FT has broken a report that the US has been closely involved in Ukrainian strikes on the Russian energy grid and gas infrastructure in order to “weaken Putin’s economy and bring him to the negotiating table.”
>Note the bolded above—the admission that at least “some” of the prestige Western air defense systems are operated by non-Ukrainian-speaking allies.
Why would anyone have thought otherwise?
How much time does it take to train Patriot operators? We had that discussion two years ago many times, and it was pointed out again and again how complicated Patriots are etc. But then there were so many Patriot systems blown up after that. So are we to assume that the US has been training Ukrainian operators like crazy? Which we never heard about after 2023 at all. Obviously if there ever were any Ukrainians operating the Patriots, that was only in the beginning, after that it was all NATO personnel.
So how is this news?
>Against this backdrop, we have Trump’s new announcement that he will allegedly consider sending Tomahawks to Ukraine, if Putin doesn’t bend the knee:
>I still remain very skeptical any Tomahawks will ever be delivered
This is all theater.
The decision to launch Tomahawk strikes on Russia was made a long time ago. LONG BEFORE THE SMO EVEN STARTED. Years before that.
The primary reason Putin was maneuvered into the SMO was so that the Russian frog can be boiled into accepting missile strikes into its territory, and then destroyed gradually the same way Syria, Iraq, etc. were. Which would have been unthinkable had they started directly. For that plan to work, the SMO had to be slow walked from both sides, i.e. that is why NATO never entered seriously and only provided enough materiel to the Ukrainians to keep them in the fight, but never enough to make the frog jump out of the pot (i.e. pull out the nukes). And on the Russian side the US plan relied on Russian elites being extremely loath to do a counter-Perestroika, which they would have to do if they are to fight the GPW all over again and recover all of Ukraine.
As it turned out Russian elites were indeed thoroughly compromised, which the US analysts have assessed very correctly, so here we are, at the point where the Tomahawks will start raining on the most sensitive Russian facilities in Moscow and the Urals, and all that the imbecile/traitor in the Kremlin managed to muster as a reaction was to say "we will beef up air defense in response"...
NATO practices nuclear strike on Rus regularly. They also have Aegis ashore and Deveselu installations.
Nothing new. So, ideas of targeting Rus in this way predates SMO, yes. However, freaking out now coz of tomahawks but not coz of, for example, Aegis ashore is just hysteria.
The reason Tomahawks were a red line for me was that they are nuclear capable: the first time one gets fired, Russians have to decide whether it's nuclear or conventional. Putting that decision on that kind of time-line under those conditions is absolutely insane.
True, but there were limits to the F16s abilities to get off the ground or anywhere near the combat line. But still, you have a point, and I was against them.
Honestly, if they are going to send them, then I think they are already in Ukraine. At least this is how it was with Biden’s administration. Once they started talking about the weapon it was already in Ukraine, peeps were trained or foreigners were brought in and then once it was being discussed in the public fora, then they immediately started using them.
So, I believe there are some new long range missiles in UA. Are they tomahawks? Dunno. Maybe it is something UA “made”, from 90%+ foreign components. Saw some images of supposed Flamingo missile debris.
Same with tomahawks, some are nuclear capable. So far USA supposedly has two typhons ground based launchers. One in Japan, one in Philippines, supposedly.
This is why NATO will fire a few at first to deliberately show they can be shot down easily and dealt with so that Russia relaxes a little and does not escalate.
Once that is done, NATO sets their salami slicing strategy in motion and within 4-5 months Tomahawks will be 'normalized'.
Now slide in some old A-10s, F18s and Mirages over that time and they are slowly building up a method to enable a 100 missile wave towards Russia. They should toss in some Afghan pilots and Super Tucanos and 500 or so drones as well. Does not sound too terrible, but when you combine it with superior ISR from the usa, they will maximize damage as the attack will come just when RF is taking a crap.
You can see where one day a 'Massive Ukrainian Retaliation sends Russia Ablaze' news story might come from.
I can imagine it all, along with the Russian response of. "we reduced Ukrainian electrical generation by 37%, it was great success".
You’re right about the patriots operating by NATO personnel and talking about tomahawks they’re even more complex, vulnerable, sophisticated and expensive, only operating by US personnel and not only that, they’ll awake all bears from Ukraine borders up to Vladivostok.
I guess I'm becoming one of those dreaded maximalists. Surely Russia knows if Tomahawks are already on the ground in Ukraine. To me that was the reddest of red lines. Improving air defense is hardly sufficient as a response.
"Improving air defense" is an invitation for an all-out attack.
Putin should have been dragged in handcuffs by whatever agency in Russia is supposed to guard against grand treason at the very top and tried for it the moment he said that.
The problem, from your point of view, is that he’s enormously popular, if what I hear is correct. But I agree: this seems to be a profound misjudgment. It must be pissing off at least some of the generals.
Gorbachev was popular initially too. But he was doing controlled demolition of the USSR deliberately and from the start. By the time people wised up to what is happening it was too late.
Putin, if you look at his actions since he took power back from Medvedev objectively and without any assumptions about the person, has been doing controlled demolition too. But, precisely because he is so popular, people still haven't gotten wise to what is happening, and that enables it.
At this point I still think he’s winning the Ukrainian part of this war, so don’t see it your way. I do think he’s wrong to think this is a Ukrainian war rather than (already) ww3, though. Not so sure he’s winning that. But I see his caution not as a sign of disloyalty but a natural attempt to contain a very explosive situation.
He isn't and he can't be, because that isn't even set as an objective.
The minimal winning condition for Russia in Ukraine is for Ukraine to disappear as a state, Russia to take over the territory, and then erase Ukrainian identity completely and permanently. Any territory left as Ukraine will be used as base for perpetual attacks on Russia because there can be no Ukraine that is not an anti-Russia, by the very nature of the idea of what "Ukraine" is, and that is so clear and obvious3 that, as I repeatedly say, Russian leadership can only refuse/fail to see it if they are total imbeciles or traitors. No other options.
>I see his caution not as a sign of disloyalty but a natural attempt to contain a very explosive situation.
The exact opposite has been achieved.
Back in 2022 escalation could have been cut off by e.g. conventional missile strikes on some mansions in Europe, Larry Fink's residence around NYC, the Blackrock and Lockheed Martin HQs, etc. Just to sent a message that we are serious, will not fuck around, stay out of this, we will go all the way if needed, and will hit those responsible for the attacks on us with no hesitation, no matter where they are.
Now Russian deterrence is lost to such an extent that nothing else but erasing whole countries from the map will restore it. And that is entirely on Putin's "caution".
Putin knows full well this is a war against the West. He has noted it on several occasions. He is winning both the Ukraine and the wider war - just differently than you and perhaps others (incl myself) would prefer.
The US (the WEST) is already at war with Russia, Iran and Venezuela...owners of the largest pools of oil on the planet. Probably the bosses think we're not going totally Green and EV yet, despite the non-stop blather to the contrary. WW3? Open hostilities on three continents? Yeah...I think we're there.
Does no one in Euro-land read the history of the 20th C. in their blood soaked neighborhoods? Sheesh.
You mean, Putin made wrongs by strengthening the unity of people in Russia by restoring churches and improving ordinary peoples’ lives, the old babushkas in particular?
Russians are not Jews and don’t do scorch-earth genocidal acts like the zionized collective west was pushed to do by money lenders and fascist supranational corporations.
Whoever your favorite decider is, he/she is certainly of a different kind than the current president of the Russian Federation.
By the way, do you also believe in the immaculate conception?
Collapsed societies with no clear view of the future do that, because there is nothing else left for people to fill the vacuum.
You want to be like China -- building infrastructure and factories. And the USSR was like that, but Putin's masters destroyed it and Putin himself then made sure it does not come back.
People don't realize that political ratings can go down very sharply, all it takes is a catastrophic event and politicians can loose all that support in a blink. Its all about timing and the event. Don't put too much faith in polls and ratings.
This is such a western way of thinking. For my part, he's doing it the way it should be done. Talk it down, avoid heads and emotions starts boiling and follow your plan. The moment you react, you don't have the initiative and the Russians always won their wars by keeping the initiative, even when retreating or deceiving the enemy.
Legit viewpoint, but as I see it Russians don't have the initiative beyond the Ukrainian theater. As for the history part of your comment, it isn't what I was taught, but I'm coming to distrust almost everything I was taught.
Not even close to a maximalist. This problem was solved by Kruchev and Kennedy. Russia places Iskanders and Oreshnic missiles in 'client state' Venezuela.
Vlad calls The Don to point out that the missile strikes into America will be Venezuelan not Russian.
Merely placing them in Venezuela (and Iskanders won't reach the US from there anyway) won't do anything given that the USA is **firing** into Russia, not just placing missiles around it.
You have to strike at the US directly and at that point you do it with submarines for the mainland and Oreshniks from Russia to eliminate the US bases in Eurasia.
Of course, in the present conditions, neither the Russian, nor the US leadership desire a direct war that could become nuclear. They are not plain fools. Any officer, Russian or American, proposing actions like the ones are that our inimitable strategist GM would be sent away on medical leave, if not
retired. Those are serious people on both sides.
The Russians prefer to continue the game the way it is played now and the reason is that they think that they are winning.
It is the US who is trying to find a silver bullet to reverse the tide and the reason is that they think that they are losing.
Calling VP a traitor is like topping up milk with water as we say here in South Africa.. One of the reasons many of us are with the Russian people in spirit is the fact that they have avoided by all means to, "Netanyahu" Ukraine and this must be because of the current leadership in the Kremlin.....
