Amidst the latest surge in Ukrainian long-range attacks on Russia, the Kiev Independent outlet released an interesting ‘bombshell’ claiming a “senior Ukrainian official” revealed to them that Trump had privately given Zelensky the greenlight to act “more boldly” against Russia, which we’re meant to presume has been responsible for the latest round of escalations.
I don't think that claim is true. Ukraine is disintegrating fast and nothing can save her from demise of brutal civil war and partition. Front is moving West and at some stage take Odessa up to Romanian border, taking over Transnistria, cutting the rest of remaining Ukraine from the Black Sea and maritime trade. And allowing fuels directly to Hungary, Serbia and rest of Balkans.
Trump is withdrawing from NATO and doesn't want the USA to be involved in European matters. He won't be easily convinced that Ukrainian war has chance to be won and would change his planning.
Also Trump has always hated Ukraine for Russiagate, Zelensky's association with Biden's clan and Democrats. He also hates most of European leaders for their support for Democrats. He even went recently in a public spat with Meloni, a conservative, but they always hated each other.
Yes, the American private corporations have free hand to engage in war anywhere (Palestine, Ukraine) to make money and train their algorithms for use by the US Army. But there are no any weapons left, nothing will be produced for years and it will go into American army inventory for the consecutive attacks on Iran. There would be many of them and nuke deadly.
The most important for Trump is Middle East, situation there is far from over, mainly because from Israeli genocide in Lebanon, and shortly attack on Syria, Turkey and many other countries.
Trump isn't "withdrawing from NATO". Don't fall for the WWE theatre act. US will remain in charge of NATO, and US ISR will continue to fully support Ukraine and NATO war against Russia.
NATO is a treaty. The President can withdraw at will. The Senate does not have to advise and consent on an abrogation of a treaty. They can whine and bitch and moan, though, and will.
Congress codified strict guardrails to prevent unilateral withdrawal:
The 2024 NDAA: Lawmakers included a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act that explicitly prohibits the President from suspending, terminating, or withdrawing from the North Atlantic Treaty.
Requirements for Exit: To legally withdraw, the decision must be backed by a two-thirds supermajority vote in the Senate or authorized by a separate Act of Congress.
Funding Restrictions: The legislation also prohibits the use of any federal funds to support a withdrawal from the alliance without this explicit congressional consent.
Section 1250A's Prohibition of Unilateral Presidential Withdrawal from the North Atlantic Treaty
In Section 1250A of the 2024 NDAA (found at 22 U.S.C. § 1928f), Congress prohibited the President from "suspend[ing], terminat[ing], denounc[ing] or withdraw[ing] from the North Atlantic Treaty … except by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, provided that two-thirds of the Senators present concur, or pursuant to an Act of Congress." Congress further prohibited the use of any funds to "support, directly or indirectly, any decision to" withdraw from the North Atlantic Treaty without Senate advice and consent or statutory authorization. Although Congress has to some extent regulated the President's withdrawal from a treaty in the past, Section 1250A is the first statute in which Congress has prohibited unilateral presidential withdrawal from a treaty.
Congress can’t pass a law overriding constitutional authority. It’s the same problem with war powers. You can pass the resolution but where is the enforcement mechanism? There isn’t. You’d have to get the executive branch to charge itself with crimes, which is ludicrous.
The whole Iran/Contra thing turned on something narrower - that Congress had mandated the money NOT go to the Contra rebels in Nicaragua. Obvious fraud happened and they got caught. An analogous situation would be if Congress said that the funding for NATO must not go to say…Poland, and they found a workaround to give a check to Donald Tusk or something. They are playing games with funding in the above NDAA, but it doesn't matter. It'll be sufficiently obfuscated by the DoD, which has _never_ been properly audited.
Congress can't stop this, and I stand firmly on that ground.
I fo not follow Iran / Contra and 'Congress prohibited the President from "suspend[ing], terminat[ing], denounc[ing] or withdraw[ing] from the North Atlantic Treaty … except by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, provided that two-thirds of the Senators present concur, or pursuant to an Act of Congress."' connections
is it in the constitution? if it isn't, it's like a Russian guy said upon applying at Georgetown and Yale when all the spots were given and being told gently, "getting in is almost impossible." He replied,
in America if it is difficult, it means it is no problem. If it is impossible -- it's difficult."
Trump can stop intelligence including satellite and targeting info today if he wanted.he could also pull military and intelligence assets today and prevent sharing with EU countries.
NATO from this long perspective is now on shakiest of ground. It BARELY held together (and sometimes gave in places) when everybody was united on goals, which were peace and prosperity and no threats. Great goals. But now? Some want relations some do not some want talks some do not some want trade some do not and over everything we see the overarching ugly threat of the Fourth Reich, war and racism and all. We in the US nourished that remnant generation of Nazis and made them praiseworthy and peaceloving and so on, allowing them to nurture future generations of similar who were burrowed underground waiting for the warmth of the EU sun. And the reality is this: why the fuck were we paying so Europeans could brag about their glorious social benefits paid for by US taxes. I say: NATO article 5 is nonsense. France dying for Germany greed for territory and power? C'mon, man.
I suspect it's true. Trump/West took a seriously bloody nose in Iran, where the Iranians didn't give one fig about "Optics" and blew up any damned thing they felt like. The 'Madman theory', and they did it better than the US.
However Russia is taking it like a well-trained puppy, and Big Bad USA can get its self-esteem back with what it thinks is a low-cost strategy - send drones to Ukr, watch the plumes of smoke over Moscow, no retaliations to them worth the name. They get strongly worded letters of complaint.
And Europe (CIA puppet leadership), WANTS Russia to retaliate directly. At the moment, and for some years, they have tried to bang the drums of war and pretty much everyone who isn't brain dead has yawned. However, should Europe have a "9/11 moment", where EVERY SINGLE CHANNEL NON-STOP pumps out the same massively-hysterical images of something in Europe burning, and the phrase "Its a Russian retaliation" will DEFINITELY not be used, this will change the social equation.
Or at least, so the European capitals are banking.
Putin, naturally, is completely aware of this, which is why the Russian military has more than doubled in size, and is fully equipped and trained.
The CIA puppets will be more than happy to do a 'Kitchener' - forcibly conscript the male population, and send them to die pointlessly in meat waves. In fact, that is a clear goal.
By this point I don't think Trump is really that much aware - he just wants a "Victory", and Russia is rather sadly not making that costly AT ALL.
I suspect President Putin will retire soon, although he must know that the West will never accept that, and he will be a high priority assassination target for the rest of his life.
What a fucking mess. And all because the Western Empire, just like the Roman Empire it was modeled upon, cannot accept the idea that somebody somewhere exists outside of its control.
It would be hard for these euro sources to deny retaliatory logic, when it will not be "something in Europe burning" but rather, "some drone or electronics factory," probably somewhere manufacturing Storm Shadows or the like.
As for this moronic western behaviour being a continuation of Roman Empire policies to "create a wasteland and call it peace," it is quite obviously a policy emanating from Tel Aviv, not Rome or Brussels.
Remove the jews from your governments, and find peace at last.
Note how in Starmer's whiny resignation speech, he spoke of "the country I love," ( as Theresa May also did when she resigned ) without specifying which country that was -but certainly not Britain - which he has ruined almost beyond repair - he also spoke proudly about how he has "combatted antisemitism" during his tenure, forgetting to say he has combatted rape gangs too - because he has encouraged and abetted them.
Let's not even go there by asking who it was who, as DPP, refused to prosecute Jimmy Savile.
A predecessor of his, one "Dave" Cameron, specified the two things he most cared about - the State of Israel, and the Conservative party - no reference to the nation he was being paid at the time to be Prime Minister of.
Further note of course, that the incoming replacement for him, Burnham, is also one of the Labour Party's "Friends of Israel," for which you can substitute "Enemies of Britain" if you so choose.
I wonder what the bookies' are pricing the war at these days? Germany, under their proud, chickenshit warrior Merz, is openly sending drones to Ukraine. How long can this go on before Russia decides to return the favor? Or will the AfD simply drive Merz out of power, and into some job more in line with his temperament and rare intellect--say, assistant manager at a McDonald's? Only one thing's for sure: I wouldn't bet against Putin and Russia.
There are deals behind close doors. Including Putin-Trump deal. That's why Trump is withdrawing from Lithuania, Germany, Poland dwindled from 20 to 10 000 and the promised 5 000 will never materialise - just teasing Poles for some troops on the ground send to Middle East
"They" have been trying harder and harder since 2022 to provoke Russian Federation into SOME kind of an overt retaliatory attack against the US/EU/NATO states using Ukraine to attack them.
RF has not taken that bait yet, they aren't stupid enough to let their opponents dictate their actions, especially this kind.
Really, entirely lacked. Didn't Russia attack Ukraine. Is that not assertiveness to go up against NATO? How much more is there, a single country going up a the biggest alliance in history, led be the most powerful military the world.has ever seen?
Not remotely true. Russia attacked to stop the in-the-works ethnic cleansing invasion of Donbass by 130,000 Nazi fanatics and NATO accessories, and it
did that despite having a mere 75K to 80K men available to stop the invasion.
It was a really desperate move and Russia was willing to take big losses to protect the people of Donbass from being wiped out by the Nazis, and Russia was constrained by the huge ethnic Russian population in the regions of Ukraine where the invasion would strike.
The diplomatic double-dealing by the US just before the Russian invasion was totally unprecedented in the relationship between the US and USSR/Russian nuclear powers. It was an insane level of duplicity that risked the lives of 350 million Americans. Now Russia knows the US has descended to that level of irresponsibility but nobody believed the US would roll the dice with its own people to that degree back in late 2021.
Doesn't matter. Russia used inadequate force. It didn't work. Could have should have would have.
Failed.
This whole war has been a series of Russian miscalculations, and neither Ukraine nor its western sponsors acting the way Russia expected, and getting wrongfooted as a result.
Nonsense. It achieved the immediate objective, which was to totally, utterly defeat the US attempt to invade Donbass with a 130,000 man army.
It also forever brought four new territories into Russia, made the Sea of Azov an internal Russian lake, and eliminated almost all of the Black Sea coast from the Nazi regime's control.
Oh, and it's destroyed about half a trillion in US and US stooge dollars and military assets, killed between 500,000 and 1.5 million Nazis and is inflicting a decisive defeat on the US and its stooges.
That's only "failure" to people who have completely lost contact with reality.
Trump is not "frustrated" re project Ukraine. It was obvious from the start that our rulers had recognized utter defeat in 2023 and wanted out while continuing the project in a new form. Trump was the ideal guy to do it: carnival barker and snake-oil salesman, he pulled another Kim. Promised to make peace in a week, he juggled the news cycle for a year and a half, shaking shining objects to distract attention and throwing double messages that constantly cancel each other until he could pull out his stakes and transfer the whole job to his "European" slaves. He got the latter to spend to the point of economic exhaustion and prepare European opinion for not only continuing to the last Ukrainian (very soon now) but also direct suicidal war with Russia, to the last European from [next countries]. Meanwhile he continues the "talks" charade and the Witkushneries. The Russians are not dupes -- the yakking doesn't cost more than saliva and keeps things peaceful on the surface, so they, too, can pretend that they are facing the "Europeans". The evidence that Europe is preparing to commit suicide by cop under orders from the US are all over the place. One major piece of evidence is the deliberate destruction of the sacrifial victim's economy prior to its getting bled. The weak point in all this, though, is the (new?) American habit of forgetting that there is a reality side to war -- it's not all make-believe and PR. No matter how much money the European slaves are paying, the means are lacking and will continue to do so.
"No matter how much money the European slaves are paying, the means are lacking and will continue to do so."
That is the issue most doomers fail to recognise. Europe has few resources of their own - they must purchase them. Since they committed economic suicide by cutting off cheap energy from Russia, their costs have risen dramatically - shops and factories are closing, civilian economic support is collapsing, free speech disappearing and censorship increasing as the political and economic environment deteriorates under the pressure of supporting the war. The difference in Europe between life pre-2013 (Maidan) and now shows a huge gap in quality of life and standards of living. There is a significant and growing social undercurrent increasingly showing itself as life grows more difficult.
The idea that Europe will be able to carry through with promises to support Ukraine with weapons and money beyond comforting words is fundamentally at risk as the social situation deteriorates. Many say that even if Russia accomplishes its end in Ukraine, then the West will just open another front to start all over in order to keep draining Russia. What they do not understand is that the long-term problem generated by the refusal to purchase cheap energy from Russia will definitely prevent such from ever happening to a degree that will do serious harm to Russia.
Meanwhile, Russia grows stronger militarily and economically.
Everything points to the conclusion that the destruction of the European economy is a planned move by the US. Before getting the knife, the lamb must be shorn -- let's not waste. Upping the NATO expenses of the new poor to 5+% of GDP is the coup de grâce to the welfare state. No problem, US-installed dictatorial leaders, ie the all-bankers and Yale-or-Harvard "Young Leaders" crew in charge will deliver, along with their full contingent of meat grinder fodder. So the only hope for us is that they remain as stupid as ever, or as stupid as most of their citizens, seeing the make-believe world as the real one.
The value of europe to the US is as a vast colony on which to dump its produce/services at a price it sets (and as war fighting proxy- although not as much here given the low inclination of europeans to put their necks on the line).
The destruction of the European economy? Which one? Debt is the unit of economic measurement in the EU, and don't imagine the creditors are philanthropists.
You don't need that much resources to grab new conscripts off the street, give them 3 months of "training", and then ship them off with a rifle to a front line they are definitely not expected to come back from. It probably costs the Russians more to keep the corpses frozen until they are 'exchanged' than Ukr spent on them.
Just as Russia was 3x the population of Ukraine, Europe is >3x the population of Russia.
Look at the people in charge of Europe (The very same ones who want to send Ukr refugees back to die, and have no problems with Ukr conscription/meat waves). They would HAPPILY forcibly conscript the young men who are currently enraged at their incompetence and mismanagement - 1-2m Germans, 1-2m Frenchies, 1-2m Brits, plus Spanish, Italians, Portuguese, and all the smaller countries.
