaganda for two years painting the Russians as crazy, incapable, inept and weak, but the "counterinformation" then made propaganda painting the US as crazy, incapable, inept and weak. Two stadium fans who profess to be "balanced". And BTW very short-sighted, The Ukraine-Russia war outcome is marginal compared to the objectives, and the very probable Russian victory on the field will not change them.
That the Russian MOD didn't figure out from the outset that these were obvious targets that needed to be protected accordingly says volumes.
Actually it makes perfect sense for them to not be protected.
Because any attack on these is supposed to be a launch-on-warning trigger, and the enemy knows that, thus would only attack them in the opening phases of a real attack, thus making it all the more vital for such attacks to be a launch-on-warning trigger.
But if leadership does nothing after the first such attack, then they become easy soft targets.
And the first such attack was in fact a month ago, against the "Container" radar in Mordovia. Then we had the hit on the Voronezh-M in Armavir, the attempt on the Voronezh-M in Orsk, and reportedly another attempt on Armavir (to finish it off because it may not have been fully disabled). Those three attacks happened in a span of 4-5 days.
The Kremlin isn't even acknowledging they are happening...
The military is really not to blame here, this is entirely on the political leadership/
"Just as the drone that hit the radar in Armavir may well have been launched from Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, or even ships in the Black Sea."
Or in other words, you don't have a fucken clue and are guessing, thrashing about to prop up your ignorance.
Seems this site has been recently invaded by a small cadre of self-important armchair generals whose delusion tells them they are of greater stuff than Russia's General Staff. If only Putin would listen to them and take the first step to wipe out the world - perhaps "anti-West neocons" would be an adequate term for them as they exhibit all the characteristics and temperament of Western neocons.
Yep, how dare those ignorant, stupid Russians ignore their sage advice.
LOL exactly, it would be comical if it wasn't sad to see how easy it is to manipulate with a fresh push of propaganda. I mean the actual battlefield is catastrophic for "The West" so now what? Yes, Russia has lost the nuclear war already, just read the comments. The biggest "don't look here, look over there" I have seen since the beginning of this mess.
*****
I agree with you that this attack should not be omitted in a fresh report of the situation. You could be anti-western or pro-russia (same but different) all as much as you want but to ignore this type of operations is either wishful thinking or pure ignorance. The truth is that neither the good Simplicius or the Gerasimov Stavka knows to handle this threat right now. The Alliance has stepped up their ”strategic ambiguety” aimed at creating uncertainty and confusion yet harming or exhausting the Russian side. I do no think West is so stupid to prepare a first strike. Russias spies would have knowledge of such a plan or discussions. It could be a Ukrainian initiative to poke the Bear into nuke response or it could be a dual-plan with US support to harm the early-warning structure without starting WW3 and blind the southern eyes covering Iran. And we all know what that latter mean. I also see the same provocative manners from late 2021 and early 2022 when US called out Russia: dont you dare attack Ukraine - we will crush you. When Russia invaded the Western trap fell with massiva sanctions and theft/freezing of Russia assets in West. They were rather smug and self-confident those days. These operation are both provocations, show of ”strength”, test of russian will/patience/fear and at the sam time doing substantial damage. I am thankful that Putin and the Russian MoD are not responding in hasty way.
I see it differently - the whole Ukraine operation was designed to get us to this point, where the US is striking at Russian strategic systems hiding from behind the Ukrainian proxy's back.
Because doing it openly and suddenly would have resulted in WWIII.
But if you slowly boil the frog, you can achieve strategic superiority.
So far Putin has been masterfully played at each step. Go back to early 2022 - did you think that in the third year of this Russian cities will be bombed daily (and it isn't even just the immediate border areas -- today there was a mass UAV attack on Oryol, with civilians killed) and the Kremlin will just pretend it isn't happening and will not do anything in response? Let alone nearly daily attacks on the absolutely most critical strategic systems.
And it isn't just drones, there is an important radar station in Crimea too, which was attacked with US missiles last week, but you don't hear much about it at all.