And no, they haven't avoided it -- have you looked at what every city not taken by mid-March 2022 looks like in Ukraine after it finally falls into Russian hands after months and years of brutal fighting? Marinka, Volchansk, Artyomovsk, Popasnaya, etc. -- those all look exactly like Gaza.
All of which could have been avoided by physically cutting off the flow of weapons, which Putin can do today if he decides to, but for some mysterious reason (well, not so mysterious -- I have explained the reasons many times here) he preferred to have Russians and Ukrainians slaughter each other WWI style.
Not only the Russians are doing the heavy bombing of cities in Ukraine.. Unlike in Gaza where the Jooz side are the only ones who are demolishing even the anthills.. Also, there's no wilful genociding of civilians in Ukkraine as far as many of us here in Africa know.. Your comparison isn't thorough in my view.. At present, NATO is Ukraine in neo-Nazi regalia and we must stop liking to believe that NATO is this innocent terrorist organization that is not killing anyone.. If that was the case, this war would have long been over by now..
But by agreeing to this format of the war, Russia ensured all that destruction.
It didn't have to agree on the format, and it serves nobody's interests in Russia other than the Russian oligarchy hoping to get some kind of a deal with the West while not changing anything internally.
It is said Mao once said, "we study the method of warfare by warfare" something to that effect. At the onset,the Russians didn't seem to grasp what they were up against and had to go back to the drawing board.. We all saw this in real life.. Also, one prominent Russian whose quote I came across stated that ,there's one man who is hoping to mend fences with Europe and that man is VP.. The oligarchs are the same everywhere. Their interests is self-enrichment. I don't expect anything different in Russia.. Yes, NATO wants to be seen as innocent and be judged likewise..
If people actually did some research, you would realize that WW1 was a war of attrition, millions of men died on both sides, reaching stalemates, and it never resolved issues and than it led to the second war. Putin is making the same mistakes.
This so called SMO is not any different. Slaughtering your neighbour to oblivion only to remove a nazi cancer is like cutting off all your body parts to take out a small tumour.
Ukraine is a breeding ground for hatred towards Russia that is growing not diminishing.
>Slaughtering your neighbour to oblivion only to remove a nazi cancer is like cutting off all your body parts to take out a small tumour.
In this case what Putin is doing is more like having a still not fully metastasized tumor and trying to excise 10% of where it has spread while cutting off your still fully healthy arm in the process and not touching at all the main tumor mass, then declaring that if you remove that 10%, the problem will be somehow permanently and magically solved.
You are really talking of opening hundreds of miles of new frontlines and digging defensive positions to seal off the Romanian, Polish borders to Ukraine. In addition these new fronts have to be supported by long-distance logistics across hostile territories. On top of that these new fronts can be easily sandwiched between Ukraine and NATO forces in case of a NATO attack. Russian losses in manpower would suddenly go through the sky. This is precisely what they are trying to avoid.
Go back, study the history of the Korean War of the early 1950s and ask yourself the question: Why did the US not turn the Chinese transportation hubs into glossy parking lots and win the war easily against North Korea? Please write a one thousand word essay with your answer and submit it here for grading.
Because the US had achieved its strategic goal -- to establish itself on the peninsula, and it didn't matter all that much whether there is a North Korea or not.
Most importantly, the US mainland itself was not threatened in any way.
This is very different -- right now the front lines are roughly where they were in 1943 around this time of the year (and also in 1941). In other words, a thousand kilometers into Russian territory. That warrants a lot more than nuking some border crossings.
And that is also the failure to understand the nature of the war that so many here display.
This is not your garden variety Cold War proxy war, in which the superpowers are fighting each other in some far off places. This is a repeat of the GPW for Russia, and right now the situation is much worse than it was back then if no nukes are ever used -- the enemy has a tenfold advantage in population (where it was roughly matched back then) and Russia can only win if it clears the space around it with nukes.
We have two trends:
1) Fighting one street a week from Kursk to the Altantic
2) Allowing unrestricted missile strikes into the deep Russian rear leading to collapse of Russian industry.
Which one do you think will reach the finish line first?
The USA is the DS's private army! The goal was never a spectacular victory for the army, but the destruction of countries, then the infiltration of these large corporations, and the looting and "rebuilding" of the country, through which they gain continuous profits. This is how the US won every war, even when the army left as if it had lost. People's lives don't matter to them (DS), in fact, genocide is a good thing for them. Especially if they offer blood sacrifices to their "god" in the process...
The Key points in a GM concern-rant are always found in the last paragraph:
EG:
"Russians compromised.."
"Tomahawks will start raining.."
"..the imbecile/ traitor in the Kremlin"
Distilled and parboiled down, it's always about removing Putin..
Perhaps a review of this:
Concern Trolling--
"A concern troll is someone who disingenuously visits sites of an opposing ideology to disrupt conversation by offering unwanted advice on how to solve problems that do not really exist.
...the concern troll's posts are almost exclusively intended to derail the normal functions of the targeted website.
....pretends to conform in order to subtly sow dissent and doubt.."---
Rationalwiki. org
See also the Wiktionary article on "Concern Troll".
It's hard to talk to believers because they just want to believe and they don't care about the truth. They think that anyone who questions their faith is a troll. Usually, believers are the ones who, when they finally realize they've been tricked, are the first to come forward and shout that they always said it, they always knew it, etc...
From a US cruise missile submarine in the Black Sea, Montreux be damned. The alleged "Ukrainian" Tomahawks will just be there for plausible deniability, they might just as well be mockups.
OK. So it its a declaration of war between the U.S and Russia. Each side firing weapons at each other's homeland.
All right. Then no need to go to war with Turkey at the same time so as to attack Russia from one particular direction. Once the U.S. is attacking Moscow and Russia is attacking D.C. there no need for striving for more advantageous positional attacks. It's pretty clear where your plan is intended to go.
Can you imagine the shame, embarrassment, and humiliation American soldiers must feel, knowing they are being trained on an obsolete system like the Patriot Missile Battery?
The US isn't going to allow Banderans to operate PATRIOT systems due the number of classified operating systems that a battery requires: guidance, RADAR, communications, etc.
Strikes me that most of what Trump says is merely for public consumption. As for the "tomahawk," my understanding is that they are easily shot down because of the slow speed they fly at, though maybe there is some advantage to them if they can fly at a low altitude and evade the SR400 that way. But I doubt it.
S400 is for high altitude. Aircrafts and ballistic missiles is the main targets.
Simplicius had some good articles on Pantsir and the defense of Crimea. You need low altitude defense and short reaction time when they are identified over the horizon. Russia has lost 3 AWACS so I dont think they use them near the front anymore and that wouldnt help hitting Storm Shadow, Scalp or Tomahawks with S400. I read Russia use state of the art ground based system for the S400.
Actually, the S400's effective altitude range is 10 meters to 30Km with the radar it utilises. So I remain unconvinced that it can't take down low flying cruise missiles. But of course, I am going by published specs, not actuals.
correct, one of the radars used by newer S300 and S400, the one that looks like a board and is risen 20+ m above ground, is dedicated to (among others) detect ground hugging targets. Once such targets are detected they can be shot down by S400 - remember the containers contain a number of different AD missiles - or provide the target data to a connected nearby (the target) middle or close range SAM, if there is any. Given the size of the RF, it is clear that it is not possible to cover the whole territory with all kind of SAM.
Until WWIII starts and satellites start raining down, Tomahawks can be easily tracked by satellite surveillance, and interceptor aircraft dispatched to shoot them down. There are currently three players with the requisite capabilities, USA, China, and Russia.
Ofc S400 can shoot down Tomahawk. It can literally shoot down everything, down to artillery shell (which happened on occasion). Tomahawk is pretty much standard fodder for this systems.
The British Storm Shadow missile is also a low flying missile, and although of shorter range than the Tomahawk, is nonetheless a more modern and sophisticated missile. Russia shoots down the Storm Shadow on a regular basis now. It will do the same with the less sophisticated, but longer range, Tomahawk.
AFAIU, Tomahawks are deadly against non-peer enemies. Any state with extensive satellite surveillance (currently USA, Russia, and China) will be able to track them from orbit as they make their slow way across, so that they can be mowed down by fighter planes. They will be sitting ducks this way, until the satellite network is taken down at the commencement of actual Armageddon.
Re: US coordinating strikes. I also heard water is wet
Re: negotiations with Russia. I read somewhere that the strategy during the USSR days was to bluff and bluff big, and that the Soviets would always back down. Seems approach hasn't changed
Indeed. I should have mentioned that the strategy worked! Now the US is a bit of a 1-trick pony, esp under Trump. Bluff, and bluff big. If you're the EU or Korea - you fold. If you're China, you respond. If you're Russia, you just take it
By making what happens to Russia appear to be it's own fault, the implications are that:
"it's led by imbeciles".
"They're losers".
"it's not worthy of our attention",
"We shouldn't sympathize with it"..
This eventually leads to:
"Y'know, maybe we should support Ukraine".
And then General Maestro himself, ever generous with his time, will have us get out our hymnals and sing praises to Ukraine.
Still, GM doesn't hold a candle to the Duran's troll on Rumble. The guy we have to put up with daily at the Duran has 30+ alt accounts he uses to punish us with downvotes, and himself upvotes. On Rumble the down votes sink and close up posts. No mods over there.