This was always NATO's purpose. To recreate the WW2 Eastern Front, but this time not even pretend the anglo countries are opposed to the invasion eastwards.
It's all planned (In that haphazard 'back of a envelope' style that characterises Western 'elites' these days).
Pity the young, whose potentially decent enough future is now just to become drone-fodder. But those left 'at home' might find they catch some unnamed virus.
The 'Great Depopulation' is on the horizon, which upends all previous calculations about "energy" etc. And they don't have to care about "elections", when everyone who thinks a war with Russia is a bad idea will be banned from standing. So much for "Electoral change" at that point.
Grab people off the streets of Europe? I think not. The populations of these countries are opposed to this war and would never allow such measures to take place on behalf of a country like Ukraine. Elections don't matter, nor did they ever - democracy has always been a sham, and people are now beginning to realise that.
The elites might plan, but their plans are unrealistic shit - the globalists are rapidly losing influence, esp as the rest of the world outside the Western coalition is gaining strength.
All this 'depopulation' garbage is just that, like 'Net Zero' - complete nonsense. They have a population problem for certain, but its not over-population, it is under-population modern civilisation with its higher standards of living results in fewer people having babies, the resulting population decrease resulting in difficulties maintaining strong economies. Russia is worried about this. China is worried about this. Europe is too stupid to worry about it.
I agree with most of what you write, but looking at your first paragraph, the same was true for Ukraine some years ago.
Yet for the past 4 years they have been a meat processing concentration camp where men get kidnapped on the streets and sent to the slaughter fields.
And these are Slavic people. Much more hardened than e.g. Scandinavians.
Would the Scandinavians really resist something like this? These are the people who vaxxed their 3-year old kids in order for themselves to "stay safe". When push comes to shove they will be pushing their own sons into the TCC wagons if that means stopping the evil Putler from getting to them.
Exactly. Never overestimate human illogic when in groups; never underestimate the power of Madison Avenue and propaganda. Turnaround of the crowds has been known to occur as suddenly as a coastal squall. Millions of well-fed, smug "middle classes" were many times transformed into uniformed lemming runs.
Well, maybe. Certainly populations can be turned - we are herd creatures after all. However, no matter how large the army Europe raise, it simply does not have the resources to do much with it - it doesn't really have the money needed, the logistics network to support it, nor the weaponry/ammo required, nor the industrial base to support all that, plus it has extremely weak, unbalanced, unintelligent, stupid leadership to drive it all. They think they can be ready by 2029/2030 - of course they will! But how will they do that? Again, no money, limited resources, no cheap energy sources, ever-weakening industrial base, an unwilling population, and poor leadership. And even if somehow they were able to come up with a large army, how long do you think it would last in a modern war with Russia who has the best air defences and standoff weapons in the world, including tactical nukes (if the situation required). Their major centres of intelligence, decision-making and political leadership along with their prime military bases, esp air assets, would be destroyed within the first week. Unlike Ukraine, Russia would once again introduce Europe to REAL warfare, no holds barred. As for the weakness of Putin, many here will remember the 'Putin of the Second Chechen war" shortly after he came to power as Prime Minister - this was the War Putin - you don't want to be in his sights when he has turned the fury of his war machine on you as he did with the Chechens to bring them into line. He famously said, "If we catch them in the toilet, we will wipe them out in the outhouse." If a village was found to be supporting any separatists, it was completely destroyed.
He, like Russians before him, executed war without mercy.
The best chance Europe has to survive is a major change in leadership, divorce from the USA, dismantling of the EU and NATO, formulating a new pan-European security architecture with Russia and re-opening trade with Russia (though that might no longer be a possibility since Russia has physically redirected its energy flows east away from Europe).
Chances are that the sun will rise in the West and set in East.
I think you torpedo your own argument -- "these are Slavic people. Much more hardened than e.g. Scandinavians." As a result, when you conscript them they do indeed fight hard and bravely. Could you say the same about most conscripts from the West who have never had to deal with any crisis worse than their smartphone ran out of charge?
And what are these robots going to do? March on Moscow? Good luck with that says Napoleon and Hitler. Are they immune to tactical nukes? Just asking...
I would add that the troops sent to the front—or rather, the survivors among them—would become stateless. The foreign occupiers within EU countries would not fail to seize those defenseless nations and establish their caliphate there.
This is a thought I share in part but chose not to express. The "heritage" populations are at risk from incomers, but not just Muslims. It may not be necessary for their international-banker-owned political leaders to attempt to draft "heritage" multi-generationally-born nationals and send them off to war, given that drafting other-ethnicity residents might resist said draft, because at the rate things are going population-wise and socially, the incomers are already close to effecting the seizure. European ethnics, particularly northwest Europeans, are depopulating themselves out of existence and Coudenhove-Kalergi is break-dancing in his grave, although his hoped for hybrids may not all be of an African mix. The same is true of the West in general; homogeneous ethnic identities may well-nigh disappear over the course of this century.
The populations of Europe will go as meekly as the Ukr, and that is just a fact. With national databases, face-rec, ubiquitous surveillance cameras, and fascist states, there is no escape. Of course the plans are "fantastic shit", but that has never stopped them from implementing them. See: Iraq, fx.
As for population, this only matters if you are thinking in 'Classical' terms - ie, the survival of the Nation. Do you see ANY concern by the globalists for this?
You have zero understanding of the situation that would develop in many European countries if a national government would try to conscript their citizens for a war with Russia. Thinking about controlling bank accounts is preposterous.
In fact, an instant revolutionary moment would be produced.
It woukd be 1917 but without White generals, cossacks and and White rank and file. It would be a magical moment of national unity, trades unions, parties from the extreme left to the extreme right, including left, right and center would rebel.
You say block the bank account of anyone not answering to the draft.
No one would answer and the banks would burn on the real sense of the word if any such thing would be attempted.
I don't know where are you from, but you seem to know very little about European societies.
That's not what going to happen if Europe really raise 3x larger army. It's not going to be drone fodder, it's going to be tac nuke fodder. Simply because it's more efficient. People constantly misunderstand that nukes are not deterrence weapons, it's "I can't lose" weapons. With intermediate tac nukes arsenal close to 10k warheads, the size of European potential army is completely irrelevant to Russia.
Forcibly conscript the Spanish? Any politician trying to do that would hang from the branch of the nearest tree, before one single man is send to any front.
There are always plenty of ways to get people angry enough to fight. Just today Kit Klarenberg's article about Northern Ireland. The British special ops left a sandwich on Bobby Sands gravestone in order to get Republicans rioting on the streets. The only thing that's changed from the 70s is they have social media and digital bacon sandwiches.
1 to 2 million Germans, 1 to 2 million French, 1 to 2 million Britons, plus Spaniards, Italians, Portuguese, and all the smaller nations.
I think your coke dealer is messing up the deliveries; that stuff is cut with garbage. Look at the facts: NATO countries (just speaking of Europe) are failing to meet their personnel quotas and can't replace those retiring or leaving voluntarily—numbers that are rising all the time. Do you really think the authorities in these countries will manage to round people up off the streets? As a former soldier—and the army I served in was considered a major force—I can tell you that the only thing I was offered in combat was a thousand ways to die. I find it hard to picture today's troops—those oddballs who look like the mentally challenged—heading to the front lines. Here’s a question: how many special forces personnel stayed in the ranks until retirement after surviving intense combat in Afghanistan and Iraq? You need to stop dreaming; Darth Vader, the Terminator, and Rambo belong in the movies.
It's funny to note that almost everyone thinks they are superior to the Ukrainians, and that "their" regime couldn't possibly do to us what was done to Ukr.
Ukr has literally sent paraplegics into the front lines, the mentally disabled, and the retired. Nazis generally want to kill such people anyway, and the "optics" is SOOO much better when it's the 'front line' killing them rather than a prison camp.
Btw, I loathe coke, and what it does to people. Probably my least favourite street drug. Sounds like your favourite drug is either religion or far-right media. Even coke doesn't addle wits as bad as THOSE.
Hahahahahaha—religion? Far-right? That’s the usual narrative used to shut down any contradictions, speculations, or truths. I have just one question for you: would you willingly let yourself be rounded up as part of that group of 1 to 2 million? Another question: have you served? And if so, would you willingly head to the front lines to face Russia, the USA, China, or other powers? If not, what are you waiting for to take the step and show up at a recruitment center? You could also join the Ukrainian International Legion.
It's a fair bet that anyone who constantly goes on about "immigrants" (By which they rarely mean the corporate 'titans', but usually Brown normal people), rather blaming the greed of the 'elites', is a rightwinger.
It's also a fair bet that they fondly imagine their 'native' religion is Shittianity, and usually have no idea this was a cult that came out of the Middle East and was forcibly spread by the sword.
Perhaps on both counts I was wrong.
I'm sorry to avoid your direct questions, but I'm afraid a lot of personal info is classified - by me. It's the internet, don'tchaknow.
Would I be willing to go to the front lines to face Russia, China? No. Those countries have done me no harm, and frankly want a better future than what Western countries are offering.
Against the USA? Now you're talking. To get the CIA out of the politics, the military occupation bases off our soil, the toxic crap that is American "food" out of the country altogether, and for that matter the media which is just pure fascism by this point also blocked.
"You could also join the Ukrainian International Legion."
If I was North Korean I would consider that too... OOOH, you mean the OTHER side, right!
All those fuckers, like you cannot understand that wherever you were stirring up shit,
YOU HAD NO FUCKING BUSINESS TO BE THERE.
"Here’s a question: how many special forces personnel stayed in the ranks until retirement after surviving intense combat in Afghanistan and Iraq?"
If anyone has joined the Armed forces for combat OUTSIDE of their Sovereign country, especially when the home country hasn't been attacked I call them Broken Men that must abrogate personal responsibility to kill outside their country, as it is not defending the homeland.
It looks to me like you live in the same building as Grunéo. That explains why you're having trouble understanding what you read—it's an epidemic in that building, right? Read it again and again; the light will dawn on you.
no eu people will die for Ukraine they will take a flight to southern hemisphere and relocate there other older will even less fight too much confort, they are cowards
If you see two people in the street fighting, do you always pick a side and jump in swinging too? Why not eric - are you a coward?
As Mao said in the LRB, there is a world of difference between an Imperial army and Imperial, compared to a liberator army and Liberator war.
Would I join an army to liberate Palestine from the Zionazis? I'd certainly consider it. Would I join an imperial war against Russia for the Bankster class? South America sounds good, if not Russia itself.
It's not COWARDICE, it's the AIMS of the war that counts.
Your last sentence called to mind Ernest Borgnine in "The Wild Bunch" slapping his hat against his thigh and rebutting William Holden by shouting something to the effect of "It ain't givin' your word that counts, it's who you give it TO!"
"Just as Russia was 3x the population of Ukraine, Europe is >3x the population of Russia." That's missing the point. Population means nothing without the resources to arm, equip, and support that population in war. Europe no longer has those resources, energy being first and foremost the key resource. Russia does.
Once you have a sufficient base population (and Russia certainly does) it's all about the massive resources required to wage modern war. Looking at the resource required, Russia has all the resources and Europe doesn't.
Europe has more than enough such resources. Simple question: does Europe have access to/use more energy now than it did in the 1930s?
Sure, it needs taking away from the population, and redirecting into the military machine. So why do you think the european states have been quietly building a totalitarian surveillance machine if they intended to keep everyone sweet?
"Guns not butter" is the planned future. If you say in response, quite reasonably: "But ill-equipped, badly trained soldiers will just be massacred when thrown against the well oiled Russian military!", I quite agree - and point you at Ukraine.
You think the traitorous Zio/CIA swine in charge of Europe CARES about their OWN population any more? Those leaders are hated for good reasons.
And when a large part of the aim is to 'reduce the populations' too, welll....
Europe does not have the capacity any more to procure those resources and must rely on the global market. Europe has set itself back at least a decade so they are already on the back foot.
"Simple question: does Europe have access to/use more energy now than it did in the 1930s?"
Compared to what it needs, it has less. It's a false comparison to measure today's European energy requirements against past days. To see that, just ask the same question about more or less than it had in the 1500's.
In point of fact, though, since you raise the question, Germany in the 30's was indeed bottlenecked by lack of energy. That was one of the reasons they lost despite having conquered industrial resources in countries other than their own which they could turn to their own purpose, countries such as France, Austria, Czechoslovakia, etc.
But the asymmetry is far, far worse today. Germany spent over 50 years building an industrial base and an economy that depends upon cheap Russian energy. Without it, they're kneecapped.
That was an extremely low-energy society that was always in a permanent state of war. There was no spare energy even for razor blades, and food was always rationed, and always short.
The citizens lived in a totalitarian state of constant fear, but there was no chance of revolt, none, even within the elites themselves.
Yes, it was fiction (was?), but fiction based upon real world conversations that Eric Blair had overheard during WW2 regarding the expected post-war period.
Note: I'm not saying this WILL happen, all I'm saying is that it is not impossible, not by a long shot.
Note 2: I'm also not saying such a war can be "won" - whatever that means in the post-modern age with the very modern WMD stockpiles - but as 1984 say, the war was not MEANT to be won - just fought for eternity.
The irony is the elites won't enjoy it either, they didn't in the book. But there was nothing they could do about it - the system had been designed too well.
There was no way out of the trap they had built themselves.
We can see the same dynamic at work now, the "Intel Agencies" are busy creating that very system, and there's already nothing that common people can do about it - anymore than the normal Ukies could prevent what happened there.
She sponsored Trump's electoral campaign, but now she would like to literally dispose of him, he is a toast. Thus possible saving Republicans from mid term defeat.