When the open strikes on "official" Russian territory begin, and no nukes fly in the other direction, you can just write off Russia and start preparing for how your are going to live in the kind of world in which the evil empire has conquered everything and there is no escape from it (except perhaps in North Korea). Because that will mean that the Kremlin has made the final decision to fold instead of fighting back.
I share your concern over the boiling frog developments. Leaders, people, you and me, Simplicious we all get accustomed to new events that have not been experienced before. That US/NATO provoked Russia's invasion of Ukraine should have been more shocking than the invasion itself. As you and others have written before, it all started much earlier - already when Putin became president in 2000. The kettle was stirred in Chechnya and Georgia. Increased temperature in Ukraine in 2004 and has continued since then. Maidan and Syria were also temperature risers. Nordstream 2 was a red line. So was the bombings of Crimea bridge and attacks on Nuclear plants in Ukraine. When we see attacks on Belgorod, russian airfields in Motherland and now even attacks on strategic installations for early warning of nuclear attacks we should be concerned and ”wake up”. But it has not been a US policy to achieve a first strike on Russia or do it behind the proxy of Ukraine war. It was all,a strategy of” containment”. I called it strangulation. The US goal has been, and still is, a break up of Russia in smaller states they later can pick one after another. I think US/NATO did a big miscalculation and now they are trying to find other ways to get the upper hand. I think Gerasimov is more concerend than Simplicius about the Atacms wiping out AD-systems and radarinstalations on Crimea, although Simplicious lifted the issue in an earlier article. I give you that I would never have thought that US proxys would get away with bombing Russian motherland. But I rather have Putin at the rudder than Medvedev….
You wrote, "I rather have Putin at the rudder than Medvedev…." which hints at my deepest fear since 2017, the last time I was in Russia (and Ukraine, for that matter). I've been there when the elections were getting ready, with people funding Yury Luzhkov, and were 100% sure their money would make that Mayor of Moscow the Russian president when Yeltsin appointed Putin.
I always worried that Putin might end up being perceived as too meek, too mild, almost like a pussy by the more aggressive, militant parts of his military and be replaced. At this point in time, this seems highly unlikely, but had the attack on the Voronezh-M radar, designed to detect and track ballistic and cruise missiles, providing early warning and strategic missile defense capabilities for Russia, succeeded in destroying it (one of the 8 or 10 Russia possesses), everything is possible.
Again, the entire war strategy must always be graded using the scale provided by Putin himself. Russia has neither demilitarized Ukraine, denazified Ukraine, nor made the Donbass safe. In fact at one point Putin aid Russia must denazify Europe and today the opposite is occurring. It is getting late in the day for Russia to begin the war in earnest. Body counts mean nothing, absolutely nothing. When the bombs stop falling on Russian territory and the last Nazi insignia is seen on video, and the Kievan leadership is dangling by meat hooks, then Russia can ease up and pro-Russian spectators can sleep easily. At BEST Russia has currently drawn a stalemate.
I have written a lot of the Russian window of opportunity. They dont have all the time in the world to expect everything going there way. Changes happen. And you are absolutely right about the goals. Bombs are falling inside Russia, there are cocainefueled nazis in Kiev and Ukraine is propped up with weapons from the West. I think a stalemate Korean-style is coming if West pour in troops in Ukraine. And it will be presented as a US victory over the Dark forces. Therefore Russia should step up. But I do care of the body counts. On both sides. It is all so meaningless. We know the Culprits but I also accuse the people and common citizens of the West. They are so ignorant at their own fate.
dear mikey
how do you know what the "window of opportunity" is when you don't know what the opportunities are?
your reply has been noted.
unfortunately the job opening for comedy writers has been filled.
lol, just don't give up do you?
you remind me of a slowly boiling frog
You are right.
It is quite possible the west would launch first.
Nobody in EU pr USA would cry about the residents of Moscow or Sankt Petersburg. Anyone who had ever been in contact with the western elites knows this. Only Putin does not understand and does not want to understand this. In any war, if you are afraid of your opponent, you shall be crushed.