If I had to pick a troll to put up with I'd take GM over the psycho troll on Rumble.
Still we get a lot of serious discussions on Rumble. But not like here, the discussions here I find to be amazing. The Duran guys read Simplicius. Most of your serious geopolitical analysts do.
So yeah, the Duran and Simplicius are gonna attract derailer trolls.
Your list is a list I'm proud to be on, son. Unless you're a hardened biker plastered with tattoos, I'd bet that in twenty years you'll recant all of that Nazi stuff.
Nazis aren't nice people, not even to each other. If you get sick, your Nazi friends aren't coming over with chicken soup.
If anyone cared, the trolls and bots would flood this place so quick, faster than Simp could ban them. And nobody cares what counternarrative people think. They're not the ones in the room when the decisions are made.
They broke the system because not even the communist nomenklatura could stand any more time the economic stagnation, personal lack of liberty and boring silliness of it all.
I insist, I lived in the URSS and know what the real conditions were. After the initial period of just homicidal brutality, it became just political surrealism and Russia is still paying the price for it.
What we will really need to seek out here is the level of involvement the US has to perform at the programming and guiding process of each Tomahawk missile. These missiles try to follow the terrain very closely as they maneuver toward their targets in order to maximalise their chances for success. Does that mean that each missile has to be custom programmed depending the geographic locations it flies over? The price is ranging from about 1.8 to 4 million dollars, not exactly an inexpensive toy that you can hand over to a Ukraine drone operator who is used to playing with $1,000 drones. The range is rather high, 1,000 miles and more. The speed is not really spectacular at 600 miles, it can be taken out. The problem is that in-flight reprogramming is possible. The path can be corrected during approach so evasive maneuvers are possible to throw off defenders. Because of the decades long development of this weapon literally countless options are available for the ground operator, but this assumes years of training and hands on experience.
Do you really have any doubt about the level of US involvement? Given what you said, isn't it only logical to conclude involvement is (for all practical purposes) 100%?
Yes, the reason these Ukrainian UAVs can traverse such long distances through Russian defenses is because US ISR maps the way through weak points in Russian air defense. Why are there weak points in Russian air defense? Because Russia is a huge, huge country, virtually impossible to completely shield, so the most critical areas are given the best coverage, leaving the lesser critical to shorter range protection like the Pantsir. Although some UAVs actually reach their targets and cause damage, you will note that most are downed before they reach them.
I do note that. I also note that when it comes to nuclear weapons it doesn’t take a whole lot of them to get through. Air defense is not enough: deterrence is required, and I have to agree with GM that Russia is not creating enough of that.
When it comes to nukes, it is all over anyway. Even one nuke will result in a massive exchange which ends it all for us. Russia has over 5000 nukes poised to strike the US and is vassals - that is all the deterrence necessary and the US knows this full well. Besides, when the crazies in the White House decide that it is time for first strike, they will not do it with a few nukes. They will go all in, convinced they can knock out Russia's ability to respond.
I don’t say you aren’t making sense, just that I’m convinced that many of the US decision-makers aren’t operating in that real world. I think they want to do it. I think they might try a sneak attack. After all, look at what GM keeps saying: a nuke here or there and people will stop fighting. American generals could feel the same thing and try a similar tactic. In my view, GM is not a nut, not a troll, and not alone.
Russia is clear on this point - a nuke here or there against Russia will result in a massive response - and the American generals are well aware of this.
GM is not a nut - but he is a troll. And you are right - he is not alone.
Nuke here or there is an opinion. He also said if Rus used nukes, everybody would chicken out, but then he told us that Rus used tactical nuke and got four in response. Then he says Rus should nuke Europe and US would chicken out. Nothing better for US than nuking Europe. Exactly what they want, a nuclear war in Europe leading to another 1945 devastation to waltz in.
Rus, on the other hand said that once it gets real then US gets razed. If we get to this stage, I hope I will have time to observe perfidious albion burning ;)
The whole premise of this war is that the West will keep escalating up to the point Russia nukes something. And if Russia does not nuke anything ever because its elites refuse to do it (due to the destruction of the country being less damaging to them than defending it, as it was in 1989-1991), then it will be destroyed.
Then there is a question of whether the West actually has a technological trump card and if Russia nukes something, the West will hit it hard and destroy it directly.
Based on public evidence that isn't the case.
But if there is something secret like that, then Russia has to buy time to develop countermeasures to whatever that secret US weapon is and carry out a first strike that disables as much of the American offensives potential as possible. Maybe that is what is happening behind the public facade of humiliation, but it doesn't look like it. Everything is much easier to explain with the refusal to do a counter-Perestroika.
You seem to be having a love affair with the troll AKA General Moron. Maybe when the nukes the troll loves so much start flying you two can get down and dirty in a bunker under his trailer.
And the rulers won't survive a major exchange, even in thier bunkers. Most haven't done a day's real work in their lives and have no working man skills. If they survive and come out of their bunkers, they will be met with devastation - no economy, no industry, bleak, darkened skies, no agriculture and importantly no worker bees (you know, the peons you mention?) to do any work for them, and if any 'peons' survive, they will have the rulers for dinner.
That's because Russia is the only adult in the room, knowing from experience the ravages of war, unlike Americans. The Russians, by international law, have every right to attack America just so, but won't, not because they don't have the balls, but because they know what the consequences would involve hitting a peer level nuclear power and the terrible escalation that would bring with it.
The trouble with Americans and Europeans is that the only way they know how to deal with adversity is blowing people up and bullying them into submission. Not all people are like that and would rather find other ways to settle things. I know that sounds like big girl's blouse to you, but if you knew what real war is as the Russians, you would do everything possible to prevent it, not encourage it.
Tomahawk production started over 40 years ago. The older generations were fully preprogrammed and Ukraine will likely get these as they are easier to use and cheaper. ALL models have to use high quality satellite guidance systems, something the Comedian does not have. The various versions produced in the last two decades have so many programming options (both, ground and in-flight) that it would take several pages to list them. In addition we can be sure that not all capabilities are published. During the early deployments against Iraq many Tomahawks flew off to Iran, Saud Arabia, etc. as the targeting was anything but precise. Supposedly later on these problems were corrected. Considering that (supposedly) Ursula’s plane was deprived from satellite navigation in the middle of Bulgaria by nasty Russian teddy bears, the early Tomahawks might end up digging into Ukraine/Russian potato fields for $2 or 3 million each, not an inexpensive trick to dig up rotting potatoes. There is no simple answer to your question, too many unknown variables there. One thing is sure; The US is taking some chances here. If the Tomahawks end up going the Abrams tanks way that is the Russians figure out ways to take out most of them with electronic sabotage, laser (they fly very low) and other countermeasures, we will see Putin’s face with a broad smile calling America a ‘paper tiger’. He might even demand the return of Texas and California to Mexico:))
I get that you don’t think the Tomahawks would make it through. What I don’t like is that the Russians seeing them in flight have to guess whether they’re nuclear or not, and I note the earlier comment that the US is not by any means above sneaking a few nukes into the mixture in hopes of a decapitation strike.
I don’t say that would be smart, but then I don’t think the US is particularly confining itself to doing smart things. And I don’t think the price of any of this makes the slightest difference to the war mongers. They’ll just cut off benefits to a few more of the disabled or something. Not a problem.
I think this might take time but the Russians will figure out how to make Tomahawks rain from the sky, off targets. All models theoretically can be taken over by hostiles because of their GPS dependence. Their flight time into deeper Russia is an hour or two. Even the faster Russian fighter jets can race them and take them out with machinegun fire. If the Ukrainians will not use Belarusian airspace the Tomahawks will be detected very early from the presently occupied territories and there will be ample time to meet the Tomahawks inside Russia, long before they reach targets.
"the US is not by any means above sneaking a few nukes into the mixture"
Do you have a precedent or any basis in fact for such a claim? The US has considered nukes on a number of occasions and each time have concluded it would lead to a massive nuclear exchange. Have all the nuclear armed Russian subs disappeared?
You’re arguing practicalities, I was making a statement of principles: the US has shown itself to be unprincipled and treacherous. Whether they would actually do it? Another question - not one that I’m happy about risking my life, or most of the other lives on the planet, on the assumption that the US will do the right thing.
Both Russia and the US are able to respond to a first strike with a devastating blow. This is what was called MAD and is it today more feasible than ever.
If Russia figures out ways to bring down the Tomahawks they will suddenly have the hottest worldwide defense weapon seller. US forces, warships, carriers and nuclear submarines carry many thousands of Tomahawks. This would be an incredible blow to the US military reputation.
To add insult to injury, China just might be smart enough to figure out that there is an opening here. If China attacks Taiwan suddenly the larger part of the US Navy will rush to the South China Sea to join the party. As soon as they make it there the Russian and Chinese shadow fleets can unload a few shiploads of medium and long-range missiles to their newly discovered friends, the Venezuelan, Cuban and Mexican ‘Freedom Fighters’. Part of the US Navy will starts another mad rush, back to the Gulf of Mexico, allowing easier operations into Taiwan by the Chinese. Under no conditions are you allowed to send this Top Secret material to China!!!
Tomahawk is a vastly simpler proposition to shoot down than Storm Shadow was. The only reason Russian AA systems aren't "flying off the shelves" to outside buyers is because Russia kind of needs them for the SMO....