"...but also direct suicidal war with Russia, to the last European from [next countries]." I’ll bet anything that in the year 6038, the runts will still be yapping and nothing more. I’ll say it again for the umpteenth time: whether it’s NATO or the EU runts, they never hesitated to go to war against desert peasants in flip-flops, yet they barely stayed long before heading home—unable to go the distance, with Daddy unable to make up for the shortages. My prediction: the slaves will establish the most ferocious of dictatorships to control their enslaved populations—peoples more fearful than any others since the dawn of humanity.
‘Latest Surge in Attacks on Russia Was "Encouraged" by Trump’
It is most likely true. Before this statement was made (if it was made) it was surely cleared with Zelinsky and that guy would not want to cross Trump for sure. He was likely authorized by Trump to make the statement. Once we break down the two wars, Iran and Ukraine, and analyze Trump’s actual acts without paying any attention to rhetoric, the story is simple and obvious. He is driving for monetary gain plus the dissolution of the Russian Federation. In Iran he had similar high goals but the Iranians called his cards and he did not have a winning hand. His original plan was to run over some critical countries on this planet and arrive too China and Cuba with his victorious armies. The plan is already a failure.
But Zelensky and Trump are crossing each other all the time for years, the prime example Zelensky at the White House being kicked out through the kitchen door. This time it's not Zelensky publicly contradicting Trump, but some unknown entity.
Yes, both actors with experience, and Trump commented the White House incident a "great show", but Trump and Zelensky are both loosing their trump cards. They both have to withdraw, both have short lives ahead of them - literally they can vanish overnight. Trump is even closer to it, imminent threat - slow poisoning and multi-organ failure or dagger in the back on spiral stairs, like Julius Caesar with "And you, Brutus?".
They are being kept only to engage Russia in Europe, to prevent it from the Middle East and Iran theatre, and the rest of world.
‘This time it's not Zelensky publicly contradicting Trump, but some unknown entity.’
He might be unknown to us but certainly not to Zelensky. The most likely scenario is: Trump set off the chain reaction with Zelensky as they both hope to profit from the act. This was not an accidental or unauthorized leak. Trump is hoping for a juicy deal with Russia where Putin was already agreeable and Zellensky is hoping to finish the war on better terms. On the one hand it is theatrical act, on the other hand we can all rest assured the major actors are constantly communicating and that includes the European leaders as well. I think the face off with Meloni was real. I have seen a short video where she was clearly disgusted with Orange and rather vocal about it. Trump is also playing to keep the door open for NATO entry into Ukraine after a shaky peace agreement but that is not going to work out. Some Russian commanders will just find an excuse to tactical nuke German or UK troops if they enter.
The bookies remark was intended as a setting for sarcastic humor. I would as soon go to bookies for political advice as I would to Thomas Friedman's endless supply of taxi drivers--in other words, not in my lifetime.
He was president, that between Putin's presidencies. Putin was elected till 2030, with possible extension to 2036. So very unlikely Medvedev will be back, war will end before that.
If Putin would to die, he would be replaced by a military person, not by civilian. Possibly without presidential elections but nomination by the Security Council or by Duma. And that would mean competent and fast acting developments. Medvedev, for what he good is, he is still a colourful parrot.
Unlike America, Russia has a constitution that they believe in. They would never tolerate such an unconstitutional move. Besides, neither the Security Council nor the Duma would ever in a million years support such a move.
2012 – Hero of the Russian Federation, the Order for Services to the Fatherland with Swords (IV degree), The Medal of the Order for Services to the Fatherland (II degree),
2017 – The Order of Alexander Nevsky,
2022 – The Order for Services to the Fatherland (III degree).
"Commander of the Special Operation Forces and Deputy Chief of the Main Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces." 2013-2015
Probably had something to do with the "Little Green Men" in Crimea. ;)
What we know for certain is that Jerry Lewis will be the next US President; he will lead the country from the afterlife via his social network, "Truth Jerry."
Russia has been sparingly using drones for a week, and has discussed using the Oreshnik in "combat", not just "testing" as the prior strikes have been. I presume that Russia is prepared to hit something and maybe some-bodys very hard if/when Ukraine hits Russian drone-repeater radio-towers in Belarus..
Got any more command bunkers with NATO Generals in them guys?
The last days Russia has used several Kinzhals on airfields in Vasilkov and Starokonstantinov, not as good as Oreshniks, but it has them in large supply of hundreds.
There are plenty of command bunkers, one was busted on Maysky (May) Island in the Nikolaev region with 10 British "instructors"
What a BS! Eric Smith publicly talking about defeating Russia using drones for more than 4 years - how this is an “obligation to do”. So it is nothing new.
Zelensky started complaining about Belarus now of all times, because he is trying to get Russia to overextend her air defences over to include Belarus. This way, Russia proper and the four oblasts will have less air defence against further drone raids.
Zelensky doesn't care nor fear much Belarus, he is just scheming
Lukashenko can always invite North Korean 10 000 strong contingent with their MLRS 240mm, able to fly over from the border directly on Kiev.
If full war, Russian 750 000 conscripts can be send to Belarus for training.
That is another over 1000 km front line, doubling what is now for Ukraine.
Besides, some European countries don't want war coming closer to it's borders. They will stop supporting Ukraine. See sauering relations with Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria. And many other countries around the world would recognise Ukraine as an offender.
If Putin allows West attacking Moscow without strong response why do you think he will do it for a different country?
I can’t think of any places where outside western ukraine where Putin protected friends….wether militarily or maiden color revolutions, Putin is afraid to push back decisively against the West. Hitting legit military targets in Ukraine is not a response.
Hopefully Russia will make clear that if Belarus 'helping' attacks on Ukraine deserves military action then Europe doing the same much more extensively against Russia will receive the reciprocal action directly as well.
How large again are the forces all of Europe could throw at this time against Russia? And how large how the "waiting" troops in Russia, that have yet to be deployed?
The figures are out there. Russia easily, shall we say, trumps everyone else, unless the US joins the European side. And the Donald has made it clear he despises Europe, and won't fight its battles.
Charles Maguire you must be a teenager. Stop with the arrogant American accent. You have no idea what Putin has done for the world. A weaker leader in Russia like yourself the world would have been turned to ash a decade ago.
WWIII and nuclear war is excuse Putin pacifists or his Globalists Oligarchs hide behind. Iran with no nuclear weapons, held back and arguably defeated two nuclear powers in 4 months even after US threatened nuclear war. Iran had the iron will to protect itself. Putin has been fumbling the SMO for 4 years....
Exactly. Somehow if you have nuclear weapons you are in far more danger, and must take no steps to defend yourself, than if you don't. That's what passes for thought in this group.
Sorry but B.S., Putin will not protect Russia let alone anyone else by going to war. Hell, even Donbass has paid heavy price for Putin refusal to take “smo” seriously much earlier.
who are you talking to ? Me ? I think its protocol that if Russia were coming into a conflict on behalf of an ally - that's defined as war not a special military operation - but I'm not in the military- its just obviously different
Nothing new here: west participating in the war even before it started in 2022. Only difference is that until now Russia could handle it. Now with 500+ drone waves, if your AD is 99% performing, there will be 5 drones striking targets.
And trend is that there will be more and more drones for Ukraine and AD can not be improved enough to match it.
Jesus Christ. Of COURSE the US has greenlit the latest attacks. Not a singe one happens without US intelligence and targeting. The west is betting on more "perpetual weakness" from Putin, and that's a damn good bet. They'll attack Belarus on the same theory, and who thinks Putin will stand up more for Lukashenko than he does for Russians? Which is not at all. Defeat looms.
Dude, if you don’t see it yet, you’re never going to see it, even after Putin signs whatever he’s forced to sign. The amazing “I’ll never hit my enemy” strategy simply doesn’t work. So go on back to Simplicius and agree with him, yet again, that every attack on Russia is a sign of desperation and weakness, and every flat-line response from Putin is a sign of great strength and wisdom.
I never claimed any of that. But the fact is that Russia is a huge power, both militarily and economically and resource rich, unlike Ukraine and the rest of Europe. In a war of attrition the result is inevitable, esp in light of the fact that Russia's economy is not affected near to the extent that Europe's has been and that Russia's inventory of weaponry has increased over time, not decreased. You and I might not like how Putin and his Security Council (the conduct of the war is not just Putin's strategy but his Security Council) is conducting the war but it is evident that there can only be one result - a destroyed Ukraine, a fractured Europe and the real possibility of a breakup of NATO.
If a guy came up and slapped you in the face with a puppet, would you say you were fighting the puppet? or the guy? If the guy holding the puppet then, still bombing you regularly, offered to mediate between you and his puppet, would you enter that farce?
Or to put it differently, if a guy said he’d hit decision-centers and treat any attack from the puppet as an attack by you and then pretended he never said that and never stopped pounding the puppet and never attacked you, would you have any respect for him at all? And would you think such a clown would inevitably win the real war being fought?
Russia will lose if Putin can’t come up with better answers to those questions than he’s offered so far. And it is now iffy even if he does wise up. The US and Europe are nowhere near economic collapse, and despite the theater, NATO is nowhere near fragmentation.
You ignore the fact that Europe and the USA have been seriously hurt by this war - most of what is going on in Europe today is directly a result of the war. And whilst the US is still providing ISR and limited weaponry its credibility around the world has been seriously damaged over the backwardness of its weaponry and the inability to defend against Russian weapons. The West is having serious problems with continuing this war, regardless of all the propaganda noise they are making, propaganda that appears to have you blinded as well.
But I will grant you one thing. I believe it would be most helpful to the Russian effort if they would send a few Oreshniks to the UK and Germany thus giving them a clear message that if they keep fucking around, they will find out what real war is about. But even if they don't do that, the end result will not change.
I can see no circumstance in which Russia would lose. What would 'losing' even look like?
Losing would look like a Ukraine surviving still full of Nazis while Russia is surrounded by hostile or alienated countries, leaving the US a clear field for its endless mischief. A few years ago I'd have said it was a defeated Syria, an imperiled Iran, a politically captured Venezuela, Romania, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Kazakhstan, but oops, most of those things have already happened.
The US's reputation has been damaged? by whom? The weapons industry has never made so much money and can't make enough for all its customers, which is something you like to say, but that wouldn't be true if there were no demand, would it?
The west is not HAVING to defend against Russian weapons. That's the point I keep making. Bitch-slapping a puppet isn't hurting the puppeteer.
"You ignore the fact that Europe and the USA have been seriously hurt by this war - most of what is going on in Europe today is directly a result of the war."
I suspect most are on the precipice, but that beats being "On the Beach" if one takes that as a reference to the 1957 Nevil Shute novel or the 1959 movie of the same name.
I was tending towards this point of view after initially thinking that the Russians would win convincingly. Putin’s softly softly approach is certainly making Russia look weak. And maybe they are. However, on the front line, they have either taken, or are about to take, Konstantinovka and Lyman after a slow but relentlessly steady advance, whereas what Ukraine and its western backers are doing is mainly optics.
You're always talking about Putin. Can't help thinking you believe it's all about him... It's not. Frankly speaking, I am someone very happy that he has resisted all the provocations (here are many behind him eager to pull the trigger). Anyone gagging for a full scale war is by definition an idiot. Recognise anyone like that?
If you're in a war you might as well fight it. The real idiots are the ones who cheer on a leader who refuses to do that and thus guarantees defeat. Know anyone like that?
This war is not "about" Putin, but regarding military decisions, the buck stops with him. He is the one fucking things up, which you implicitly recognize when you say how happy you are that he has resisted all the provocations. Yes, killing or maiming 200,000 Russians is a mere "provocation," hardly more than an unkind word, right? And further, the point I have repeatedly made is that Putin's pussillaminity is making full scale war with all of Europe more, not less, likely. You only have to open your ears to their comments to know that, but keep em shut. It's more comfortable that way.
So you're gagging for a real war... You talk like you're down the pub with your mates. I do share a little of your frustration, meaning I do think Russia (I don't talk about 'Putin' because it's perfectly clear to me that whole the buck stops at him, he doesn't run the ship singlehandedly...) should make a few PR displays of their own. But if the gates were too truly open, you must remember there are unforeseen consequences, destruction on a scale that is hard to imagine and of course death on an even larger scale. All that before any 'boots on the ground' got started.
No. War, real war, has to be a last resort. Putin the merciful knows this (sorry, couldn't resist 😅). 200,000 dead Russians is likely far less than what it would have cost. On that note, in light of the massively disproportionate losses to the Ukrainians, I wonder when they will rebel - maybe they are already, but their great, EU member-to-be, democracy is preventing a stop to their madness?
I’m done here. I’ve said what I had to say. Remember this conversation when Putin signs a deal that leaves Ukraine intact and militarily able to attack again. Which he will do.
What's truly amazing is your level of retardation. You have almost reached gm's level, not surprising since you both share the exact same ip address. Quit the troll farm and get a real job
Yes. You are right. Russia and Belarus are doomed. A sad defeat is coming.
Many Putin worshipers are starting to realize how incompetent (or treacherous) Putin is. It was clear for years since the start of this war. The whole collective west, if not the whole world including China is the Ukrainian resource base. The developed world loves USA/EU/Ukraine and the world hates Russia.
Ukraine has this back support that Russia cannot hit or hurt. while Ukraine/USA can hit Russia. We hear that Ushakov begged for negotiations with the EU but EU rejected him.
Europe does not want to trade and negotiate. Europe wants to eat Russia for dinner. Frankly speaking, the Russians deserve that as they were unable to remove a stupid old man form Kremlin. They always wanted just to be US style stupid consumers. Russia was defeated long ago as they started dreaming Western dreams, as Russian women started to prefer Americans to Russian men. That was the end, we see only the bloody aftermath.
John Helmer says that even the chairman of Russian central bank, Nibulina now disobeys Putin and reject cheaper credits for the war industry.
So Russia lost deterrence and respect.
Now, Russia can prevent a total defeat only via going nuclear. But that is not going to happen.
Iran is also defeated as it started to negotiate.
You cannot negotiate with the West. American native Indians know that. Putin should have asked them.