Putin even didn't dare to destroy 750 KV network in Ukraine and win the war by that single move.
Russia shall be defeated. Little by little.
"Russia shall be defeated. Little by little."
you're basing this conclusion on the fact that a 750kv power line was not destroyed.
how unbelievable perceptive of you
I see you're using again. What's your level? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQRfTD6AXPs
There was no confirmation on any of these 2 yet.
There was never even confirmation of first strike. You just creating another "two A50" hogwash story all over again
Whatever metrics the West is using to decide if they're winning or not are managed to hell and back - now completely useless for figuring out the situation on the ground.
https://open.substack.com/pub/argomend/p/metricization?r=2q4k35&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
Thanks for this update, S, much needed
The German initiative to collect Patriot systems even the Germans admit fell flat, the Spanish gvmt promised three, but appear to have backed down
This reminds one of the famous bla bla the Czech screetched about having sourced 800,000 (+) artillery shells from 'anonymous', only to see this fade from the newscycle and no shells delivered, as far as I know
What about those Israeli systems which they wish to dump on some poor unsuspecting customer? Would these not do? Or can they not be sent to Ukraine?
In all fairness, Gotland is not a worthless island, it's been a focal point for trade and defense for many centuries. Anyone knowing the history of the area should agree. That being said, obviously it's not a Russian target.
It used to be a Soviet one.
And given what the Swedes have done over the last two years, they very much deserve to lose it.
Never was a Soviet Island.
I said target.
Ok, missunderstod. Sorry.
Officially, the King of Sweden is actually "The King of Sweden and Gotland" because it used to be a separate country.
I think you should read more about Gotland strategic significance. US admirals call it a unsinkable Carrier. It was never an offensive Russian target, more a defensive in case NATO closed of Baltic Sea or moved into Sweden. Russia has no means to invade Gotland and even less possibilities to support troops on the ground. If or when US/NATO militarize Gotland with new har ours and airfields it will become a target of Russian missile barrages.
Fantastic as always
In real life you can't just type in chat "Attack the A point!" and then rush head first into T-80s, then complain about "Russian bias" as you get shot and die like in War Thunder.
The Baltic States saying they will send troops into Ukraine
As these countries are part of NATO - I understand these troops to be subject to NATO control, and that the countries would have to ask NATO to send the troops, or for NATO authorisation to send the troops
Is this not the case ?
Kind of like a bratty kid threatening you with his big brother yes
They have sovereignty over their own armed forces and can go in alone NOT under the NATO flag if they choose. But they won't, for obvious reasons.
Ok, but in that case no NATO Article 5 as they appear to think would apply according to the report S posted, so their 3 and half soldiers and half a barrel of ammunition would all be in vain
Besides as S pointed out, should they not pay attention to their own border with RF, rather than worrying about some one else's
Yes, you are referring to Tobol which has them all bawling - there was a report on this in the previous post
But obviously the Baltics ruling class is not only deeply suspect for it's Nazi collaborationist past, but they have been co opted by the EUUS thinktank academic MIC, and are paid to be as stupid as they can be
Passive aggressive is right, don't mind us we're just live testing our new gadget, please contact customer service
No way NATO countries are going to get anywhere near 300,000, volunteers, conscripts, mercenaries, cash, kenyans, or pressganging
Even if -300, 000 active duty is an absolute minimum, estimates of the numbers of NATO's required for any effective action go up to 1M
Plus 5/6 times this number in support staff
That'll take them many years to put together, plus logistics etc etc
Plus - EU Parliament vote is coming up soon, polls are not looking great for the current EU régime - and very bad for warfighting, will get worse with every RF advance
No article 5 if Poland officially moved troops into Ukraine and engages Russian troops. Same deal if Poland fires at Russian troops from Poland into Ukraine. Article 5 only gets triggered if Russia strikes first and into Poland.