China does NOT want to take Taiwan militarily, unless it really, really HAS to. The only thing Taiwan has, of any great value, is TSMC, and the US has *promised* to B2 those Fabs into oblivion (watch Nvidia, AMD, Apple etc stock price tank if that happens! It would make the dot comm bust look like a party popper)
The level of US involvement in launching a Tomahawk approaches 100%. Any reduction from that would be due to the use of the Polish Aegis Ashore installations as the launch platform (slight caveat, a Tomahawk and a Storm Shadow are very similar in size/weight, so *in theory*, something that can fire the latter can be adapted to fire the former).
ALL of the flightpath and terrain following data has to be supplied by the US, any video/data sent by the missile MUST use US military comms satellites, as would any in flight changes to targeting.
There's almost literally no way for the US to whitewash its involvement in the use of Tomahawk.
GM may yet get to see his beloved nukes fly, if saner heads do not prevail.
I was suspecting the proper answer to the question is along the lines of your writing. Putin said it a few times that Russia is being pushed toward a nuclear confrontation and he just might be correct here. The fact is that the Tomahawks can be set up to carry nuclear warheads as they were already used for that some years ago.
The nuke variant is a very specific one, and absolutely can only be launched from a US platform (ie sub, B-52, B-1/2) and I suspect that is the straw that the pro-Tomahawk US clowns are clinging to. i.e If a US nuke specific firing platform is NOT used in firing a Tomahawk, then Russia has no reason to go all doctrinal and nuke the shit out of the West, so we should be good to go... idiots
You still fail to understand the difference between analysis and advocacy.
I am explaining to people here all the time that it is an objective fact dictated by cold hard logic that Putin has dug Russia into such a hole that nothing else but the large-scale use of nukes will dig it out of it, and that Putin's incompetence/suspect loyalties/outright treason is the reason for having ended up in such a situation that we didn't have to be in and wouldn't have been in with more competent, decisive and timely action in the interests of mother Russia, which is one of the major reasons I am so unhappy with Putin.
Then I get called a troll and a genocidal nut for explaining these objective cold hard facts.
Any use of nukes against a nuclear capable nation will set off an instant mass hysteria. There will be no thinking, no negotiations just immediate acts to nuke the other party’s nuclear establishments, military industries and major population centers. All navy ships will be destroyed and there will be a desperate search for submarines. The life expectancy of carriers will be measured in hours, at the most. They are very large and are constantly followed, impossible to hide. If Russia is nuked China and North Korea will also reply in kind. Even if they will not be under direct attack, blowing up hundreds of nukes in Russia will cause the destruction of their own nations as well via pollution and the following nuclear winter. You need to study nuclear war strategies.
nobody said you did but make no mistake, if russia starts to lose china and nk will wash their hand like nobody's business, pontius will be put to shame.
brics is just a fantasy, ussr really tried something but the truth is that the so called 3rd world countries want exactly what the west wants, consumerism and somebody else to work.
"set off mass hysteria" -- you are committing the fallacy of judging others by how you yourself would act. These nuclear scenarios are all planned out in advance in meticulous detail, there is no room for knee-jerk emotional reaction in the staff bunkers.
Also, the US nuclear doctrine states that, when a first strike is launched, it must be launched against both Russia and China (and NK, FWIW), because no major power must be allowed to be left standing. So Russia and China are in effect joined at the hip, and well aware that they cannot avoid a common fate. They will stand or fall together, regardless of their respective wishes. That is why China will respond to a first strike on Russia, not out of any concern for "pollution".
‘there is no room for knee-jerk emotional reaction in the staff bunkers.’
The top decision makers will override any policies they find to be against their best PERSONAL AND CLASS interests. Personal or government responsibility, accountability will become nonexistent in minutes. Events will play out at such high speed that most who have permits will not even make it to any bunkers. Chaos will be an unavoidable organic part of the process. NOBODY will read the ‘US nuclear doctrine’ and most will not even remember it. Top government and military officers will try to make desperate attempts to reach nuke safe shelters but most will never make it. Communication will be nonexistent except in exceptional situations, for people with access to hardened, independently functional electronic systems. The nation that initiates first strike will have a decided advantage but will be also trashed. The concept of nuclear war grew out of a class of mentally disturbed people, was nursed to maturity and manipulated, forced on the population of this planet. If sanity ruled their minds they would have nipped this in the bud already in the 1940s and 1950s at the latest but this was certainly not the case.
You need to study human nature.
‘And please keep in mind: The fundamental role of U.S. nuclear weapons is to deter nuclear attack on the United States and its allies and partners.’ I hope this is vague enough for you.
Core personnel is on rotation at all critical posts, they will not "make desperate attempts to reach". But it is good that you at least concede that there ARE "people with access to hardened, independently functional electronic systems", because the rest of your post assumes there are none.
As for "top decision makers", they will be responsible for the initial press of the button, the cadres on duty will take it from there.
You ARE a troll... Or a NATO agent, if not those, then you are very low IQ.
It has been PAINFULLY obvious that your "analysis" is nothing more than blowing NATO's own trumpet, and every suggested Russian action you make ALWAYS benefits OTAN over Russia, and sends Russia on a path to its own destruction.
That you fail to see those consequences of your suggested actions is once again, direct evidence of either your low IQ, or your pro-Bandera sympathies.
The few faulty Tomahawks conspicuously gifted to Ukraine can serve as a red herring to obfuscate a surprise attack actually carried out from a US cruise missile sub in the Black Sea. "It was Zelensky that did it! These Tomahawks came from Odessa!"
With that speed, Tomahawk missiles are about as capable as WWII-era Stuka stormers, except that possibly carrying a nuke. They are sitting ducks to anyone who can track them from above, i.e. by satellite surveillance. Formidable against Iran, especially by surprise. Less so against a peer adversary.
"The Third World War will begin in 2028 — this is the forecast made by British military analysts in their leading headquarters."
Interesting to hear Brits forecasting when the UK will cease to exist, as assuredly it will if WWIII starts. They seem to imagine that Russia has to slog its way through Europe to get to them, with no recognition of what Russia can lay on them from afar.
That might be a happy day for the actual Brits, when their major cities full of foreigners are eliminated.
"All of Eastern Europe will be engulfed in flames.". A real WW3 prediction would be all of Europe burning with extra missiles for the UK, but that might scare their own population and decrease enthusiasm for the war.
It was almost inescapeable to not mention the Offensive on Russian Refinerys.
Of course Deep State actors can create pressure on Trump with those articles and ”truths” out of the blue but I think it is more of a Perception War against their own people. ”Look, we the US/West are already doing harm to Russia and our support to Ukraine is 100%”
In fact everyone will be totally flabbergasted once the whole truth escape the prison of information ambiguity. The involvement has been far reaching and as much as was needed.
As for the ”maximalist” option or directives. We are way beyond the horizon of a SMO.
The enormous scale of lies and deceptions in the West regarding the causes of the conflict, who has done what and the reality of the War that has been going along for 4 years deserves a clean retribution. A ceasefire and a ”settlement” of the conflict will NOT bring the truth at the table.
Russia will forever, in the western media, bear the guilt and blood-sodden reputation.
Putin, Kreml, Russia and its population should be aware of who is going to be the writer of the History. Them or others?
We are certainly way beyond the horizon of a SMO. It seems as ihough the West is now engaged in a low intensity but widespread war against Russia: shooting-information-economic. Whether this entanglement of both sides is through accident or design I could not say, but suggest any plan rarely remains static once the shooting starts and historically speaking, as wars progress, original war aims change, expand and harden.
Now as someone who lives in Western Europe, I would quite like it to remain in a condition which does not involve widespread nuclear fall out. However for reasons which escape me, our leaders keep pushing us to escalate the war - without seeming to realise this is existential for Russia. Well the West's leaders seem to have convinced themselves (but not yet their populations) that this is also an existential struggle for them - rather than a war of choice.
Seems I don't really get a say in the matter so I hope for the best and fear the worst. Either way, I cannot see how the West is supposed to "win" against Russia, particularly as it will be supported by China and perhaps BRICS generally. Russia simply finds itself - like Ukraine - maybe a proxy in a wider conflict. However its actions in the SMO need to be viewed against this wider conflict. And in good Russian fashion, it is maintaining large contingency reserves of both capabilities and options.
However IMO it has sufferred from the boiling frog syndrome and tolerance and restraint have simply emboldened the West and encouraged more escalation.
Disagree that the west has been emboldened and encouraged: these malicious politicians don’t need such motivation and will always spin it in the way that benefits their agenda. Harse responses from Russia would have just fueled the Russophobia.
And as Insaid many times: Russia is not working in a vacuum, it has to take into account their allies and not alienate them.
Don't you live in a "democracy" ? Isn't that what most europeans fill their mouths with, when talking about everyone else, as if they are superior ?
If you are a democracy, then you do have a say in the matter and you are also responsible for the literal nazis in power in Europe. Sorry to be so blunt, but that's the reality. Europeans love to criticize others and claim to be better, because they are "democracies", but when their "elected" leaders are the worst fascisrts ever, europeans "can never do anything about it, it's not their fault..."...Please...give me a break.
As an european myself, I at least understand that we are NOT democracies. I understand that as the fascist dictatorships that we live in, in Europe, we can't do anything to change things, unless a vast majority of the population revolts and acts accordingly. And I don't mean peaceful protests on the streets, if I'm making myself clear.
But since most europeans either support fascism or are more concerned with football (or both), nothing will change and that's the european people's fault. it's no one else's fault. Dictators like von der Leyen, Macron, Merz, etc can't do shit without the support of the majority of the people. And that's exactly what they have now. If they didn't, the people would've already removed them, by force if needed. Realityt is most europeans either support all this or don't really care about it.