"Russia can prevent a total defeat only via going nuclear. But that is not going to happen". Why is it not going to happen? This is the great dichotomy that both Russia and the West are going to have to face. The West is determined to defeat Russia, but it is not possible to defeat a nuclear power. Russia will no more allow itself to be defeated than the US would. Kennedy had it right when he warned the West not to back Russia into a corner, which is precisely where we are heading.
It won't happen in the simple way you imagine. Putin will sign some bogus deal, claiming victory. All the morons here will celebrate his wisdom, though it will have sold out everything he's said so far, and eventually the west will engineer a balkanization, either through a coup of Putin or his replacement, or through some sort of local shenanigans. Putin has amply demonstrated that nothing short of nuclear attack, if that, would trigger nukes on Russia's side. That is, unless Putin EVER mans up and starts treating this war as a war and not a stroll through the park.
Oh, and in my other reply I forgot to say that the Native American Indians did not have the worlds largest nuclear arsenal, so the analogy, snappy as it is, is specious.
>Russia needs only to continue plying its grinding war and await the slow political collapse of Europe.
What political collapse? I’m in the UK. Starmer has just stepped down. The next PM, carbon copy of Starmer, has been ushered into parliament in a by-election (ie, the voters of a specific constituency voted him in), in order to contest the Labour party’s leadership, win it (of course) and be put in the PM’s chair. It is all as expected and it is all under iron control. When the next election comes round Farrage will be given his marching orders, another five years. And so on and so forth. They can’t really be telling me that Putin is counting on “Europe’s political collapse” for winning in Ukraine. My mind is made, this war is fake.
I was trying to be charitable. Non stop repeating absurd arguments makes a certain sense if one gets paid, even a modicum, for it. Otherwise it is plain silly.
You repeat that is is technically possible to close a bank account. This is obvious. But you fail to understand that you cannot do that to a whole nation in a revolutionary state. That would destroy the economy in days.
No comparison with some judicial action against an unwanted candidate.
No European is going to be drafted and send to the "Ostfront". Not in our time. If you don't understand that, it is a lose of time discussing anything with you.
Continue your variations of a theme. What was it? Russia is weak, the West solid and powerful and Putin is a traitor and a Zionist. Sure.
Europe already is damaging its own economies. Doesn't bother the rulers a bit.
And it wasn't just "judicial action against an unwanted candidate". The entire election was cancelled.
You otherwise invent a bunch of arguments I never made in order to argue with strawmen. I never have said Putin was a traitor or a Zionist, to start with.
He probably is a traitor and a zionist, though. Regarding the freezing of accounts, one might also consider the Canadian trucker strike a few years ago, where not only the truckers, but all people attempting to support them, had accounts frozen. Confiscated too, I think. Any confidence that that the Europeans won't do this on as wide a scale as necessary are delusional. It wouldn't be 5 million, though.
Despite the big talk most people will sign up without rebellion, and the leaders of any movement to resist can be targeted just as they already have been. They'll head to the front if required to do so. Why would anybody have confidence otherwise? Either they're in favor of hostilities now, in which case they can be persuaded to fight, or they're against them now, in which case they have been completely ignored without any problem as they cut social services and foster race riots.
You think that you have a "clear vision", but you can't really see if you ignore so many factors. Among others, the fact that Russia is nuclear power, as well as the West. Western elites are SO OBVIOUSLY provoking Russia. And we know why. Western "elites" count on their nuclear shelters and AI. Did they invite you to their nuclear shelter? No. They dream of only a few young people for biomass needs (organ harvesting, sex industry, etc.).
So, in fact, Putin INDEED is very wise. He doesn't go where the West is pushing him - they want him to push the red button first, so that they could blame him for nuclear Armagedon. Anyway, despites of trillions spent on propaganda, they are getting defeated in their own info war. Thanks to Ukraine we know about the REAL stakes of Western financial empire in wars of the XX and XXI century - we know their tactics and strategy. We can all see that the West is run by psychopathic mafia. And psychos cannot win because they are SELF-DESTRUCTIVE.
Whenever we talk about attrition we never talk about "Who has the most money?" and "Who has the most people?" China isn't going to fight in Europe apparently or lend money to the Russian government at their much lower rates due to "sanctions." The Bank of England and the Rothschilds have a completely different idea about lending money to win wars. The Bank of England has lending for war written into its charter. So the European countries are paying 3-4% while Russia pays 14.5%, down from 22% half way through the war. The head of the Russian bank is on record as opposing the war, to the delight of the Western economic media.
Yes, obviously there are limits and conditions and red lines agreed upon for both, and then the technology changed. And I don't think Russia has the capital to reorient its defenses, or has set up conditions so it can't "because of sanctions." Russia and China are going to have to say "F' the sanctions. We are at war." Forget S-300s, 400s, and 500s; we need more Panstirs, but they use up a lot of ammo. Russia needs WWII defenses or needs to take out the satellites. AS THEY CROSS RUSSIA'S RED LINES RUSSIA HAS TO CROSS THEIRS. They need to take out the bridges that divide the Ukraine East and West and end the government. They don't need to nuke Germany. Take out the Ukrainian government. I have no problem with hitting Musk and Thiel infrastructure. They stole the technology the US and NASA spent years and billions developing.
The entire West has been Epstein'ed, and we are its victims.
I’d ask you to wake me up when the mighty engine of Russian superiority gets cranking, or when the west collapses economically, but we both know we’ll probably die of old age before that happens. By the time Russia’s defeat is “actually imminent” as I think you mean the phrase, everybody will say it’s obvious and they’ll blame those of us who warned about it for it happening. It probably hasn’t passed the point of no return yet, but it is imminent even now.
Of course not, but that hasn’t stopped people from claiming I’m an agent of… whoever. I wasn’t speaking of me personally, however. There are several of us pointing things out and constantly being called names.
Don’t be naive concerning monetary theory or history, like the ninny who claimed, ‘…The dollar is currently doing fine. It isn't even weakening against gold at the moment or for the past six months, and against other currencies it's very strong…’, for despite this baseless view of economic “might”, the USD has lost nearly 98% of its value since 1913.
But why should the USD crash sooner rather than later? Well, because the ever changing monetary system sees an average lifespan of roughly 40 years. The last was Bretton Woods II, and the current fiat system is on its last legs having been instituted on Aug 17 1971 by Nixon when he unpegged the dollar from gold. It has lasted 55 years and the nails in its coffin are splintering the coffin as the nails share less room amongst the ever increasing reactions by the world’s powers.
There WILL be a new monetary system by the end of this decade, you can bet your bottom dollar and you can also be certain Washington’s debt ridden Ponzi scheme will no longer lead the world reserve currency as gold consolidates and fills central bank coffers in preparation for this
Given the sleazy way you stated your argument you hardly deserve a response, but since you're pretending to be a monetary expert I will take issue with two of the things you say. First, your bet that there will be a new monetary system by the end of this decade. I'd take that bet. BRICS is illusory and doesn't even pretend to want to create a new currency, and China is both actively against its currency becoming a reserve currency and working hard to preserve the dollar. There won't be a new monetary regime in place by 2030. That's a pipe dream.
About the dollar "losing 98% of its value since 1913," you obviously have no idea what that means. What it obviously does NOT mean is that Americans or dollar holders in general have lost wealth. On the contrary, America is richer than ever (or was a few years ago). The dollar's erosion has been a drain on dollar holders, not the economy at large, and since it has been accompanied by numerous policy changes funneling huge amounts of money to the rich, what the dollar's erosion has really meant is to cream the non-wealthy on fixed income. The poor, the elderly, the disabled. They're the ones who desperately need a stable currency. It is also true that when inflation exceeds the growth of wages, the working class takes a big hit, which it has since 1973. There's nothing about any of that that the people running DC right now care about in the least.
The price of gold is a pretty good barometer of confidence in fiat, and the fact that that price is stable is, in fact, very significant. The dollar isn't "weakening" if it is in fact strengthening against all other currencies and their alternatives. Which it currently is. It would be much better for the world if it were not.
You’ve assured me I’m in good company then with the beginning of your response (I’m sure you couldn’t help yourself). But let’s take on your flimsy and baseless claims:
1. BRICS has not only experimented with a basket currency backed by commodities, but has also created an alternative to SWIFT, aka BRICS Pay. This is in addition to adjacent payment processors outside the London/Washington shadow complex. But The claim BRICS isn’t investing in a neutral currency is just incorrect. Also please notice I never claimed BRICS desires to have a hegemonic banking/ world reserve system like what exists today with the Washington/London cartel.
But your next argument invites an easy rebuke for a complete absence of foundational understanding concerning economics. How so?
A healthy economy, or true prosperity HINGES on the middle class. In fact a healthy economy sees roughly 80% of its GDP created by small business. Yes, it is the most basic fact that innovation begins with the individual and that government CANNOT create jobs and therefore doesnt create wealth. You might argue they create government jobs, but this is a net negative because these jobs are funded by taxpayers directly (front end), or indirectly through currency creation (backend).Yet you sit here and claim the USD losing a massive 98% of its value doesn’t/ hasn’t hurt the economy but only the working class? You make this error by assuming that the US is wealthy when the rich are well off and own most of the wealth. But you’re wrong. History has revealed time and again a massive wealth disparity between the corporate/ ruling bedfellows and the working class often leads to revolution, or a new monetary system (grass roots vs central planning) due to unsustainable debt both private and public. The central planners tend to use bail outs (currency creation), or more recently, bail-ins which is the seizing of currency from unsecured creditors (bank accounts).
The fact is US “wealth” is illusory and REQUIRES more debt in order to exist. This is a Ponzi scheme that has imploded time and again going back millennia to Greece and Rome, and more recently a ONE HUNDRED PERCENT failure rate of all fiat currencies to ever exist. But please tell me how the USD is going to overcome this given all these facts. I won’t hold my breath.
“brotherly Ukrainian…” if Russia stop to be brotherly towards Ukrainians this would be MAJOR victory for the West!!! Just like Serbs and Croats - keep them fighting.
I don't think that claim is true. Ukraine is disintegrating fast and nothing can save her from demise of brutal civil war and partition. Front is moving West and at some stage take Odessa up to Romanian border, taking over Transnistria, cutting the rest of remaining Ukraine from the Black Sea and maritime trade. And allowing fuels directly to Hungary, Serbia and rest of Balkans.
Trump is withdrawing from NATO and doesn't want the USA to be involved in European matters. He won't be easily convinced that Ukrainian war has chance to be won and would change his planning.
Also Trump has always hated Ukraine for Russiagate, Zelensky's association with Biden's clan and Democrats. He also hates most of European leaders for their support for Democrats. He even went recently in a public spat with Meloni, a conservative, but they always hated each other.
Yes, the American private corporations have free hand to engage in war anywhere (Palestine, Ukraine) to make money and train their algorithms for use by the US Army. But there are no any weapons left, nothing will be produced for years and it will go into American army inventory for the consecutive attacks on Iran. There would be many of them and nuke deadly.
The most important for Trump is Middle East, situation there is far from over, mainly because from Israeli genocide in Lebanon, and shortly attack on Syria, Turkey and many other countries.
Trump isn't "withdrawing from NATO". Don't fall for the WWE theatre act. US will remain in charge of NATO, and US ISR will continue to fully support Ukraine and NATO war against Russia.
Trump cannot withdraw anyway, Congress does that.
They are extending Supreme Allied Commander's powers, anyway. That just always happens to be Muhriqani.
NATO is a treaty. The President can withdraw at will. The Senate does not have to advise and consent on an abrogation of a treaty. They can whine and bitch and moan, though, and will.
What about this?
The Legal Framework
Congress codified strict guardrails to prevent unilateral withdrawal:
The 2024 NDAA: Lawmakers included a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act that explicitly prohibits the President from suspending, terminating, or withdrawing from the North Atlantic Treaty.
Requirements for Exit: To legally withdraw, the decision must be backed by a two-thirds supermajority vote in the Senate or authorized by a separate Act of Congress.
Funding Restrictions: The legislation also prohibits the use of any federal funds to support a withdrawal from the alliance without this explicit congressional consent.
Section 1250A's Prohibition of Unilateral Presidential Withdrawal from the North Atlantic Treaty
In Section 1250A of the 2024 NDAA (found at 22 U.S.C. § 1928f), Congress prohibited the President from "suspend[ing], terminat[ing], denounc[ing] or withdraw[ing] from the North Atlantic Treaty … except by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, provided that two-thirds of the Senators present concur, or pursuant to an Act of Congress." Congress further prohibited the use of any funds to "support, directly or indirectly, any decision to" withdraw from the North Atlantic Treaty without Senate advice and consent or statutory authorization. Although Congress has to some extent regulated the President's withdrawal from a treaty in the past, Section 1250A is the first statute in which Congress has prohibited unilateral presidential withdrawal from a treaty.
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB11256
Congress can’t pass a law overriding constitutional authority. It’s the same problem with war powers. You can pass the resolution but where is the enforcement mechanism? There isn’t. You’d have to get the executive branch to charge itself with crimes, which is ludicrous.
The whole Iran/Contra thing turned on something narrower - that Congress had mandated the money NOT go to the Contra rebels in Nicaragua. Obvious fraud happened and they got caught. An analogous situation would be if Congress said that the funding for NATO must not go to say…Poland, and they found a workaround to give a check to Donald Tusk or something. They are playing games with funding in the above NDAA, but it doesn't matter. It'll be sufficiently obfuscated by the DoD, which has _never_ been properly audited.
Congress can't stop this, and I stand firmly on that ground.
I fo not follow Iran / Contra and 'Congress prohibited the President from "suspend[ing], terminat[ing], denounc[ing] or withdraw[ing] from the North Atlantic Treaty … except by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, provided that two-thirds of the Senators present concur, or pursuant to an Act of Congress."' connections
Anyway, Medvedev also thinks Congress can block the withdrawal. Maybe he is onto something.;)
is it in the constitution? if it isn't, it's like a Russian guy said upon applying at Georgetown and Yale when all the spots were given and being told gently, "getting in is almost impossible." He replied,
in America if it is difficult, it means it is no problem. If it is impossible -- it's difficult."