Well yes, but those Balts appear to think different according to the article quoted by S
Yes, the Balts appear to be totally delusional. Also, even if Russia invaded NATO, Article 5 is pretty voluntary and entails each country sending whatever they feel like sending.
It seems that the Balts are fulfilling some sort of unstated agreement to 'say out loud' what other NATO countries are careful not to
This appears to have given them the idea they can say what they want, with no reference to reality
If they are afraid of RF invading the Baltics etc as they claim, and that they are 'building a barrier' to prevent this, and putting in arms factories etc, why send some of your very scarce troops out of country ? Unless of course this is merely tokenism
Read the Russian newspaper articles I quoted in another comment - they say these countries are broke, are fighting amongst themselves, competing for EU fvours, are de industrialising rapidly, are being invaded by 'Russian' dissidents, many of whom come from the Ukraine......(ironically) so much so that they fear for their culture and want to force these invaders to learn Baltic and to send their children to Baltic schools and worship....sounds familiar doesn't it
Judging by Blinken's impromptu concert in Kiev, it's probably going to be "thoughts and prayers".
Article 5 applies if, when and to the extent that the Americans say it does.
The text is irrelevant.
NATO will twist Article 5 into any convenient shape it needs, ultimately. 'Rules Based Order' and all that....
Maybe will become Article 2 + 3
Or Article 17 - 13 + 1
Ukraine is getting the "reverse Article 5" treatment: the NATO promise of eventual Article 5 protection ensures Russia will demilitarize it.
Article 2+2
"no NATO Article 5 " NATO Article 5 doesn't mean anything at all. Google it and read it: it's short and to the point.
Contrary to warmonger propaganda, Article 5 does NOT say that an attack on any NATO member MUST result in answering attacks by other NATO members. All it does is require other NATO members to consider the situation and to react as they see fit. That's all. If Russia attacks Estonia, other NATO members are perfectly free to say "We've considered this grave escalation by Russia and we feel the correct response is a harsh condemnation of Russia's action and the recall of our ambassador for consultation." There is nothing at all in Article 5 that requires any NATO country to undertake military action in that situation.
You are right - but they, the EU countries, have to go on pretending article 5 has some value, in order to impress their submissive but soon to vote populations that NATO is an united and effective alliance which will come to the help of the poor small victim countries as well as the rich big etc
The problem is not only can not NATO in general and the bigger countries admit the truth, they pay the Batics to lie, but by this process they all delude themselves as to what they can or can not do, or think they can do
They are still trying to steal the CBR assets, they are still defying ICJ and ICC, they are pretending the RF has a powerful anti EU disinformation campaign, with spies everywhere, who are also burning down armaments factories...and so on
Try it one time! Lie about everything for a day and see what happens
There's a piece which quotes the Finnish MoD which may have some bearing, the author evidently is sincere, but I feel he does not appreciate quite how insincere his and NATO politicians are
"On March 4, our Minister of Defense, Antti Häkkänen, said in a speech he held at the opening of the National Defense Course that “It’s time to recognize the facts. Russia is a threat to the whole democratic world”. Coming from a Finnish Minister of Defense, this is as close as we can get to a declaration of war without actually declaring it.
I consider that this speech was a marker, signaling that Finland is committed to a war against Russia. I naturally sincerely hope that I am wrong about this. However, this is so exceptional coming from a Finnish Minister of Defense that I am having difficulties explaining it by any other motive (I don’t, for example, buy the extreme stupidity argument)."
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/endgame-part-ii-how-conflict-ukraine-ends
The NATO Treaty and its articles mean whatever the Americans say they mean at the moment. The text is irrelevant.
If you understand how geopolitics, international relations and decision-making at the state level work, then you can come to the conclusion that, in principle, no agreement, no matter what is written in it, guarantees its compliance. There is no higher magical power that will make this happen. Even if this Article 5 had written that if any NATO member was attacked, the United States would immediately launch a nuclear strike on the aggressor, in reality this would never have happened. In reality, no one will create problems for themselves just for the sake of not breaking some kind of agreement in order to solve the problems of another country. Any agreement is respected only if there is some benefit from it. And if it is more profitable not to comply with the agreement, then so be it.