That's your interpretation of it. I'm simply stating the facts, the reality of the situation. I also apologized for being blunt, but those that don't know reality, only benefit from knowing it. At least, that's my view.
Your reaction is inline with what most europeans and north americans do, when confronted with reality. The one talking about reality, is immediately criticized...how dare he burst my bubble that I live in a "democracy" and that I am "free". It's another symptom of those that want at all costs, to live in fantasy land and often use that fantasy as an "argument" to gloat about their self perceived superiority. I mean, that's what europeans do almost every day. They are "gardens" of democracy and freedom, while everywhere else it's a "jungle" of dictators and war. Reality of course is most of the west are nothing but fascists dictatorships, where their people are propagandized to think the most outrageous and unbelievable things and that their censorship., their authoritarianism, their fascism, their warmongering is all about defending "democracy" and "freedom".
I don't hate them, but I am frustrated that so many people don't see what's in front of their eyes and clear as water.
Which means they either do see it and support it or they don't see it, because their brains don't work or worse even, don't care...All these options are really, really bad...Democracies, true democracies require people caring about it. Most western people don't. They just claim they do and that's it.
The 83% cant organize themselves. Old people, children, sick, ignorants, people who has something to socially lose etc. You had a couple of ”Yellow vests” that protested. 200 of them had their eyes shot out with rubber bullets 3–4 cm in diameter. That is what you call repression.
In Canada you had truckdrivers who protested. They had their bank accounts freezed…
Macron may be unpopular. Yes. Orders are followed. Yes.
Sure and like Mark Twain said "it's easier to fool someone, than to convince them they were fooled".
If someone is fooled and understands they were fooled, that's the first step in the right path. But most people in the west, don't care about the fact they were fooled. And if presented with the arguments AND proof that they were fooled, they will cover their eyes and ears and shout LALALA, ignoring everything that is being exposed to them.
In reality most people in the west don't want to move a finger to actually be a "democracy" or actually be "free". They just believe that whatever is written on paper will somehow protect them from censorship, being arrested for wrong think and other clearly anti-democratic and authoritarian policies being applied on a daily basis in any western country. When confronted with the fact that there are people suffering from these measures, they don't believe it and just stick their head sin the sand. In other words, for most people in the west., it's not a problem, unless it happens to them.
Unfortunately, liberty is incompatible with equality in most cases. It should be no surprise that democracies routinely violate natural rights in the quest for the establishment of a more equal society. By thriving upon envy and greed, democracies erode the moral foundation of a society. While the intentions of democracies are noble, their results are not. A free order will be one based upon the freedom of association and property rights rather than democracy.
Well...I don't really see where this "quest for the establishment of a more equal society" is happening in the west, where the claimed "democracies" supposedly exist. There is no equality not an attempt to reach it in the west. There's just propaganda of equality. Meanwhile, rich people get richer and laws are passed to benefit rich people even more. Corruption is rampant and poor get poorer and the middle class, if it still exists, is being literally murdered, just for going to a supermarket...
But then again, the democracies you refer to cannot be in western countries, because there is no democracy in any western country. There are only oligarchies. There is only the rule of unelected elites, over the many, while the many think they elected someone that actually does anything for them, when in fact he/she that was "elected" works directly for the oligarchs, the elites. This is not democracy, nor equality. it's the exact opposite.
Russias symphathetic approach with reasonable talks about the root causes and showing restraints both in objectives in Ukraine and actions in the War (mostly reactions on the Wests provocations) has not rendered them any good will.
After four years that strategy has certainly boiled the Russian frog more than the Western.
It is only wishful thinking by dissidents in the West that (((they))) will fail and crumble into a heap of dust. Money printing is easy and 400 million people can be misinformed, deceived, used and misused as cannonfodder almost at will.
And the ”will” is very unclear and probably a moving target where opportunists from different fractions, deep hidden agendas, open agendas (as the Rand Corporation) and others scavenges the table.
History is full of examples of slow-grinding inescapable geostrategy movements going on for centuries AND sudden flashes of events that turns everything upside down (for a while at least). We are in a middle of such events just before that moment.
Your leaders are convinced that Russia doesn't have the stones, and besides, they and theirs will survive any nuclear war, snug as a bug in a rug. As for peons like you and I, who cares?
And of course it might be me, but it seems as if syntax and grammar errors creep into my posts after I have checked them. But apologies for fat thumb syndrome. Especially after lunch.
Merz, Macron, Starmer, and the other YGL are not the actual leaders. They are stooges selected from banking and masonic families on three criteria: narcissistic amorality, incompetence, and hardcore kompromat, and guided with an iron hand by Cabal handlers. They are disposable, just as Renfield was disposable. The actual vampire masters rule out of Geneva and Zurich, and have bunker complexes under the Swiss Alps. All of Switzerland is one massive fallout shelter.
"Russia will forever, in the western media, bear the guilt and blood-sodden reputation."
Lol. Russia was demonized by the West for centuries. Doesn't matter whether it's Imperial, Soviet or Modern Russia, whether it's monarchy, communist or capitalist. It's always "aggressive", too vast, too mysterious, uncivilized and too rich for its own good. Russian people are always dehumanized and portrayed as barbarians that West is indoctrinated to fear and hate unconditionally.
But Russia is done with the West and couldn't care less what West thinks.
No matter who started it, this is an objective reality. I also doubt it will ever change. And I sincerely hope that Russia cuts ties with West for good. This sick relationship has brought Russia nothing but grief and rivers of blood spilled by arrogant people with colonial mentality who dream of destroying Russia, looting its riches and exterminating its people.
"It’s also likely an attempt at some kind of grandstanding “message” to Russia, but I still remain very skeptical any Tomahawks will ever be delivered."
Well, I'm taking the other side of that coin. Global leaders have seen a lot from POTUS 47, mainly talking about peace while escalating several wars. Prior US Presidents have been pressured to attack Iran, certainly George W Bush and Obama, both refused. Trump actually attacked Iran.
Also 47 accepted a golden (exploding) pager as a gift. Whatever the facts may be, both Hamas and Iran believe that 47 lured them into peace talks so they could be targeted in decapitation strikes. Putin has admitted that 47's words are meaningless, and that the RF only pays attention to his actions. Well, 47's administration continues to foment regime change operations while aiding, arming and funding multiple wars, and committing murders via piracy in the Caribbean. As bloody as the last 80 years have been, the US is as aggressive now as it has ever been.
According to Borzzikman, TU-160s have been flying (well offshore) the coast of Florida. If true, this would be rather more than an expensive training exercise, it is a pointed warning that the RF has a robust nuclear triad. Would a man with a golden pager groom the RF into accepting flights of nuclear capable Tomahawks as normal, only to, when it is least expected, deliver a nuclear decapitation strike via Tomahawk? I have no doubts that strategic planners in the RF are quite aware of this possibility and trying to deter it, if possible.
I noticed a qualitative difference in Trump's stance toward Gaza and Israel before and after the golden pager. Trump clearly has no particular fear of death since he has been facing it since 2016, and did not back off.. However he is deathly afraid of insignificance.
The golden pager itself will be placed in public archive with other gifts to officials, by law. But its form was a glaring symbolic threat. I conclude it once held a photo gallery of 'gotchas'. Trump is being blackmailed.
‘Putin has admitted that 47's words are meaningless, and that the RF only pays attention to his actions.’
During graduate school I was the ultimate, constant promoter of the idea that no politicians’ words should be ever taken seriously, only their actions should be considered. (The only exception is when they clearly state that they want to exterminate their own populations, as that is already obvious.)
Other than the fact western media is admitting that actual NATO/US personnel are crewing the missiles using American ISR and hitting targets assigned by American overall command, this is not news.
Way back when the last nazis surrendered under the industrial plant in Mariupol, they shot the NATO officers and burned the bodies. Sufficient passport fragments were left to identify that these were French, British and Americans.
There are Telegram interviews of Chechen and Yakut servicemen who killed off the last American and Polish soldiers in the Kursk region.
There are several reports over the last years I've read of missiles taking out NATO underground HQs and hotels with foreign soldiers.
The only aspect of this directly NATO orchestrated war that is odd, is the fact that Russia officially plays along with our media that this is a "Ukranian" war. As though the Kiev regime is a sovereign, popularly elected victim of Russian aggression.
The 2023 Ukraine offensive out of Rabotina, Zaparozhe region, which never reached the 1st line of defense was completely commanded by the US. Absolutely failed leadership.
This strategy of defending every town to the last man and bullet, reminiscent of the Wermacht in 1944/1945 is insane. Reckless waste of Ukranian lives, ordered by their "allies"!
To be fair, Russia has been saying that this is NATO's war against Russia pretty much from the beginning. But it's true that for whatever reason, even though Trump does all the escalation possible, Putin especially, still wants to "please" Trump and not directly attack him. I find that very dumb and stupid. They don't need to attack him directly, but they need to criticize his bipolar nature, which creates more tension.
As for Ukraine's / NATO strategy, don't forget that NATO tactics come directly from german nazis, that NATO countries protected from being punished for their crimes, with things like Operation paperclip. NATO tactics are in effect a fork of nazi tactics. They attack civilians, they use civilians as shields, they sacrifice their own soldiers for the sake of propaganda, etc etc. NATO and USA in particular, is defacto nazi Germany 2.0
It is not pleasant to see the truth in this and to agree, but it is true that my country consistently destroys other countries and causes millions of cumulative deaths in the name of spreading "democracy".