Trump can stop intelligence including satellite and targeting info today if he wanted.he could also pull military and intelligence assets today and prevent sharing with EU countries.
If he really wanted to of course…
NATO from this long perspective is now on shakiest of ground. It BARELY held together (and sometimes gave in places) when everybody was united on goals, which were peace and prosperity and no threats. Great goals. But now? Some want relations some do not some want talks some do not some want trade some do not and over everything we see the overarching ugly threat of the Fourth Reich, war and racism and all. We in the US nourished that remnant generation of Nazis and made them praiseworthy and peaceloving and so on, allowing them to nurture future generations of similar who were burrowed underground waiting for the warmth of the EU sun. And the reality is this: why the fuck were we paying so Europeans could brag about their glorious social benefits paid for by US taxes. I say: NATO article 5 is nonsense. France dying for Germany greed for territory and power? C'mon, man.
I suspect it's true. Trump/West took a seriously bloody nose in Iran, where the Iranians didn't give one fig about "Optics" and blew up any damned thing they felt like. The 'Madman theory', and they did it better than the US.
However Russia is taking it like a well-trained puppy, and Big Bad USA can get its self-esteem back with what it thinks is a low-cost strategy - send drones to Ukr, watch the plumes of smoke over Moscow, no retaliations to them worth the name. They get strongly worded letters of complaint.
And Europe (CIA puppet leadership), WANTS Russia to retaliate directly. At the moment, and for some years, they have tried to bang the drums of war and pretty much everyone who isn't brain dead has yawned. However, should Europe have a "9/11 moment", where EVERY SINGLE CHANNEL NON-STOP pumps out the same massively-hysterical images of something in Europe burning, and the phrase "Its a Russian retaliation" will DEFINITELY not be used, this will change the social equation.
Or at least, so the European capitals are banking.
Putin, naturally, is completely aware of this, which is why the Russian military has more than doubled in size, and is fully equipped and trained.
The CIA puppets will be more than happy to do a 'Kitchener' - forcibly conscript the male population, and send them to die pointlessly in meat waves. In fact, that is a clear goal.
By this point I don't think Trump is really that much aware - he just wants a "Victory", and Russia is rather sadly not making that costly AT ALL.
I suspect President Putin will retire soon, although he must know that the West will never accept that, and he will be a high priority assassination target for the rest of his life.
What a fucking mess. And all because the Western Empire, just like the Roman Empire it was modeled upon, cannot accept the idea that somebody somewhere exists outside of its control.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Terry-Jones-Barbarians-Alan-Ereira/dp/056353916X
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xa9pe42
It would be hard for these euro sources to deny retaliatory logic, when it will not be "something in Europe burning" but rather, "some drone or electronics factory," probably somewhere manufacturing Storm Shadows or the like.
As for this moronic western behaviour being a continuation of Roman Empire policies to "create a wasteland and call it peace," it is quite obviously a policy emanating from Tel Aviv, not Rome or Brussels.
Remove the jews from your governments, and find peace at last.
Note how in Starmer's whiny resignation speech, he spoke of "the country I love," ( as Theresa May also did when she resigned ) without specifying which country that was -but certainly not Britain - which he has ruined almost beyond repair - he also spoke proudly about how he has "combatted antisemitism" during his tenure, forgetting to say he has combatted rape gangs too - because he has encouraged and abetted them.
Let's not even go there by asking who it was who, as DPP, refused to prosecute Jimmy Savile.
A predecessor of his, one "Dave" Cameron, specified the two things he most cared about - the State of Israel, and the Conservative party - no reference to the nation he was being paid at the time to be Prime Minister of.
Further note of course, that the incoming replacement for him, Burnham, is also one of the Labour Party's "Friends of Israel," for which you can substitute "Enemies of Britain" if you so choose.
1
1
https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/ukrainian-sources-claim-latest-surge/comment/281681495
I wonder what the bookies' are pricing the war at these days? Germany, under their proud, chickenshit warrior Merz, is openly sending drones to Ukraine. How long can this go on before Russia decides to return the favor? Or will the AfD simply drive Merz out of power, and into some job more in line with his temperament and rare intellect--say, assistant manager at a McDonald's? Only one thing's for sure: I wouldn't bet against Putin and Russia.
There are deals behind close doors. Including Putin-Trump deal. That's why Trump is withdrawing from Lithuania, Germany, Poland dwindled from 20 to 10 000 and the promised 5 000 will never materialise - just teasing Poles for some troops on the ground send to Middle East
"They" have been trying harder and harder since 2022 to provoke Russian Federation into SOME kind of an overt retaliatory attack against the US/EU/NATO states using Ukraine to attack them.
RF has not taken that bait yet, they aren't stupid enough to let their opponents dictate their actions, especially this kind.
This would require an assertiveness that Russia has entirely lacked so far in this war.
Really, entirely lacked. Didn't Russia attack Ukraine. Is that not assertiveness to go up against NATO? How much more is there, a single country going up a the biggest alliance in history, led be the most powerful military the world.has ever seen?
Russia halfassed the attack on Ukraine. Meanwhile, NATO attacks Russia daily. With total impunity.
"Russia halfassed the attack on Ukraine."
Not remotely true. Russia attacked to stop the in-the-works ethnic cleansing invasion of Donbass by 130,000 Nazi fanatics and NATO accessories, and it
did that despite having a mere 75K to 80K men available to stop the invasion.
It was a really desperate move and Russia was willing to take big losses to protect the people of Donbass from being wiped out by the Nazis, and Russia was constrained by the huge ethnic Russian population in the regions of Ukraine where the invasion would strike.
The diplomatic double-dealing by the US just before the Russian invasion was totally unprecedented in the relationship between the US and USSR/Russian nuclear powers. It was an insane level of duplicity that risked the lives of 350 million Americans. Now Russia knows the US has descended to that level of irresponsibility but nobody believed the US would roll the dice with its own people to that degree back in late 2021.
Doesn't matter. Russia used inadequate force. It didn't work. Could have should have would have.
Failed.
This whole war has been a series of Russian miscalculations, and neither Ukraine nor its western sponsors acting the way Russia expected, and getting wrongfooted as a result.
"Failed."
Nonsense. It achieved the immediate objective, which was to totally, utterly defeat the US attempt to invade Donbass with a 130,000 man army.
It also forever brought four new territories into Russia, made the Sea of Azov an internal Russian lake, and eliminated almost all of the Black Sea coast from the Nazi regime's control.
Oh, and it's destroyed about half a trillion in US and US stooge dollars and military assets, killed between 500,000 and 1.5 million Nazis and is inflicting a decisive defeat on the US and its stooges.
That's only "failure" to people who have completely lost contact with reality.
Russia is entirely too smart to defend itself. That would just be falling into the nefarious trap set by the west.
Trump is not "frustrated" re project Ukraine. It was obvious from the start that our rulers had recognized utter defeat in 2023 and wanted out while continuing the project in a new form. Trump was the ideal guy to do it: carnival barker and snake-oil salesman, he pulled another Kim. Promised to make peace in a week, he juggled the news cycle for a year and a half, shaking shining objects to distract attention and throwing double messages that constantly cancel each other until he could pull out his stakes and transfer the whole job to his "European" slaves. He got the latter to spend to the point of economic exhaustion and prepare European opinion for not only continuing to the last Ukrainian (very soon now) but also direct suicidal war with Russia, to the last European from [next countries]. Meanwhile he continues the "talks" charade and the Witkushneries. The Russians are not dupes -- the yakking doesn't cost more than saliva and keeps things peaceful on the surface, so they, too, can pretend that they are facing the "Europeans". The evidence that Europe is preparing to commit suicide by cop under orders from the US are all over the place. One major piece of evidence is the deliberate destruction of the sacrifial victim's economy prior to its getting bled. The weak point in all this, though, is the (new?) American habit of forgetting that there is a reality side to war -- it's not all make-believe and PR. No matter how much money the European slaves are paying, the means are lacking and will continue to do so.
"No matter how much money the European slaves are paying, the means are lacking and will continue to do so."
That is the issue most doomers fail to recognise. Europe has few resources of their own - they must purchase them. Since they committed economic suicide by cutting off cheap energy from Russia, their costs have risen dramatically - shops and factories are closing, civilian economic support is collapsing, free speech disappearing and censorship increasing as the political and economic environment deteriorates under the pressure of supporting the war. The difference in Europe between life pre-2013 (Maidan) and now shows a huge gap in quality of life and standards of living. There is a significant and growing social undercurrent increasingly showing itself as life grows more difficult.
The idea that Europe will be able to carry through with promises to support Ukraine with weapons and money beyond comforting words is fundamentally at risk as the social situation deteriorates. Many say that even if Russia accomplishes its end in Ukraine, then the West will just open another front to start all over in order to keep draining Russia. What they do not understand is that the long-term problem generated by the refusal to purchase cheap energy from Russia will definitely prevent such from ever happening to a degree that will do serious harm to Russia.
Meanwhile, Russia grows stronger militarily and economically.
Everything points to the conclusion that the destruction of the European economy is a planned move by the US. Before getting the knife, the lamb must be shorn -- let's not waste. Upping the NATO expenses of the new poor to 5+% of GDP is the coup de grâce to the welfare state. No problem, US-installed dictatorial leaders, ie the all-bankers and Yale-or-Harvard "Young Leaders" crew in charge will deliver, along with their full contingent of meat grinder fodder. So the only hope for us is that they remain as stupid as ever, or as stupid as most of their citizens, seeing the make-believe world as the real one.
The value of europe to the US is as a vast colony on which to dump its produce/services at a price it sets (and as war fighting proxy- although not as much here given the low inclination of europeans to put their necks on the line).
"Inclinations do change". Variously attributed to Bernays, Goebbels, Obama...
But not by default to higher energetic estates!
@Jullianne
https://youtu.be/Mw-brvKO-Z0?si=q_xj4xT16ZRZv12i
It is, extend the life of the hegemon for a little bit longer at the expense of EU.
The destruction of the European economy? Which one? Debt is the unit of economic measurement in the EU, and don't imagine the creditors are philanthropists.
@JQP
FIRST you rape, THEN you loot, after THAT, you can pillage, THEN you burn, troop! £'in amateurs...
You don't need that much resources to grab new conscripts off the street, give them 3 months of "training", and then ship them off with a rifle to a front line they are definitely not expected to come back from. It probably costs the Russians more to keep the corpses frozen until they are 'exchanged' than Ukr spent on them.
Just as Russia was 3x the population of Ukraine, Europe is >3x the population of Russia.
Look at the people in charge of Europe (The very same ones who want to send Ukr refugees back to die, and have no problems with Ukr conscription/meat waves). They would HAPPILY forcibly conscript the young men who are currently enraged at their incompetence and mismanagement - 1-2m Germans, 1-2m Frenchies, 1-2m Brits, plus Spanish, Italians, Portuguese, and all the smaller countries.
This was always NATO's purpose. To recreate the WW2 Eastern Front, but this time not even pretend the anglo countries are opposed to the invasion eastwards.
It's all planned (In that haphazard 'back of a envelope' style that characterises Western 'elites' these days).
Pity the young, whose potentially decent enough future is now just to become drone-fodder. But those left 'at home' might find they catch some unnamed virus.
The 'Great Depopulation' is on the horizon, which upends all previous calculations about "energy" etc. And they don't have to care about "elections", when everyone who thinks a war with Russia is a bad idea will be banned from standing. So much for "Electoral change" at that point.
Grab people off the streets of Europe? I think not. The populations of these countries are opposed to this war and would never allow such measures to take place on behalf of a country like Ukraine. Elections don't matter, nor did they ever - democracy has always been a sham, and people are now beginning to realise that.
The elites might plan, but their plans are unrealistic shit - the globalists are rapidly losing influence, esp as the rest of the world outside the Western coalition is gaining strength.
All this 'depopulation' garbage is just that, like 'Net Zero' - complete nonsense. They have a population problem for certain, but its not over-population, it is under-population modern civilisation with its higher standards of living results in fewer people having babies, the resulting population decrease resulting in difficulties maintaining strong economies. Russia is worried about this. China is worried about this. Europe is too stupid to worry about it.
I agree with most of what you write, but looking at your first paragraph, the same was true for Ukraine some years ago.
Yet for the past 4 years they have been a meat processing concentration camp where men get kidnapped on the streets and sent to the slaughter fields.
And these are Slavic people. Much more hardened than e.g. Scandinavians.
Would the Scandinavians really resist something like this? These are the people who vaxxed their 3-year old kids in order for themselves to "stay safe". When push comes to shove they will be pushing their own sons into the TCC wagons if that means stopping the evil Putler from getting to them.
I hope you are right though.
Exactly. Never overestimate human illogic when in groups; never underestimate the power of Madison Avenue and propaganda. Turnaround of the crowds has been known to occur as suddenly as a coastal squall. Millions of well-fed, smug "middle classes" were many times transformed into uniformed lemming runs.
All you need is "a new Pearl Harbor" to change the consensus for not going to war.
PNAC talked about it.
9 - 11 provided it.
Well, maybe. Certainly populations can be turned - we are herd creatures after all. However, no matter how large the army Europe raise, it simply does not have the resources to do much with it - it doesn't really have the money needed, the logistics network to support it, nor the weaponry/ammo required, nor the industrial base to support all that, plus it has extremely weak, unbalanced, unintelligent, stupid leadership to drive it all. They think they can be ready by 2029/2030 - of course they will! But how will they do that? Again, no money, limited resources, no cheap energy sources, ever-weakening industrial base, an unwilling population, and poor leadership. And even if somehow they were able to come up with a large army, how long do you think it would last in a modern war with Russia who has the best air defences and standoff weapons in the world, including tactical nukes (if the situation required). Their major centres of intelligence, decision-making and political leadership along with their prime military bases, esp air assets, would be destroyed within the first week. Unlike Ukraine, Russia would once again introduce Europe to REAL warfare, no holds barred. As for the weakness of Putin, many here will remember the 'Putin of the Second Chechen war" shortly after he came to power as Prime Minister - this was the War Putin - you don't want to be in his sights when he has turned the fury of his war machine on you as he did with the Chechens to bring them into line. He famously said, "If we catch them in the toilet, we will wipe them out in the outhouse." If a village was found to be supporting any separatists, it was completely destroyed.