It is only Estonia, Poland and Sweden talking of putting troops in Ukraine, not the whole Baltikum. And of course uncle Sammwould make them a call if they try. I see it as a sign that they either is crumbling NATO into pieces or just doing some good old disinformation/propaganda/test ballons against Russia AND their own people. I think the latter. Whenever chief-evil Stoltenberg talks you can rely that it is NATO talking. All others are either playing individual games or are part of clandestine operations.
The article quoted by S only refers to those three countries
But they all have, well I have'nt counted, but many others have said they will send troops, it's a kind of competition to see who can be the most daringly conformist - Lithuania does so every month, Latvia sometimes says it will sometimes says it won't, but more often yes than no, Finland copies Latvia, but more no so far than yes
These countries are all competing for the same EU and NATO pieces of the pie, and the pie is only so big, not that big at all
They have all the new expenses of NATO adherence and regulations, plus they have to spend more on defence, they have to build fences barriers and protections, they have to pay more for their fuels - so it's only normal that get a return on their investment from the EU
Part of the price is saying what EU/NATO tells them to say, they do not have to mean it, whatever meaning it means to those who are obliged to lie
Anyone who knows the breed's behaviour will fully understand why the three Baltic states are called the Chihuahua countries ....
Whether under NATO aegis or independently, the deployment of troops openly into a country at war is asking for those troops to be targeted for destruction. While the actual stepping foot over the Ukrainian border would not be an act of war, it is likely that the countries in question would treat the deaths of their armed forces while within Ukraine to be a casus belli. With that said, considering we're dealing with Russia here, they'd probably have to either fire on Russian forces or declare war openly to be subject to Russian attack on their home countries. And lets be clear: it would be only the home countries of those who declared war against Russia either by bringing Russian forces under fire or alternatively declaring war against Russia. Technically, moving bodies of foreign troops into one of the annexed oblasts would be enough, also.
Indeed. And here is the ambiguity. If France, Poland and Estonia deploy troops in Western Ukraine and never is attacked and attack no one they will anyway help Ukraine free some reserves to the East. Both US/NATO have excluded boots on ground in Ukraine so I dont think any of the Chihuaha-states will go against it. The missiles are the problem. We have evidence that Brits and Frogs are helping Ukraine to attack Crimea with Storm Shadow/Scalps. We noted one or two attacks deep into Russia and damaging one Radar in Armavir. Those ”helpers” are probably both inside and outside Ukraine. Russia has probably attacked those Command center if they are within Ukraine. This day EU (how they can decide such thing is beyond my understanding) gave green light to Member-state to allow their weapons to be used against target in all of Russia. It will be a decision for each state. Putin declared that ”small states” should think about wich country they are up against. Britain and France is bigger than small so one can assume that Russia will allow Storm Shadows and Atacms to be launched against them? No. I think the answers from Russia will be harsh if suddenly cities bordering Ukraine will be attacked. The problem is that Russia ”allowed” attacks on Crimea. And now comes next step from West.
The problem is that if they come into range of Russian troops they have a choice - either bring their home countries into a war with Russia or flee with their tails between their legs. It's a desperation strategy.
The armaments remain irrelevant. We found this out during the Cold War. Supplying arms to an insurgency by no means affects the outcome much.
This also demonstrates Putin's wisdom in confining the war to the annexed oblasts for the last 2 years or so. At least an argument could be made that foreign troops entering one of them would involve them in a shooting war with Russia. The fact that things are no longer confined there means that Russia feels strong enough to take on all comers.