The irony of creating a military dictatorship in Ukraine, destroying that modern made up contruct of disparate regions while also raping its' resources and people, while justifying commencing another operation in Venezuela.
Under our occupation of Afghanistan we were allied with the Northern Alliance of heroine cartels. Our military was importing heroine with reference to the spike in heroine addiction across our country. Just as ugly was the trafficking of boys in the sex slave trade. While our media pontificated about girls rights.
Now that the Taliban control the entire country the heroine industry is largely eliminated and boys are no longer trafficked. Yet we call Maduro a narco terrorist.
NATO is all in while losing. The ramifications to the US, Europe and the Trump Administration when public denial is no longer possible are catastrophic. This is what makes the extreme danger of our nuclear weapon use.
Cornered rats are dangerous. Perhaps Putin is not doing everything correctly, but the pressure on him to be careful is immense. He is dealing with unstable terror sponsoring regimes that are nuclear armed.
Our business model works for a few, until it doesn't. The consequences when it no longer "works" is the concern I have. Dying whales can take out those around them.
Who is constantly escalating? Russia or the West? The winning side doesn't need escalation; it's already winning, it just needs time and to keep doing what it's doing. The losing side needs escalation to turn the tide. For years, it was the West that constantly escalated the situation, introducing ever more powerful weapons in an attempt to reverse the situation.
I don't suppose there's any real difference between UK and US in this regard, despite the rhetoric, and I have little doubt the story is true. Grist for the hardliners' mill, not that they needed any. One wonders how long Putin will be able to keep up the charade he's been maintaining. That business of supporting Trump for the peace prize was disgusting.
I'm sure all the reporters knew all that, so perhaps the story was planted as yet another dare to Russia. The west is dying for a fight.
Not if the retired generals are any indication of American military competence. Hard to find a bigger bunch of clowns anywhere other than European leadership. But more specifically, they are convention-bound, intensely propagandized, fed only choice American intelligence, and bootlickers by profession.
Not all of them, of course, but all the ones I've heard speaking.
They climbed high up the greasy pole in an intensely political and politicised bureacracy. They didn't get there by being mavericks or telling their bosses that they were wrong.
"And again the US military doesn't have the slavish culture of accepting any mission, no matter how unrealistic."
You say that, but we recently instigated an unprovoked attack on Iran, several exceedingly treacherous strikes on negotiators, and US troops have been introduced and took action in American cities in plain violation of the constitution. And of course I regard as everything we've done to help Israel as violating every tenet of decency and law. I'm sure Majors and Colonels are smarter than generals, but I have zero faith in any one person in the military taking individual responsibility for their actions and refusing an order. Some undoubtedly will, but it's always going to be a bad bet given the training and culture they have.
In the US armed forces, by the time one climbs to the general tier, one has been thoroughly vetted for sycophant biddability. Individuals who show individual initiative, scruples, or even intelligence have been sidelined along the way. A similar process of negative selection "career" goes on in political parties, but in the military, with its elaborate hierarchy, it is even more effective. John is totally off-base; the "slavish culture" is enforced for the lower ranks, and becomes second nature at the top.
Prolonged, existential war upsets this pattern, allowing talent to slowly rise; but the US haven't experienced existential war since the 1860s.
Many Western retired generals are paid for stirring tensions. It is good for the accounts of the firmas that pay them some very nice complements to their pensions. Eisenhower disclosed that fact decades ago.
Words are cheap.
Commanding officers are in a different position.
They know the enemy shoots back. The front would not be a CNN plateau.
US commanding officers are currently in a war in Ukraine where the enemy does NOT shoot back. The only ones dying are Ukrainians and Russians, BOTH of whom the US is happy to see six feet under. If the war expands to include other Europeans, I’m not sure the US would object to that, either.
But to address your real point, which is the difference between command and commentary, I think it’s unclear how much of the cool aid the commanders are drinking as they dish it out to the public. The leaders seem to be imbibing freely, and the commanding officers are trained to follow orders. I don’t trust their judgment at all; they are, after all, losing the war in Ukraine on the ground.
I’m not sure you’re right about that, but even if you are I think it’s time for such trolling to stop. China is demonstrating how to respond to Trump right now - they’re spanking him an making him stand in the back of the room. Russia should at least start telling the truth about him. It’s not like he’s smart enough to understand subtlety.
You should understand that Putin praising Trump weakens him in the domestic front and saying that he should receive the Nobel for Peace makes him look ridiculous in front of the wide world. Putin is an old fox.
Putin praising Trump weakens Trump? or weakens Putin himself? I doubt the first and can’t see why he’d want the second. Whichever you mean, I think it’s counterproductive. In my opinion Putin should be labeling US involvement for what it is and directly confronting it. He obviously thinks different.
It tentatively appears to me that Putin is playing the waiting game; he is deliberately moving slowly, and the creeping attrition grind is not just a military strategy, it goes deeper. Some say he is biding time waiting for Ukrainian manpower to finally collapse, but that's not it, it's something much bigger, not just theater-scale. I wonder what he is foreseeing that we do not.
And then, of course, I could be completely wrong, and GM right :-)
Could be. I would guess he’s trying to build BRICS and multipolarity and thinks that the US may fall apart under its own weight, much the way Europeans think their umpteenth sanctions package will finally collapse Russia, but with a much better chance. Or it could be he’s wanting to destroy the Banderites and thinks it’s easier if they remain a cohesive unit. I would think either of those would be mistakes, but plenty of people wouldn’t. Perhaps he started slowly because he didn’t know the sanctions would be so ineffective… whatever the case, I think a better approach now would be to end the war rapidly, frontloading some casualties in order to reduce the ultimate toll. Reasonable minds could differ.
WWIII in 2028? By then France will not have a government, Macron will be on the assembly line of Renault, 83 % of French want him out and a majority isn’t going to war with Russia with him, moreover the national debt will have increased by some more billions. Their Ceasars and Rafales too expensive to keep them operational. For other institutions EU and gov’s Ursula included, perhaps they will become eco farmers, saving the planet from their war wet dreams.
Macron will probably be dating Katy Perry or her new boyfriend Trudeau on the Riviera. The unpopularity of any of these clowns certainly does not result in their being relegated to constructive work. Nor does it even seem to slow down the mad rush to war.
Justin's wife left him amid rumors swirling about him.
Later, he attended the Barbie movie showing dressed head to toe in pink. Freed at last, I guess.
Recently he almost got ejected from Parliament for hoarsely accusing an MP of being "homophobic", like he had some personal skin in the game.
Evidently his orientation is taking some twists and turns.
His father Pierre's identity was fluid and undefinable too. Pierre was a noted swinger party bladesman.
Pierre and Justin's mother reportedly had an open marriage.
So open that Justin's mom romped with Fidel Castro, among many other high profile celebrities in the 1970's. A member or two of the Rolling Stones had a fling with her as well, adding their own buena notches on her bedpost.
Granted, the gal had some prodigious energy.
Most people see the extreme similarities between Justin and Fidel, and dissimilarity between Justin and Pierre. I don't think we need a 23andMe DNA test to tell us what likely happened.
Katy Perry has the dough, Justin has the A-list friends, and a-partying they will go.
Katy is worth $400 million. Despite what AI says, Justin's dough is a measley $5-10 million.
But again, she's got the money and he's got the time. When she runs short of money, he'll run short of time.
Justin's liberal friends owe him a lot of invites to parties, celebrity events, homages to Bacchus, hedonistic retreats, new age coke-filled engagements. He's done everything they wanted him to do, so time to call in his markers.
Remember, Justin is a guy who's official plane sat in a foreign airport for days with him in it because he was coke binging.
Katy Perry will soon be introduced to the world of high level adrenochrome zombies. She'll meet all those scaly old reptiles like Soros.
Remember when Justin went to New York to go to the UN, and the first place he went to off the plane was the Manhattan office of George Soros? Gotta kiss the ring now and then.
It'll be a whirlwind for her. For Justin it's just more of the same non-stop partying, only maybe now he can get the number for Katy's coke dealer.
hahaha - all the gossip I’ll need for months, and really what I meant to do was take a swing at Macron and Brigitte! It was a cheap shot, but then he’s a cheap imitation of a man.
Von der Lyin and her handlers must be freaking out with the election of Babis. There seems to.be enough momentum there for a significant push back. The leadership in France and Germany is at an all time low, times are looking decidedly unstable in Europe.
So they must win then, them snow niggers.
You see yourself as a Balkan snow nigger, Marko? Or are you more self-confident?
Given the mediocrity of the strikes into Russia, odds are there are US fingerprints on the efforts.
>Note the bolded above—the admission that at least “some” of the prestige Western air defense systems are operated by non-Ukrainian-speaking allies.
Why would anyone have thought otherwise?
How much time does it take to train Patriot operators? We had that discussion two years ago many times, and it was pointed out again and again how complicated Patriots are etc. But then there were so many Patriot systems blown up after that. So are we to assume that the US has been training Ukrainian operators like crazy? Which we never heard about after 2023 at all. Obviously if there ever were any Ukrainians operating the Patriots, that was only in the beginning, after that it was all NATO personnel.
So how is this news?
>Against this backdrop, we have Trump’s new announcement that he will allegedly consider sending Tomahawks to Ukraine, if Putin doesn’t bend the knee:
>I still remain very skeptical any Tomahawks will ever be delivered
This is all theater.