He, like Russians before him, executed war without mercy.
The best chance Europe has to survive is a major change in leadership, divorce from the USA, dismantling of the EU and NATO, formulating a new pan-European security architecture with Russia and re-opening trade with Russia (though that might no longer be a possibility since Russia has physically redirected its energy flows east away from Europe).
Chances are that the sun will rise in the West and set in East.
The problem europe has is that any european army raised will be "manned" by, well, europeans.
I suspose the answer is to offer Africans, Asians, Latins, whatever a passport in exchange for a tour of duty.
If you are right, then you will be traveling to the front in a train car? Fortunately for you, that is nothing but a dream.
I think you torpedo your own argument -- "these are Slavic people. Much more hardened than e.g. Scandinavians." As a result, when you conscript them they do indeed fight hard and bravely. Could you say the same about most conscripts from the West who have never had to deal with any crisis worse than their smartphone ran out of charge?
Unless sent to a war they never started, like in WW1 and WW2!
I think of the Canucks and Auzzies that allowed themselves to be cannon fodder, rather than uphold the principles of national sovereignty.
After WW2 my father said that if he knew what WW2 was really about he never would have signed up in 1939, and this was in 1974:
"Perfidious Albion only uses people!"
AI and robotics addresses your issues with not having enough people to support high end economies.
And what are these robots going to do? March on Moscow? Good luck with that says Napoleon and Hitler. Are they immune to tactical nukes? Just asking...
Your point was that a lack of people is going to decimate economies; to which I replied as stated - not that we need people to wage war.
I would add that the troops sent to the front—or rather, the survivors among them—would become stateless. The foreign occupiers within EU countries would not fail to seize those defenseless nations and establish their caliphate there.
This is a thought I share in part but chose not to express. The "heritage" populations are at risk from incomers, but not just Muslims. It may not be necessary for their international-banker-owned political leaders to attempt to draft "heritage" multi-generationally-born nationals and send them off to war, given that drafting other-ethnicity residents might resist said draft, because at the rate things are going population-wise and socially, the incomers are already close to effecting the seizure. European ethnics, particularly northwest Europeans, are depopulating themselves out of existence and Coudenhove-Kalergi is break-dancing in his grave, although his hoped for hybrids may not all be of an African mix. The same is true of the West in general; homogeneous ethnic identities may well-nigh disappear over the course of this century.
The populations of Europe will go as meekly as the Ukr, and that is just a fact. With national databases, face-rec, ubiquitous surveillance cameras, and fascist states, there is no escape. Of course the plans are "fantastic shit", but that has never stopped them from implementing them. See: Iraq, fx.
As for population, this only matters if you are thinking in 'Classical' terms - ie, the survival of the Nation. Do you see ANY concern by the globalists for this?
Of course. Cut off the resisters' bank accounts. Try to live in a cashless society for any length of time with no banking access.
I have - it's not pleasant. Not hard to see an even deeper abyss in the years ahead. There will be a lot of suicides.
You have zero understanding of the situation that would develop in many European countries if a national government would try to conscript their citizens for a war with Russia. Thinking about controlling bank accounts is preposterous.
In fact, an instant revolutionary moment would be produced.
It woukd be 1917 but without White generals, cossacks and and White rank and file. It would be a magical moment of national unity, trades unions, parties from the extreme left to the extreme right, including left, right and center would rebel.
You say block the bank account of anyone not answering to the draft.
No one would answer and the banks would burn on the real sense of the word if any such thing would be attempted.
I don't know where are you from, but you seem to know very little about European societies.
Ukraine made "recruitment of the street" a govmnt military policy. It isn't a stretch to think that an EU country may resort to the same strategy.
"All this 'depopulation' garbage is just that, like 'Net Zero' - complete nonsense."
Yeah, right!
What was the fucking CoronaPrank about?
30% year on year increased death from the jabs.
Only a fucked-up Worshiper of Mammon would think its about the economy. The Zio-Kikes want an economy from the results of reducing population.
Nobody cares what the people think or like or want. Hell, election results were cancelled in Romania, all to barely a peep.
Ever heard of Pearl Harbour?
I could be wrong but after 9/11 I am not so certain people will fall for that again.
That's not what going to happen if Europe really raise 3x larger army. It's not going to be drone fodder, it's going to be tac nuke fodder. Simply because it's more efficient. People constantly misunderstand that nukes are not deterrence weapons, it's "I can't lose" weapons. With intermediate tac nukes arsenal close to 10k warheads, the size of European potential army is completely irrelevant to Russia.
Forcibly conscript the Spanish? Any politician trying to do that would hang from the branch of the nearest tree, before one single man is send to any front.
Two words: guerra civil.
We all like to think so - I imagine the Ukr, at least in the east, thought so too. And now they are all just dried blood on the steppes.
NATO's entire purpose is to put Nazis in charge across Europe (Which they have largely achieved), and then those Nazi will Nazi, as Nazis do.
Mass media has long used subliminals, and it is astounding the effects of mass psychosis they can still deliver.
There are always plenty of ways to get people angry enough to fight. Just today Kit Klarenberg's article about Northern Ireland. The British special ops left a sandwich on Bobby Sands gravestone in order to get Republicans rioting on the streets. The only thing that's changed from the 70s is they have social media and digital bacon sandwiches.
Don't kid yourself. Simply cut off the banking access of anyone who doesn't show up on draft day.
They'll fold.
1 to 2 million Germans, 1 to 2 million French, 1 to 2 million Britons, plus Spaniards, Italians, Portuguese, and all the smaller nations.
I think your coke dealer is messing up the deliveries; that stuff is cut with garbage. Look at the facts: NATO countries (just speaking of Europe) are failing to meet their personnel quotas and can't replace those retiring or leaving voluntarily—numbers that are rising all the time. Do you really think the authorities in these countries will manage to round people up off the streets? As a former soldier—and the army I served in was considered a major force—I can tell you that the only thing I was offered in combat was a thousand ways to die. I find it hard to picture today's troops—those oddballs who look like the mentally challenged—heading to the front lines. Here’s a question: how many special forces personnel stayed in the ranks until retirement after surviving intense combat in Afghanistan and Iraq? You need to stop dreaming; Darth Vader, the Terminator, and Rambo belong in the movies.
It's funny to note that almost everyone thinks they are superior to the Ukrainians, and that "their" regime couldn't possibly do to us what was done to Ukr.
Ukr has literally sent paraplegics into the front lines, the mentally disabled, and the retired. Nazis generally want to kill such people anyway, and the "optics" is SOOO much better when it's the 'front line' killing them rather than a prison camp.
Btw, I loathe coke, and what it does to people. Probably my least favourite street drug. Sounds like your favourite drug is either religion or far-right media. Even coke doesn't addle wits as bad as THOSE.
Hahahahahaha—religion? Far-right? That’s the usual narrative used to shut down any contradictions, speculations, or truths. I have just one question for you: would you willingly let yourself be rounded up as part of that group of 1 to 2 million? Another question: have you served? And if so, would you willingly head to the front lines to face Russia, the USA, China, or other powers? If not, what are you waiting for to take the step and show up at a recruitment center? You could also join the Ukrainian International Legion.
It's a fair bet that anyone who constantly goes on about "immigrants" (By which they rarely mean the corporate 'titans', but usually Brown normal people), rather blaming the greed of the 'elites', is a rightwinger.
It's also a fair bet that they fondly imagine their 'native' religion is Shittianity, and usually have no idea this was a cult that came out of the Middle East and was forcibly spread by the sword.
Perhaps on both counts I was wrong.
I'm sorry to avoid your direct questions, but I'm afraid a lot of personal info is classified - by me. It's the internet, don'tchaknow.
Would I be willing to go to the front lines to face Russia, China? No. Those countries have done me no harm, and frankly want a better future than what Western countries are offering.
Against the USA? Now you're talking. To get the CIA out of the politics, the military occupation bases off our soil, the toxic crap that is American "food" out of the country altogether, and for that matter the media which is just pure fascism by this point also blocked.
"You could also join the Ukrainian International Legion."
If I was North Korean I would consider that too... OOOH, you mean the OTHER side, right!
All those fuckers, like you cannot understand that wherever you were stirring up shit,
YOU HAD NO FUCKING BUSINESS TO BE THERE.
"Here’s a question: how many special forces personnel stayed in the ranks until retirement after surviving intense combat in Afghanistan and Iraq?"
If anyone has joined the Armed forces for combat OUTSIDE of their Sovereign country, especially when the home country hasn't been attacked I call them Broken Men that must abrogate personal responsibility to kill outside their country, as it is not defending the homeland.
That makes the recruit a low-level RETARD.
It looks to me like you live in the same building as Grunéo. That explains why you're having trouble understanding what you read—it's an epidemic in that building, right? Read it again and again; the light will dawn on you.
no eu people will die for Ukraine they will take a flight to southern hemisphere and relocate there other older will even less fight too much confort, they are cowards
If you see two people in the street fighting, do you always pick a side and jump in swinging too? Why not eric - are you a coward?
As Mao said in the LRB, there is a world of difference between an Imperial army and Imperial, compared to a liberator army and Liberator war.
Would I join an army to liberate Palestine from the Zionazis? I'd certainly consider it. Would I join an imperial war against Russia for the Bankster class? South America sounds good, if not Russia itself.
It's not COWARDICE, it's the AIMS of the war that counts.
Your last sentence called to mind Ernest Borgnine in "The Wild Bunch" slapping his hat against his thigh and rebutting William Holden by shouting something to the effect of "It ain't givin' your word that counts, it's who you give it TO!"
Lol. Never heard of that film, but yeah. :)
"Just as Russia was 3x the population of Ukraine, Europe is >3x the population of Russia." That's missing the point. Population means nothing without the resources to arm, equip, and support that population in war. Europe no longer has those resources, energy being first and foremost the key resource. Russia does.
Once you have a sufficient base population (and Russia certainly does) it's all about the massive resources required to wage modern war. Looking at the resource required, Russia has all the resources and Europe doesn't.
Europe has more than enough such resources. Simple question: does Europe have access to/use more energy now than it did in the 1930s?
Sure, it needs taking away from the population, and redirecting into the military machine. So why do you think the european states have been quietly building a totalitarian surveillance machine if they intended to keep everyone sweet?
"Guns not butter" is the planned future. If you say in response, quite reasonably: "But ill-equipped, badly trained soldiers will just be massacred when thrown against the well oiled Russian military!", I quite agree - and point you at Ukraine.
You think the traitorous Zio/CIA swine in charge of Europe CARES about their OWN population any more? Those leaders are hated for good reasons.
And when a large part of the aim is to 'reduce the populations' too, welll....
Europe does not have the capacity any more to procure those resources and must rely on the global market. Europe has set itself back at least a decade so they are already on the back foot.
The Zio-Kikes prepared the ground.
Europe can easily still make uniforms, rifles and drones. That's all you need for cannon(drone) fodder who are not expected or wanted to return.
There were reports early on that Ukr wounded were harvested for organs and disposed of.
Let that sink in, Ernest.
When conscripts are more valuable dead than alive, you don't need to spend a fortune on high tech equipment for them.
"Simple question: does Europe have access to/use more energy now than it did in the 1930s?"
Compared to what it needs, it has less. It's a false comparison to measure today's European energy requirements against past days. To see that, just ask the same question about more or less than it had in the 1500's.
In point of fact, though, since you raise the question, Germany in the 30's was indeed bottlenecked by lack of energy. That was one of the reasons they lost despite having conquered industrial resources in countries other than their own which they could turn to their own purpose, countries such as France, Austria, Czechoslovakia, etc.
But the asymmetry is far, far worse today. Germany spent over 50 years building an industrial base and an economy that depends upon cheap Russian energy. Without it, they're kneecapped.
When did you last read 1984, John?
That was an extremely low-energy society that was always in a permanent state of war. There was no spare energy even for razor blades, and food was always rationed, and always short.
The citizens lived in a totalitarian state of constant fear, but there was no chance of revolt, none, even within the elites themselves.
Yes, it was fiction (was?), but fiction based upon real world conversations that Eric Blair had overheard during WW2 regarding the expected post-war period.
Note: I'm not saying this WILL happen, all I'm saying is that it is not impossible, not by a long shot.
Note 2: I'm also not saying such a war can be "won" - whatever that means in the post-modern age with the very modern WMD stockpiles - but as 1984 say, the war was not MEANT to be won - just fought for eternity.
The irony is the elites won't enjoy it either, they didn't in the book. But there was nothing they could do about it - the system had been designed too well.
There was no way out of the trap they had built themselves.
We can see the same dynamic at work now, the "Intel Agencies" are busy creating that very system, and there's already nothing that common people can do about it - anymore than the normal Ukies could prevent what happened there.
You are overlooking a crucial element. Tech brains in the West are an endangered species.
So? Any eurozone country can borrow cheaply.
Trump's name is frequently mentioned when discussing these issues - what I want to know is what Miriam Adelson thinks.
She sponsored Trump's electoral campaign, but now she would like to literally dispose of him, he is a toast. Thus possible saving Republicans from mid term defeat.
Does Miriam Adelson think that Trump's name often comes up in these discussions?
She doesn't think - she knows.
He is her political puppet; there to take responsibility for the decisions she and Bibi have made.