What most people still don't realize, which should be obvious but it is always misrepresented by all of us, and the media, especially. Article 5 is just saying each member country must get together and make a decision on IF they will use military force, economic force, or do nothing at all. What makes me chuckle is everyone is concerned about any agreement the US is a party to, they have not honored any contract or agreement that did not directly benefit them. If a Chihuahua State gets crushed I will bet my net worth the scumbags in DC will do nothing except send trillions more of taxpayer money. They know for a fact they cannot defeat Russia in a conventional war. End of Story
NATO charter should clearly outline the procedure for suspending a member of the alliance which unilaterally, without permission of member statates, engages in military conflict. Wishful thinking I know.
Just to say on the Islands - it's NOT about "Russia wants to seize them", once again there is Western disinfo at work here.
Those islands are not being militarised to "Protect against Russia", but to "Prepare to interdict Russian trade from St Petersberg."
Wake up and sniff the coffee beans.
You nailed it Gnuneo
TBF I jumped in to say that early, and Simpli pretty much actually said that later on in the article, lol.
Still, this needs shouting about. It is an obvious indication of a long-tem plan for war over northern Europe.
With 4 nuclear powers directly involved.
I'm sure we'll be fine.
I still believe this is a war of attrition - Russia bogged down with NATO while Israel continues to poke the bear with Iran - ALL OF THIS boils down to the middle east trade corridors and who in the end will conquer - Russia China Iran (allies in the middle east) versus Israel, USA and NATO.
POOF! Say buh-bye . . . .
Surprisingly China's Belt & Road Initiative factors into Israel's war on Hamas in that the hegemon wants to destroy China's ability to get a viable BRI going, which would include Gaza, because the hegemon cannot permit China's ascendancy in trade. Israel is the hegemon's back-stop against China's success
Agree - what this is all about - USA using NATO attempting to block Russia from moving on to the middle east. Israel pokes Iran - Iran attacks Israel the USA attacks Iran and along comes Russia and China and all their new allies. This is where this is all headed. WWIII. In the interim NATO and the USA have been virtually depleted - while China Russia et al are the polar opposite, brilliant chess move by Putin - I also believe nuclear is nothing more than a threat - no one is going to do it.
https://thecradle.co/articles/india-and-irans-chabahar-deal-challenges-us-backed-trade-corridor
https://www.rt.com/business/565543-russia-suggests-alternative-to-suez-canal/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Exactly. And I think Simplicius has missed all the actions that are being prepared to heighteing the tensions in the Baltic Sea, The goal is of course to strangle St Petersburg and Kaliningrad if Russia gain even more victories in Ukraine.
Have you got a substack covering everything happening in the wider arena regarding the baltics, southern border zones and the wider geopolitical situation? Could you do a 1 or 2 part stack that would take us all 3 days to read please.
:-) Ironic… I dont. And I dont expect Simplicius to manage what an assembled NATO HQ cant fulfill. All I say is that Simplicius are more concerned with the positive signs in Russias warfare than the threats from the West. You can ridicule US/NATO and their minions but they can stir quite a mess if they dare/ get there acts together. We havent seen the last actions in Baltic Sea.
No, he HAS mentioned the tensions in the area a couple of times over the past year or two, and how the Baltics & Finland are playing games with lawfare and geography.
Why would they need islands to interdict trade ships? o.O This isn't the 17th century anymore. You have long-range radars and even longer-range anti-ship missiles.
Or did Ansar Allah not blocade the Red Sea? Bab-el-Mandeb is ~25 km while the distance from Helsinki to Tallin is ~70 km. If Ansar can do it unidirectionally across 25 km (and they mostly don't even hit ships there but they hit them further out, probably for the sake of afterwar peace), then surely Finland and Estonia can do it bidirectionally across 70 km.
Exactly. Therefore Russia need to change there international borders so they can better defend the trade routes.
I have to critique President Putin for his exceptionally poor performance compared to Mr Zelensky. After more than two years since the start of the SMO, he's managed to burn only 50,000 Ukrainian books. At that rate, it's going to take him another five or six centuries to catch up to Mr Zelensky's 13 million Russian books.
Come on Vlad, get with the program! Target those libraries!