The decision to launch Tomahawk strikes on Russia was made a long time ago. LONG BEFORE THE SMO EVEN STARTED. Years before that.
The primary reason Putin was maneuvered into the SMO was so that the Russian frog can be boiled into accepting missile strikes into its territory, and then destroyed gradually the same way Syria, Iraq, etc. were. Which would have been unthinkable had they started directly. For that plan to work, the SMO had to be slow walked from both sides, i.e. that is why NATO never entered seriously and only provided enough materiel to the Ukrainians to keep them in the fight, but never enough to make the frog jump out of the pot (i.e. pull out the nukes). And on the Russian side the US plan relied on Russian elites being extremely loath to do a counter-Perestroika, which they would have to do if they are to fight the GPW all over again and recover all of Ukraine.
As it turned out Russian elites were indeed thoroughly compromised, which the US analysts have assessed very correctly, so here we are, at the point where the Tomahawks will start raining on the most sensitive Russian facilities in Moscow and the Urals, and all that the imbecile/traitor in the Kremlin managed to muster as a reaction was to say "we will beef up air defense in response"...
I sincerely hope you are wrong on the Tomahawks.
NATO practices nuclear strike on Rus regularly. They also have Aegis ashore and Deveselu installations.
Nothing new. So, ideas of targeting Rus in this way predates SMO, yes. However, freaking out now coz of tomahawks but not coz of, for example, Aegis ashore is just hysteria.
The reason Tomahawks were a red line for me was that they are nuclear capable: the first time one gets fired, Russians have to decide whether it's nuclear or conventional. Putting that decision on that kind of time-line under those conditions is absolutely insane.
Exactly this was debated re f16s.
True, but there were limits to the F16s abilities to get off the ground or anywhere near the combat line. But still, you have a point, and I was against them.
Honestly, if they are going to send them, then I think they are already in Ukraine. At least this is how it was with Biden’s administration. Once they started talking about the weapon it was already in Ukraine, peeps were trained or foreigners were brought in and then once it was being discussed in the public fora, then they immediately started using them.
So, I believe there are some new long range missiles in UA. Are they tomahawks? Dunno. Maybe it is something UA “made”, from 90%+ foreign components. Saw some images of supposed Flamingo missile debris.
https://www.reuters.com/world/russia-says-us-built-f-16s-could-accommodate-nuclear-weapons-if-sent-ukraine-2023-06-06/
Same with tomahawks, some are nuclear capable. So far USA supposedly has two typhons ground based launchers. One in Japan, one in Philippines, supposedly.
Bring them down the Danube?
There is the LRF too.
You think the US lacks the capacity to put a VLS on a light truck? Please...
No, unlike you, I am not expert in everything, but I listen to military peeps who know better than I do what they are talking about.
Dunno who you are, you are very secretive ;)
This is why NATO will fire a few at first to deliberately show they can be shot down easily and dealt with so that Russia relaxes a little and does not escalate.
Once that is done, NATO sets their salami slicing strategy in motion and within 4-5 months Tomahawks will be 'normalized'.
Now slide in some old A-10s, F18s and Mirages over that time and they are slowly building up a method to enable a 100 missile wave towards Russia. They should toss in some Afghan pilots and Super Tucanos and 500 or so drones as well. Does not sound too terrible, but when you combine it with superior ISR from the usa, they will maximize damage as the attack will come just when RF is taking a crap.
You can see where one day a 'Massive Ukrainian Retaliation sends Russia Ablaze' news story might come from.
I can imagine it all, along with the Russian response of. "we reduced Ukrainian electrical generation by 37%, it was great success".
You can go back and see who has had a good track record of predicting how this war will develop and who hasn't.
Contributed anything to ZOV Kamchatka, yet? Lemme know, I will send you some other links.
Baba Venga predicted that USA will keep escalating? Imagine my shock.
You’re right about the patriots operating by NATO personnel and talking about tomahawks they’re even more complex, vulnerable, sophisticated and expensive, only operating by US personnel and not only that, they’ll awake all bears from Ukraine borders up to Vladivostok.
I guess I'm becoming one of those dreaded maximalists. Surely Russia knows if Tomahawks are already on the ground in Ukraine. To me that was the reddest of red lines. Improving air defense is hardly sufficient as a response.
"Improving air defense" is an invitation for an all-out attack.
Putin should have been dragged in handcuffs by whatever agency in Russia is supposed to guard against grand treason at the very top and tried for it the moment he said that.
The problem, from your point of view, is that he’s enormously popular, if what I hear is correct. But I agree: this seems to be a profound misjudgment. It must be pissing off at least some of the generals.
Gorbachev was popular initially too. But he was doing controlled demolition of the USSR deliberately and from the start. By the time people wised up to what is happening it was too late.
Putin, if you look at his actions since he took power back from Medvedev objectively and without any assumptions about the person, has been doing controlled demolition too. But, precisely because he is so popular, people still haven't gotten wise to what is happening, and that enables it.
At this point I still think he’s winning the Ukrainian part of this war, so don’t see it your way. I do think he’s wrong to think this is a Ukrainian war rather than (already) ww3, though. Not so sure he’s winning that. But I see his caution not as a sign of disloyalty but a natural attempt to contain a very explosive situation.
>he’s winning the Ukrainian part of this war
He isn't and he can't be, because that isn't even set as an objective.
The minimal winning condition for Russia in Ukraine is for Ukraine to disappear as a state, Russia to take over the territory, and then erase Ukrainian identity completely and permanently. Any territory left as Ukraine will be used as base for perpetual attacks on Russia because there can be no Ukraine that is not an anti-Russia, by the very nature of the idea of what "Ukraine" is, and that is so clear and obvious3 that, as I repeatedly say, Russian leadership can only refuse/fail to see it if they are total imbeciles or traitors. No other options.
>I see his caution not as a sign of disloyalty but a natural attempt to contain a very explosive situation.
The exact opposite has been achieved.
Back in 2022 escalation could have been cut off by e.g. conventional missile strikes on some mansions in Europe, Larry Fink's residence around NYC, the Blackrock and Lockheed Martin HQs, etc. Just to sent a message that we are serious, will not fuck around, stay out of this, we will go all the way if needed, and will hit those responsible for the attacks on us with no hesitation, no matter where they are.
Now Russian deterrence is lost to such an extent that nothing else but erasing whole countries from the map will restore it. And that is entirely on Putin's "caution".
Putin knows full well this is a war against the West. He has noted it on several occasions. He is winning both the Ukraine and the wider war - just differently than you and perhaps others (incl myself) would prefer.
(already) ww3
The US (the WEST) is already at war with Russia, Iran and Venezuela...owners of the largest pools of oil on the planet. Probably the bosses think we're not going totally Green and EV yet, despite the non-stop blather to the contrary. WW3? Open hostilities on three continents? Yeah...I think we're there.
Does no one in Euro-land read the history of the 20th C. in their blood soaked neighborhoods? Sheesh.
As DC martinet, US Sec'y of Brylcreem has said...
ef......eh.....ef.....oh
You mean, Putin made wrongs by strengthening the unity of people in Russia by restoring churches and improving ordinary peoples’ lives, the old babushkas in particular?
Russians are not Jews and don’t do scorch-earth genocidal acts like the zionized collective west was pushed to do by money lenders and fascist supranational corporations.
Whoever your favorite decider is, he/she is certainly of a different kind than the current president of the Russian Federation.
By the way, do you also believe in the immaculate conception?
Building churches is not a good sign actually.
Collapsed societies with no clear view of the future do that, because there is nothing else left for people to fill the vacuum.
You want to be like China -- building infrastructure and factories. And the USSR was like that, but Putin's masters destroyed it and Putin himself then made sure it does not come back.
People don't realize that political ratings can go down very sharply, all it takes is a catastrophic event and politicians can loose all that support in a blink. Its all about timing and the event. Don't put too much faith in polls and ratings.
There's your PDS again. It is unjustified. Give us an example of the "destruction" Putin is doing to Russia.
The troll won't, because the troll can not.
Dragging Putin off in handcuffs is certainly the west's dearest fantasy.
Fantasy indeed.
Ignorant old blowhard.Educate yourself (highly unlikely):
https://open.substack.com/pub/chandragupta/p/russias-way-of-war-sequencing-restraint?r=2jojoi&utm_medium=ios
Well what else could he say? Do you think he should make public all his plans for defense against Tomakhawk?
Yes, actually. I think he should say what he’ll do, and do what he says.
Indeed!
This is such a western way of thinking. For my part, he's doing it the way it should be done. Talk it down, avoid heads and emotions starts boiling and follow your plan. The moment you react, you don't have the initiative and the Russians always won their wars by keeping the initiative, even when retreating or deceiving the enemy.
Legit viewpoint, but as I see it Russians don't have the initiative beyond the Ukrainian theater. As for the history part of your comment, it isn't what I was taught, but I'm coming to distrust almost everything I was taught.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0niXWAPgaY
indeed Elena, understanding is knowing
Opinions are a nice thing, just opinions based on emotions or a collection of other's opinions are in the end simple BS
Not even close to a maximalist. This problem was solved by Kruchev and Kennedy. Russia places Iskanders and Oreshnic missiles in 'client state' Venezuela.
Vlad calls The Don to point out that the missile strikes into America will be Venezuelan not Russian.
Merely placing them in Venezuela (and Iskanders won't reach the US from there anyway) won't do anything given that the USA is **firing** into Russia, not just placing missiles around it.