"...but also direct suicidal war with Russia, to the last European from [next countries]." I’ll bet anything that in the year 6038, the runts will still be yapping and nothing more. I’ll say it again for the umpteenth time: whether it’s NATO or the EU runts, they never hesitated to go to war against desert peasants in flip-flops, yet they barely stayed long before heading home—unable to go the distance, with Daddy unable to make up for the shortages. My prediction: the slaves will establish the most ferocious of dictatorships to control their enslaved populations—peoples more fearful than any others since the dawn of humanity.
The neocons are convinced that they are winning.
Sleepwalking into another continental war.
Greedy "rooster lollipops," if you catch my drift.
Yes, the Epstein class has already advanced to depopulation step by a global war and annihilation of half by atom, disease and famine
‘Latest Surge in Attacks on Russia Was "Encouraged" by Trump’
It is most likely true. Before this statement was made (if it was made) it was surely cleared with Zelinsky and that guy would not want to cross Trump for sure. He was likely authorized by Trump to make the statement. Once we break down the two wars, Iran and Ukraine, and analyze Trump’s actual acts without paying any attention to rhetoric, the story is simple and obvious. He is driving for monetary gain plus the dissolution of the Russian Federation. In Iran he had similar high goals but the Iranians called his cards and he did not have a winning hand. His original plan was to run over some critical countries on this planet and arrive too China and Cuba with his victorious armies. The plan is already a failure.
But Zelensky and Trump are crossing each other all the time for years, the prime example Zelensky at the White House being kicked out through the kitchen door. This time it's not Zelensky publicly contradicting Trump, but some unknown entity.
"But Zelensky and Trump are crossing each other all the time for years..."
It's all just an act.
Yep. Two C-grade actors playing their part. Maybe one day we can catch them arguing via an open mic in their mother tongue, Yiddish.
Yes, both actors with experience, and Trump commented the White House incident a "great show", but Trump and Zelensky are both loosing their trump cards. They both have to withdraw, both have short lives ahead of them - literally they can vanish overnight. Trump is even closer to it, imminent threat - slow poisoning and multi-organ failure or dagger in the back on spiral stairs, like Julius Caesar with "And you, Brutus?".
They are being kept only to engage Russia in Europe, to prevent it from the Middle East and Iran theatre, and the rest of world.
‘This time it's not Zelensky publicly contradicting Trump, but some unknown entity.’
He might be unknown to us but certainly not to Zelensky. The most likely scenario is: Trump set off the chain reaction with Zelensky as they both hope to profit from the act. This was not an accidental or unauthorized leak. Trump is hoping for a juicy deal with Russia where Putin was already agreeable and Zellensky is hoping to finish the war on better terms. On the one hand it is theatrical act, on the other hand we can all rest assured the major actors are constantly communicating and that includes the European leaders as well. I think the face off with Meloni was real. I have seen a short video where she was clearly disgusted with Orange and rather vocal about it. Trump is also playing to keep the door open for NATO entry into Ukraine after a shaky peace agreement but that is not going to work out. Some Russian commanders will just find an excuse to tactical nuke German or UK troops if they enter.
The bookies remark was intended as a setting for sarcastic humor. I would as soon go to bookies for political advice as I would to Thomas Friedman's endless supply of taxi drivers--in other words, not in my lifetime.
It would be a different story, if Medvedev was president !!!!!!
He was president, that between Putin's presidencies. Putin was elected till 2030, with possible extension to 2036. So very unlikely Medvedev will be back, war will end before that.
If Putin would to die, he would be replaced by a military person, not by civilian. Possibly without presidential elections but nomination by the Security Council or by Duma. And that would mean competent and fast acting developments. Medvedev, for what he good is, he is still a colourful parrot.
Unlike America, Russia has a constitution that they believe in. They would never tolerate such an unconstitutional move. Besides, neither the Security Council nor the Duma would ever in a million years support such a move.
Unless in the middle of 3 WW and no time to run elections for 3 months or even to convene Duma for a special meeting.
Even America ran elections in the middle of WWII.
"I'll look for you when the war is over -- an hour and a half from now." -- So Long Mom (A Song for WWIII) , Tom Lehrer, 1965
Rumor has it Dyumin might be the next one:
http://en.kremlin.ru/catalog/persons/462/biography
Awards:
2008 – The Suvorov Medal
2012 – Hero of the Russian Federation, the Order for Services to the Fatherland with Swords (IV degree), The Medal of the Order for Services to the Fatherland (II degree),
2017 – The Order of Alexander Nevsky,
2022 – The Order for Services to the Fatherland (III degree).
"Commander of the Special Operation Forces and Deputy Chief of the Main Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces." 2013-2015
Probably had something to do with the "Little Green Men" in Crimea. ;)
Among the main virtues of these men in Crimea - and there were plenty and many - was politeness.
I guess Dyumin must be polite as well.
What we know for certain is that Jerry Lewis will be the next US President; he will lead the country from the afterlife via his social network, "Truth Jerry."
Cross our fingers
Russia has been sparingly using drones for a week, and has discussed using the Oreshnik in "combat", not just "testing" as the prior strikes have been. I presume that Russia is prepared to hit something and maybe some-bodys very hard if/when Ukraine hits Russian drone-repeater radio-towers in Belarus..
Got any more command bunkers with NATO Generals in them guys?
The last days Russia has used several Kinzhals on airfields in Vasilkov and Starokonstantinov, not as good as Oreshniks, but it has them in large supply of hundreds.
There are plenty of command bunkers, one was busted on Maysky (May) Island in the Nikolaev region with 10 British "instructors"
What a BS! Eric Smith publicly talking about defeating Russia using drones for more than 4 years - how this is an “obligation to do”. So it is nothing new.
Zelensky started complaining about Belarus now of all times, because he is trying to get Russia to overextend her air defences over to include Belarus. This way, Russia proper and the four oblasts will have less air defence against further drone raids.
Zelensky doesn't care nor fear much Belarus, he is just scheming
Lukashenko can always invite North Korean 10 000 strong contingent with their MLRS 240mm, able to fly over from the border directly on Kiev.
If full war, Russian 750 000 conscripts can be send to Belarus for training.
That is another over 1000 km front line, doubling what is now for Ukraine.
Besides, some European countries don't want war coming closer to it's borders. They will stop supporting Ukraine. See sauering relations with Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria. And many other countries around the world would recognise Ukraine as an offender.
Among it's many great toys, NK now has a 600mm MLRS. 380 klm range.
Belarus border to Kiev is 150-220 klms.
Belarus better get North Koreans over there quick because we know Russia does not protect friends…
Why do you think so?
If Putin allows West attacking Moscow without strong response why do you think he will do it for a different country?
I can’t think of any places where outside western ukraine where Putin protected friends….wether militarily or maiden color revolutions, Putin is afraid to push back decisively against the West. Hitting legit military targets in Ukraine is not a response.
Now you have changed the subject and give example of Moscow attack.
I think you have simple script to repeat in every post - Putin is weak.
As if you had 4 black belts. But you are just very strong keyboard warrior.
It's a bit short. For my part, I have dozens of stories like these; I call them illuminations—fantasies.
it means that Russia would consider an attack on Belarus as WAR not part of the SMO
Hopefully Russia will make clear that if Belarus 'helping' attacks on Ukraine deserves military action then Europe doing the same much more extensively against Russia will receive the reciprocal action directly as well.
that seems like a possibility that comes closer day by day but that would mean nuclear war. don't you underdstand that ?
How large again are the forces all of Europe could throw at this time against Russia? And how large how the "waiting" troops in Russia, that have yet to be deployed?
The figures are out there. Russia easily, shall we say, trumps everyone else, unless the US joins the European side. And the Donald has made it clear he despises Europe, and won't fight its battles.
Never happen…. Putin will ignore, make excuses or hit empty building in response once again. putin is a joke on world stage.
For many others he is a sensible diplomat.
Certainly doesn’t understand an American military concept “collateral damage"
Charles Maguire you must be a teenager. Stop with the arrogant American accent. You have no idea what Putin has done for the world. A weaker leader in Russia like yourself the world would have been turned to ash a decade ago.
WWIII and nuclear war is excuse Putin pacifists or his Globalists Oligarchs hide behind. Iran with no nuclear weapons, held back and arguably defeated two nuclear powers in 4 months even after US threatened nuclear war. Iran had the iron will to protect itself. Putin has been fumbling the SMO for 4 years....
Exactly. Somehow if you have nuclear weapons you are in far more danger, and must take no steps to defend yourself, than if you don't. That's what passes for thought in this group.
Sorry but B.S., Putin will not protect Russia let alone anyone else by going to war. Hell, even Donbass has paid heavy price for Putin refusal to take “smo” seriously much earlier.
A very powerful keyboard warrior.
Are you convincing for many?
Why? NATO munitions already hit Russia itself on a daily basis.
who are you talking to ? Me ? I think its protocol that if Russia were coming into a conflict on behalf of an ally - that's defined as war not a special military operation - but I'm not in the military- its just obviously different
Obviously NATO disagrees.
oh I wish NATO would get what its asking for - but only the officials.
capture them alive and throw they all into the fiery swamp.
That would require an assertiveness that Russia entirely is lacking so far.
Wish in one paw....
That last sentence is the St John Revelation. and you don't even know what even YOU might have to go through for Russia to be
manly like yourself.
Nothing new here: west participating in the war even before it started in 2022. Only difference is that until now Russia could handle it. Now with 500+ drone waves, if your AD is 99% performing, there will be 5 drones striking targets.
And trend is that there will be more and more drones for Ukraine and AD can not be improved enough to match it.
Jesus Christ. Of COURSE the US has greenlit the latest attacks. Not a singe one happens without US intelligence and targeting. The west is betting on more "perpetual weakness" from Putin, and that's a damn good bet. They'll attack Belarus on the same theory, and who thinks Putin will stand up more for Lukashenko than he does for Russians? Which is not at all. Defeat looms.
Long time no see, Clausewitzeva.
Defeat looms? By opening a new 1000 Km front? Defeat for whom? Russia? Please explain how Russia is going to lose this war.
Dude, if you don’t see it yet, you’re never going to see it, even after Putin signs whatever he’s forced to sign. The amazing “I’ll never hit my enemy” strategy simply doesn’t work. So go on back to Simplicius and agree with him, yet again, that every attack on Russia is a sign of desperation and weakness, and every flat-line response from Putin is a sign of great strength and wisdom.
I never claimed any of that. But the fact is that Russia is a huge power, both militarily and economically and resource rich, unlike Ukraine and the rest of Europe. In a war of attrition the result is inevitable, esp in light of the fact that Russia's economy is not affected near to the extent that Europe's has been and that Russia's inventory of weaponry has increased over time, not decreased. You and I might not like how Putin and his Security Council (the conduct of the war is not just Putin's strategy but his Security Council) is conducting the war but it is evident that there can only be one result - a destroyed Ukraine, a fractured Europe and the real possibility of a breakup of NATO.
If a guy came up and slapped you in the face with a puppet, would you say you were fighting the puppet? or the guy? If the guy holding the puppet then, still bombing you regularly, offered to mediate between you and his puppet, would you enter that farce?
Or to put it differently, if a guy said he’d hit decision-centers and treat any attack from the puppet as an attack by you and then pretended he never said that and never stopped pounding the puppet and never attacked you, would you have any respect for him at all? And would you think such a clown would inevitably win the real war being fought?
Russia will lose if Putin can’t come up with better answers to those questions than he’s offered so far. And it is now iffy even if he does wise up. The US and Europe are nowhere near economic collapse, and despite the theater, NATO is nowhere near fragmentation.
You ignore the fact that Europe and the USA have been seriously hurt by this war - most of what is going on in Europe today is directly a result of the war. And whilst the US is still providing ISR and limited weaponry its credibility around the world has been seriously damaged over the backwardness of its weaponry and the inability to defend against Russian weapons. The West is having serious problems with continuing this war, regardless of all the propaganda noise they are making, propaganda that appears to have you blinded as well.
But I will grant you one thing. I believe it would be most helpful to the Russian effort if they would send a few Oreshniks to the UK and Germany thus giving them a clear message that if they keep fucking around, they will find out what real war is about. But even if they don't do that, the end result will not change.
I can see no circumstance in which Russia would lose. What would 'losing' even look like?
Losing would look like a Ukraine surviving still full of Nazis while Russia is surrounded by hostile or alienated countries, leaving the US a clear field for its endless mischief. A few years ago I'd have said it was a defeated Syria, an imperiled Iran, a politically captured Venezuela, Romania, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Kazakhstan, but oops, most of those things have already happened.
The US's reputation has been damaged? by whom? The weapons industry has never made so much money and can't make enough for all its customers, which is something you like to say, but that wouldn't be true if there were no demand, would it?
The west is not HAVING to defend against Russian weapons. That's the point I keep making. Bitch-slapping a puppet isn't hurting the puppeteer.
Wiesbaden comes to mind... Chip
"You ignore the fact that Europe and the USA have been seriously hurt by this war - most of what is going on in Europe today is directly a result of the war."
So you know more than bond markets.
Peter Turchin researches collapse of societies
As per his ideas Europe is closer to collapse than USA but both are in the precipice
I suspect most are on the precipice, but that beats being "On the Beach" if one takes that as a reference to the 1957 Nevil Shute novel or the 1959 movie of the same name.
you lost me at "the US and Europe are nowhere near economic collapse" :-)
Stop your hysterics.
You are parroting the stink tanks of jewdaic persuasion
I was tending towards this point of view after initially thinking that the Russians would win convincingly. Putin’s softly softly approach is certainly making Russia look weak. And maybe they are. However, on the front line, they have either taken, or are about to take, Konstantinovka and Lyman after a slow but relentlessly steady advance, whereas what Ukraine and its western backers are doing is mainly optics.
You're always talking about Putin. Can't help thinking you believe it's all about him... It's not. Frankly speaking, I am someone very happy that he has resisted all the provocations (here are many behind him eager to pull the trigger). Anyone gagging for a full scale war is by definition an idiot. Recognise anyone like that?
If you're in a war you might as well fight it. The real idiots are the ones who cheer on a leader who refuses to do that and thus guarantees defeat. Know anyone like that?