Very true. Putin cannot compare to Zelensky's language/culture repression and book censorship abilities.
Zelensky has been objectively a much better wartime president than Putin.
Zelensky is out there every night on TV, addressing the country, commenting on current events, maintaining the fighting spirit (sure, it's fake, but it is also fairly effective), and, most importantly, defining clear objectives.
Meanwhile Putin is keeping silent, even as NATO bombs are falling on Russian cities, and has never defined clear objectives, with the only fairly clear message coming from him being that he is looking for a deal, not for actual victory. Which is leaving the Russian public guessing whether there will be yet another betrayal from the Kremlin after an endless series of such treasonous acts going back to the 1960s. All the momentum from the first month of the SMO has long been lost.
I know I shouldn't feed the trolls but this is a joke comment right? People like you continue to prove why satire is dead in the 21st century.
For any concerned 3rd parties wondering, GM has the geopolitical analysis skills of a particularly advanced tea spoon.
^^^
Putin clearly stated objectives at the beginning of the SMO and has repeated them since, and they remain unchanged. Wars aren't won on social media, but on the battlefield.
I restate my case that GM is delusional and probably snorting the same stuff Zelenskyy does.
Whew, GM! I read that first sentence and almost fell out of my chair.
You want them to hate you around here. You must feed off it.
I think we ought to be more charitable to a spectrum of views. The last thing I want in the comments section is a unitary set of opinions or interpretations. Just because someone may say something far out doesn't mean I want them to stop commenting. In the end its part of a vigorous debate and its whats missing from our current leaderships' decision making
One might accept a questioning of Putin's approach, but what really counts as a troll, is saying "Z is a better wartime president than P".
That is not "looking from a different perspective", that is just pie-in-the-sky nearing insanity levels, lol.
Z is an ACTOR, playing at a role. P is a decades-long hard-bitten and hard-fought for Leader of a Superpower, who brought his country back from the brink of destruction and rebuilt it enough to face down the entire collective West and NATO.
There is simply no comparison.
Spouting blatant lies is not vigorous debate. General Moron is a troll, paid or just an ignorant fool is yet to be found.
He’s a glutton for punishment and apparently it paid presence in these parts
"Zelensky has been objectively a much better wartime president than Putin."
If the growing "meat mountain" of dead Ukes is your barometer of "success", I guess you could say the Big Z is way ahead if that's your metric. The heartbroken mothers and girlfriends of DEAD Uke soldiers might quarrel with your insights/conclusions.
Zelenskii no more cares about the Ukrainian dead than he cares about the chickens that go into his McNuggets.
And no, he doesn't care about their mothers, girlfriends, etc.. That's what the secret police are for.
A man that plays the piano with his cocktail is a better leader than a man that rides bears and actually communicates with people without using tiktok. I think someone has done too many lines.
Unfortunately, yes.
Because the first rule of succeeding in something is showing up.
And Putin isn't showing up.
Dozens killed on New Year's even in an act of terror shelling in Belgorod and all we got from him as even an acknowledgement it happened was in response to a question a few weeks later that was really a "what can we do?" shrug off.
This forum suffers from groupthink.
Your comments have value in providing a contrasting point of view.
Nice of you to jump in and offer support to the troll as it’s being pummeled you guys must work on the same fucking farm
Look dumb and dumber are teaming up.
I also appreciate having GM around to keep things from getting too Pollyannaish in this forum.
---
If people ever look at a GM post and wonder "Who the heck clicked the Like button on this?", there's a fair chance it was me. (Although not on the one immediately above.)
What you say is true; indeed, true of all fora and all social interactions. But not everyone realizes that! ;)
You know, you actually had a few valid concerns before but now you definitely are a troll
That would be true if Zelensky was actually in charge. He’s not therefore….
Maybe GM should rephrase and write "the Zelensky Administration", like we do with Biden here in the Empire.
(I make a similar error myself when I refer to the "US Empire". There is no emperor.)
The great moron is dumber than the potato in the white house.
LOL^^^
This is one of two howlers from GM that I saw in the comments to this Simplicius post.
The facts are irrelevant. Control of the narrative is what matters.
Putin could throw away a restaurant napkin with some Ukrainian scribblings on it and this would be treated as the greatest crime against literature since the burning of the Library At Alexandria, while Ukraine can burn books by the millions and nobody raises a peep.
I concur. Apologies, I should have made it clear I was making a joke. ;)
One small correction. If Poland goes into Ukraine off its own bat that does not bring in NATO. Nor does it invoke any article 5 protection if Polish territory gets bombed as a result. The US has already vetoed NATO troops on the ground and has also restated the article 5 exclusion here- lest any nutty Baltic nation decide to try to bounce old europe-America into real direct combat.
Right! If Estonia and Poland send troops into Ukraine under command of a French contignent it will not trigger any article 5. And we can be sure that no one wants to trigger anything. What it will trigger is a grand rift in the NATO. We can note that Latvia and Lithaunia is rather silent. Sweden as a new member makes a lot posturing and has a warmonger as Chief of Staff. It was interesting to see him make statements about international maritime boundaries for which he has no responsibility. It is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that can comment on Swedish borders. Instead, there was talk of militarizing Åland and starting freedom of navigation operations. Actions, that belong to Finland respective to Estonia, to make decisions about.
Not to mention that Article 5 doesn't require any ally to go to war in the first place. It's very open-ended what are allies to do.
Open ended promises, ambiguity, optionality of action, double standards. Sounds like page 1 of NATO charter.
Article 5 applies, if, when and as the Americans say it does.
That said, if you think that the United States will leave its vassals out to dry....
Interestingly, that's precisely what John Mearsheimer argues: that the USA won't go to nuclear war over Ukraine; or, indeed anything else in Europe that's not existential. He may be right; or he may be overestimating US rationality. ;)
LLM-derived breakdowns and summaries of this post by Simplicius The Thinker:
https://open.substack.com/pub/complexiathesinker/p/llm-over-sitrep-52624-natos-yipping
That loud sound is NATO thrashing around like a fish that's been deeply hooked....It's too weak to enter the war, but too embarrassed to quit....
is that what they call Zugzwang?
Good analogy...Zugswang is the unpleasant obligation to move, because any move will lose...Here it's political zugswang....
If anyone is in a Zugzwang, it is the Russians.
They are the ones having their strategic nuclear systems blown up while they themselves are afraid to shoot down a single NATO drone.
The last thing this situations looks like is NATO being in a Zugzwang
😂
****
This is what you call full on delusion.
Okay, I literally laughed out loud when I scrolled after reading the first two comments in this thread and saw this reply pop up. 🤣🤣🤣
the usual GM crap
Huh?
A different view of the same facts is a good thing. GM just makes up facts to suit his views. Therein lies the problem....
So does GM stand for Genetically Modified, Gigantic Moron or General Muppet?
Before Substack, the only thing I new about GM is that it made shitty cars.
Now is General Motors expanding their business into shitty military/political analysis too?
After a few large payments came through from the pentagon, they decided they should go this way unfortunately we are burdened with the results
Great Moron
****
Go ahead Little Vassal State, step in there and fight the bear so we can learn more of their weak points….assume that is the prevailing wisdom. Such middle school tactics. It’s funny because that is probably going to be what gets us all killed.
Russia's secret weapon is to turn its adversaries into ghastly caricatures of snarlingly vituperative crawlers. Estonia's president Alar Karis wants all the smoke @ the barbecue. OTAN's system is so decrepit, so hollowed-out, so over-hyped, so toothless that it must rely on stunts, propaganda, 'media' wins & posh peace summits in alpine resorts, the point of which is to hand the winning military the terms of capitulation, instead of employing robust & logical battlefield tactics. OTAN's downward trajectory, swift, steep & hypersonic, ensures that it corkscrew into the ground @ Mach 7.
This is a chicken Caesar wrap-it-up.