This war is not "about" Putin, but regarding military decisions, the buck stops with him. He is the one fucking things up, which you implicitly recognize when you say how happy you are that he has resisted all the provocations. Yes, killing or maiming 200,000 Russians is a mere "provocation," hardly more than an unkind word, right? And further, the point I have repeatedly made is that Putin's pussillaminity is making full scale war with all of Europe more, not less, likely. You only have to open your ears to their comments to know that, but keep em shut. It's more comfortable that way.
So you're gagging for a real war... You talk like you're down the pub with your mates. I do share a little of your frustration, meaning I do think Russia (I don't talk about 'Putin' because it's perfectly clear to me that whole the buck stops at him, he doesn't run the ship singlehandedly...) should make a few PR displays of their own. But if the gates were too truly open, you must remember there are unforeseen consequences, destruction on a scale that is hard to imagine and of course death on an even larger scale. All that before any 'boots on the ground' got started.
No. War, real war, has to be a last resort. Putin the merciful knows this (sorry, couldn't resist 😅). 200,000 dead Russians is likely far less than what it would have cost. On that note, in light of the massively disproportionate losses to the Ukrainians, I wonder when they will rebel - maybe they are already, but their great, EU member-to-be, democracy is preventing a stop to their madness?
In 2022, the europeans were terrified of Russia, concerned with Russia might do if they sent a few crates of leftover Soviet munitions.
Now NATO attacks Russia daily, as Russian dithering and indecision have made war more and not less likely.
I’m done here. I’ve said what I had to say. Remember this conversation when Putin signs a deal that leaves Ukraine intact and militarily able to attack again. Which he will do.
What's truly amazing is your level of retardation. You have almost reached gm's level, not surprising since you both share the exact same ip address. Quit the troll farm and get a real job
Nice of you to reveal yourself to the world as a stupid pig.
Its not your fault you cant comprehend whats happening. You are just a dumb little girl that has zero clue what strategy is. Stay in the kitchen
Yes. You are right. Russia and Belarus are doomed. A sad defeat is coming.
Many Putin worshipers are starting to realize how incompetent (or treacherous) Putin is. It was clear for years since the start of this war. The whole collective west, if not the whole world including China is the Ukrainian resource base. The developed world loves USA/EU/Ukraine and the world hates Russia.
Ukraine has this back support that Russia cannot hit or hurt. while Ukraine/USA can hit Russia. We hear that Ushakov begged for negotiations with the EU but EU rejected him.
Europe does not want to trade and negotiate. Europe wants to eat Russia for dinner. Frankly speaking, the Russians deserve that as they were unable to remove a stupid old man form Kremlin. They always wanted just to be US style stupid consumers. Russia was defeated long ago as they started dreaming Western dreams, as Russian women started to prefer Americans to Russian men. That was the end, we see only the bloody aftermath.
John Helmer says that even the chairman of Russian central bank, Nibulina now disobeys Putin and reject cheaper credits for the war industry.
So Russia lost deterrence and respect.
Now, Russia can prevent a total defeat only via going nuclear. But that is not going to happen.
Iran is also defeated as it started to negotiate.
You cannot negotiate with the West. American native Indians know that. Putin should have asked them.
👎
"Russia can prevent a total defeat only via going nuclear. But that is not going to happen". Why is it not going to happen? This is the great dichotomy that both Russia and the West are going to have to face. The West is determined to defeat Russia, but it is not possible to defeat a nuclear power. Russia will no more allow itself to be defeated than the US would. Kennedy had it right when he warned the West not to back Russia into a corner, which is precisely where we are heading.
It won't happen in the simple way you imagine. Putin will sign some bogus deal, claiming victory. All the morons here will celebrate his wisdom, though it will have sold out everything he's said so far, and eventually the west will engineer a balkanization, either through a coup of Putin or his replacement, or through some sort of local shenanigans. Putin has amply demonstrated that nothing short of nuclear attack, if that, would trigger nukes on Russia's side. That is, unless Putin EVER mans up and starts treating this war as a war and not a stroll through the park.
Your tea leaf readings, divulged with the absolute certainty of foolishness, are getting tedious. I prefer reality and fact based analysis.
Oh, and in my other reply I forgot to say that the Native American Indians did not have the worlds largest nuclear arsenal, so the analogy, snappy as it is, is specious.
>Russia needs only to continue plying its grinding war and await the slow political collapse of Europe.
What political collapse? I’m in the UK. Starmer has just stepped down. The next PM, carbon copy of Starmer, has been ushered into parliament in a by-election (ie, the voters of a specific constituency voted him in), in order to contest the Labour party’s leadership, win it (of course) and be put in the PM’s chair. It is all as expected and it is all under iron control. When the next election comes round Farrage will be given his marching orders, another five years. And so on and so forth. They can’t really be telling me that Putin is counting on “Europe’s political collapse” for winning in Ukraine. My mind is made, this war is fake.
The war is not fake, but Russia is clearly seeking any excuse not to fight.
Yes, I didn’t mean fake in the sense of it not being a war but its published motivations and objectives not being the real ones.
By that logic, almost every war is fake.
I was trying to be charitable. Non stop repeating absurd arguments makes a certain sense if one gets paid, even a modicum, for it. Otherwise it is plain silly.
You repeat that is is technically possible to close a bank account. This is obvious. But you fail to understand that you cannot do that to a whole nation in a revolutionary state. That would destroy the economy in days.
No comparison with some judicial action against an unwanted candidate.
No European is going to be drafted and send to the "Ostfront". Not in our time. If you don't understand that, it is a lose of time discussing anything with you.
Continue your variations of a theme. What was it? Russia is weak, the West solid and powerful and Putin is a traitor and a Zionist. Sure.
Europe already is damaging its own economies. Doesn't bother the rulers a bit.
And it wasn't just "judicial action against an unwanted candidate". The entire election was cancelled.
You otherwise invent a bunch of arguments I never made in order to argue with strawmen. I never have said Putin was a traitor or a Zionist, to start with.
He probably is a traitor and a zionist, though. Regarding the freezing of accounts, one might also consider the Canadian trucker strike a few years ago, where not only the truckers, but all people attempting to support them, had accounts frozen. Confiscated too, I think. Any confidence that that the Europeans won't do this on as wide a scale as necessary are delusional. It wouldn't be 5 million, though.
Despite the big talk most people will sign up without rebellion, and the leaders of any movement to resist can be targeted just as they already have been. They'll head to the front if required to do so. Why would anybody have confidence otherwise? Either they're in favor of hostilities now, in which case they can be persuaded to fight, or they're against them now, in which case they have been completely ignored without any problem as they cut social services and foster race riots.
You think that you have a "clear vision", but you can't really see if you ignore so many factors. Among others, the fact that Russia is nuclear power, as well as the West. Western elites are SO OBVIOUSLY provoking Russia. And we know why. Western "elites" count on their nuclear shelters and AI. Did they invite you to their nuclear shelter? No. They dream of only a few young people for biomass needs (organ harvesting, sex industry, etc.).
So, in fact, Putin INDEED is very wise. He doesn't go where the West is pushing him - they want him to push the red button first, so that they could blame him for nuclear Armagedon. Anyway, despites of trillions spent on propaganda, they are getting defeated in their own info war. Thanks to Ukraine we know about the REAL stakes of Western financial empire in wars of the XX and XXI century - we know their tactics and strategy. We can all see that the West is run by psychopathic mafia. And psychos cannot win because they are SELF-DESTRUCTIVE.
Sorry, but this is just magical thinking. What I see clearly is the likely outcome of the war. I didn't say it was nice.
One woman's "clearly" is another woman's myopic squinting through the keyhole of Western narrative.
Whenever we talk about attrition we never talk about "Who has the most money?" and "Who has the most people?" China isn't going to fight in Europe apparently or lend money to the Russian government at their much lower rates due to "sanctions." The Bank of England and the Rothschilds have a completely different idea about lending money to win wars. The Bank of England has lending for war written into its charter. So the European countries are paying 3-4% while Russia pays 14.5%, down from 22% half way through the war. The head of the Russian bank is on record as opposing the war, to the delight of the Western economic media.
Yes, obviously there are limits and conditions and red lines agreed upon for both, and then the technology changed. And I don't think Russia has the capital to reorient its defenses, or has set up conditions so it can't "because of sanctions." Russia and China are going to have to say "F' the sanctions. We are at war." Forget S-300s, 400s, and 500s; we need more Panstirs, but they use up a lot of ammo. Russia needs WWII defenses or needs to take out the satellites. AS THEY CROSS RUSSIA'S RED LINES RUSSIA HAS TO CROSS THEIRS. They need to take out the bridges that divide the Ukraine East and West and end the government. They don't need to nuke Germany. Take out the Ukrainian government. I have no problem with hitting Musk and Thiel infrastructure. They stole the technology the US and NASA spent years and billions developing.
The entire West has been Epstein'ed, and we are its victims.
blah blah doom blah defeat. Wake me up when its actually imminent.
I’d ask you to wake me up when the mighty engine of Russian superiority gets cranking, or when the west collapses economically, but we both know we’ll probably die of old age before that happens. By the time Russia’s defeat is “actually imminent” as I think you mean the phrase, everybody will say it’s obvious and they’ll blame those of us who warned about it for it happening. It probably hasn’t passed the point of no return yet, but it is imminent even now.
I won't be blaming you for anything, you're just not that influential I'm afraid.
Of course not, but that hasn’t stopped people from claiming I’m an agent of… whoever. I wasn’t speaking of me personally, however. There are several of us pointing things out and constantly being called names.
Stay in the kitchen. You know less than nothing about what's actually happening.
Was it GM or Feral Finster that trooned out to make this account?
Don’t be naive concerning monetary theory or history, like the ninny who claimed, ‘…The dollar is currently doing fine. It isn't even weakening against gold at the moment or for the past six months, and against other currencies it's very strong…’, for despite this baseless view of economic “might”, the USD has lost nearly 98% of its value since 1913.
But why should the USD crash sooner rather than later? Well, because the ever changing monetary system sees an average lifespan of roughly 40 years. The last was Bretton Woods II, and the current fiat system is on its last legs having been instituted on Aug 17 1971 by Nixon when he unpegged the dollar from gold. It has lasted 55 years and the nails in its coffin are splintering the coffin as the nails share less room amongst the ever increasing reactions by the world’s powers.
There WILL be a new monetary system by the end of this decade, you can bet your bottom dollar and you can also be certain Washington’s debt ridden Ponzi scheme will no longer lead the world reserve currency as gold consolidates and fills central bank coffers in preparation for this
Given the sleazy way you stated your argument you hardly deserve a response, but since you're pretending to be a monetary expert I will take issue with two of the things you say. First, your bet that there will be a new monetary system by the end of this decade. I'd take that bet. BRICS is illusory and doesn't even pretend to want to create a new currency, and China is both actively against its currency becoming a reserve currency and working hard to preserve the dollar. There won't be a new monetary regime in place by 2030. That's a pipe dream.
About the dollar "losing 98% of its value since 1913," you obviously have no idea what that means. What it obviously does NOT mean is that Americans or dollar holders in general have lost wealth. On the contrary, America is richer than ever (or was a few years ago). The dollar's erosion has been a drain on dollar holders, not the economy at large, and since it has been accompanied by numerous policy changes funneling huge amounts of money to the rich, what the dollar's erosion has really meant is to cream the non-wealthy on fixed income. The poor, the elderly, the disabled. They're the ones who desperately need a stable currency. It is also true that when inflation exceeds the growth of wages, the working class takes a big hit, which it has since 1973. There's nothing about any of that that the people running DC right now care about in the least.
The price of gold is a pretty good barometer of confidence in fiat, and the fact that that price is stable is, in fact, very significant. The dollar isn't "weakening" if it is in fact strengthening against all other currencies and their alternatives. Which it currently is. It would be much better for the world if it were not.
You’ve assured me I’m in good company then with the beginning of your response (I’m sure you couldn’t help yourself). But let’s take on your flimsy and baseless claims:
1. BRICS has not only experimented with a basket currency backed by commodities, but has also created an alternative to SWIFT, aka BRICS Pay. This is in addition to adjacent payment processors outside the London/Washington shadow complex. But The claim BRICS isn’t investing in a neutral currency is just incorrect. Also please notice I never claimed BRICS desires to have a hegemonic banking/ world reserve system like what exists today with the Washington/London cartel.
But your next argument invites an easy rebuke for a complete absence of foundational understanding concerning economics. How so?
A healthy economy, or true prosperity HINGES on the middle class. In fact a healthy economy sees roughly 80% of its GDP created by small business. Yes, it is the most basic fact that innovation begins with the individual and that government CANNOT create jobs and therefore doesnt create wealth. You might argue they create government jobs, but this is a net negative because these jobs are funded by taxpayers directly (front end), or indirectly through currency creation (backend).Yet you sit here and claim the USD losing a massive 98% of its value doesn’t/ hasn’t hurt the economy but only the working class? You make this error by assuming that the US is wealthy when the rich are well off and own most of the wealth. But you’re wrong. History has revealed time and again a massive wealth disparity between the corporate/ ruling bedfellows and the working class often leads to revolution, or a new monetary system (grass roots vs central planning) due to unsustainable debt both private and public. The central planners tend to use bail outs (currency creation), or more recently, bail-ins which is the seizing of currency from unsecured creditors (bank accounts).
The fact is US “wealth” is illusory and REQUIRES more debt in order to exist. This is a Ponzi scheme that has imploded time and again going back millennia to Greece and Rome, and more recently a ONE HUNDRED PERCENT failure rate of all fiat currencies to ever exist. But please tell me how the USD is going to overcome this given all these facts. I won’t hold my breath.
Little Cocalinski doing his Fuhrer Bunker skit. Cringefest galore.
“brotherly Ukrainian…” if Russia stop to be brotherly towards Ukrainians this would be MAJOR victory for the West!!! Just like Serbs and Croats - keep them fighting.