You have to strike at the US directly and at that point you do it with submarines for the mainland and Oreshniks from Russia to eliminate the US bases in Eurasia.
1. This requires aggression and proactiveness that the Russian leadership has not shown so far.
2. Neither Trump nor anyone in the US will give a rat's ass about any legal niceties but the response on Russia will be brutal and unmistakable.
Which is why nobody does it.
Of course, in the present conditions, neither the Russian, nor the US leadership desire a direct war that could become nuclear. They are not plain fools. Any officer, Russian or American, proposing actions like the ones are that our inimitable strategist GM would be sent away on medical leave, if not
retired. Those are serious people on both sides.
The Russians prefer to continue the game the way it is played now and the reason is that they think that they are winning.
It is the US who is trying to find a silver bullet to reverse the tide and the reason is that they think that they are losing.
By that logic, any escalation is a sign of desperation, even if it clearly is not.
Calling VP a traitor is like topping up milk with water as we say here in South Africa.. One of the reasons many of us are with the Russian people in spirit is the fact that they have avoided by all means to, "Netanyahu" Ukraine and this must be because of the current leadership in the Kremlin.....
You don't Netanyahu Ukraine, you do it to NATO.
And no, they haven't avoided it -- have you looked at what every city not taken by mid-March 2022 looks like in Ukraine after it finally falls into Russian hands after months and years of brutal fighting? Marinka, Volchansk, Artyomovsk, Popasnaya, etc. -- those all look exactly like Gaza.
All of which could have been avoided by physically cutting off the flow of weapons, which Putin can do today if he decides to, but for some mysterious reason (well, not so mysterious -- I have explained the reasons many times here) he preferred to have Russians and Ukrainians slaughter each other WWI style.
Not only the Russians are doing the heavy bombing of cities in Ukraine.. Unlike in Gaza where the Jooz side are the only ones who are demolishing even the anthills.. Also, there's no wilful genociding of civilians in Ukkraine as far as many of us here in Africa know.. Your comparison isn't thorough in my view.. At present, NATO is Ukraine in neo-Nazi regalia and we must stop liking to believe that NATO is this innocent terrorist organization that is not killing anyone.. If that was the case, this war would have long been over by now..
Who said NATO is innocent?
But by agreeing to this format of the war, Russia ensured all that destruction.
It didn't have to agree on the format, and it serves nobody's interests in Russia other than the Russian oligarchy hoping to get some kind of a deal with the West while not changing anything internally.
It is said Mao once said, "we study the method of warfare by warfare" something to that effect. At the onset,the Russians didn't seem to grasp what they were up against and had to go back to the drawing board.. We all saw this in real life.. Also, one prominent Russian whose quote I came across stated that ,there's one man who is hoping to mend fences with Europe and that man is VP.. The oligarchs are the same everywhere. Their interests is self-enrichment. I don't expect anything different in Russia.. Yes, NATO wants to be seen as innocent and be judged likewise..
If people actually did some research, you would realize that WW1 was a war of attrition, millions of men died on both sides, reaching stalemates, and it never resolved issues and than it led to the second war. Putin is making the same mistakes.
This so called SMO is not any different. Slaughtering your neighbour to oblivion only to remove a nazi cancer is like cutting off all your body parts to take out a small tumour.
Ukraine is a breeding ground for hatred towards Russia that is growing not diminishing.
>Slaughtering your neighbour to oblivion only to remove a nazi cancer is like cutting off all your body parts to take out a small tumour.
In this case what Putin is doing is more like having a still not fully metastasized tumor and trying to excise 10% of where it has spread while cutting off your still fully healthy arm in the process and not touching at all the main tumor mass, then declaring that if you remove that 10%, the problem will be somehow permanently and magically solved.
https://chemtrails.substack.com/
https://chemtrails.substack.com/p/the-never-before-told-true-history
You are really talking of opening hundreds of miles of new frontlines and digging defensive positions to seal off the Romanian, Polish borders to Ukraine. In addition these new fronts have to be supported by long-distance logistics across hostile territories. On top of that these new fronts can be easily sandwiched between Ukraine and NATO forces in case of a NATO attack. Russian losses in manpower would suddenly go through the sky. This is precisely what they are trying to avoid.
Of course it's not going to involve new frontlines.
That is what nukes are for
Go back, study the history of the Korean War of the early 1950s and ask yourself the question: Why did the US not turn the Chinese transportation hubs into glossy parking lots and win the war easily against North Korea? Please write a one thousand word essay with your answer and submit it here for grading.
Because the US had achieved its strategic goal -- to establish itself on the peninsula, and it didn't matter all that much whether there is a North Korea or not.
Most importantly, the US mainland itself was not threatened in any way.
This is very different -- right now the front lines are roughly where they were in 1943 around this time of the year (and also in 1941). In other words, a thousand kilometers into Russian territory. That warrants a lot more than nuking some border crossings.
And that is also the failure to understand the nature of the war that so many here display.
This is not your garden variety Cold War proxy war, in which the superpowers are fighting each other in some far off places. This is a repeat of the GPW for Russia, and right now the situation is much worse than it was back then if no nukes are ever used -- the enemy has a tenfold advantage in population (where it was roughly matched back then) and Russia can only win if it clears the space around it with nukes.
We have two trends:
1) Fighting one street a week from Kursk to the Altantic
2) Allowing unrestricted missile strikes into the deep Russian rear leading to collapse of Russian industry.
Which one do you think will reach the finish line first?
The USA is the DS's private army! The goal was never a spectacular victory for the army, but the destruction of countries, then the infiltration of these large corporations, and the looting and "rebuilding" of the country, through which they gain continuous profits. This is how the US won every war, even when the army left as if it had lost. People's lives don't matter to them (DS), in fact, genocide is a good thing for them. Especially if they offer blood sacrifices to their "god" in the process...
My take is that Russia want to avoid a situation where it conquer a territory where drop
The Key points in a GM concern-rant are always found in the last paragraph:
EG:
"Russians compromised.."
"Tomahawks will start raining.."
"..the imbecile/ traitor in the Kremlin"
Distilled and parboiled down, it's always about removing Putin..
Perhaps a review of this:
Concern Trolling--
"A concern troll is someone who disingenuously visits sites of an opposing ideology to disrupt conversation by offering unwanted advice on how to solve problems that do not really exist.
...the concern troll's posts are almost exclusively intended to derail the normal functions of the targeted website.
....pretends to conform in order to subtly sow dissent and doubt.."---
Rationalwiki. org
See also the Wiktionary article on "Concern Troll".
It's hard to talk to believers because they just want to believe and they don't care about the truth. They think that anyone who questions their faith is a troll. Usually, believers are the ones who, when they finally realize they've been tricked, are the first to come forward and shout that they always said it, they always knew it, etc...
GM
Tomahawks *raining down* !!??! What ground launched Tomahawks from which currently no longer in existence launchers?
From a US cruise missile submarine in the Black Sea, Montreux be damned. The alleged "Ukrainian" Tomahawks will just be there for plausible deniability, they might just as well be mockups.
OK. So it its a declaration of war between the U.S and Russia. Each side firing weapons at each other's homeland.
All right. Then no need to go to war with Turkey at the same time so as to attack Russia from one particular direction. Once the U.S. is attacking Moscow and Russia is attacking D.C. there no need for striving for more advantageous positional attacks. It's pretty clear where your plan is intended to go.
"your plan"? You seem to be confusing prediction with intention.
Ok. The *plan* that you believe is so feasible that you predict it is likely to happen.
Can you imagine the shame, embarrassment, and humiliation American soldiers must feel, knowing they are being trained on an obsolete system like the Patriot Missile Battery?
Destroy Russia? Planned, yes. Feasible? No. That would amount to a collective march into the abyss, long before Russia itself would be destroyed.
The US isn't going to allow Banderans to operate PATRIOT systems due the number of classified operating systems that a battery requires: guidance, RADAR, communications, etc.
Will Christmas be white and merry or dark and bloody here in dying Europe I wonder.
Both at once.
Strikes me that most of what Trump says is merely for public consumption. As for the "tomahawk," my understanding is that they are easily shot down because of the slow speed they fly at, though maybe there is some advantage to them if they can fly at a low altitude and evade the SR400 that way. But I doubt it.
S400 cant shoot down Tomahawks. Russia need a lot of Pantsir for these low-fliers.
Probably, but honestly I am not sure what air defense equipment is being used in Crimea against the Storm Shadow. You are probably right.
However, if Russia's AWACS are utilised, then for certain neither Storm Shadow nor Tomahawk will have a chance against the S-400.
S400 is for high altitude. Aircrafts and ballistic missiles is the main targets.
Simplicius had some good articles on Pantsir and the defense of Crimea. You need low altitude defense and short reaction time when they are identified over the horizon. Russia has lost 3 AWACS so I dont think they use them near the front anymore and that wouldnt help hitting Storm Shadow, Scalp or Tomahawks with S400. I read Russia use state of the art ground based system for the S400.
Actually, the S400's effective altitude range is 10 meters to 30Km with the radar it utilises. So I remain unconvinced that it can't take down low flying cruise missiles. But of course, I am going by published specs, not actuals.
correct, one of the radars used by newer S300 and S400, the one that looks like a board and is risen 20+ m above ground, is dedicated to (among others) detect ground hugging targets. Once such targets are detected they can be shot down by S400 - remember the containers contain a number of different AD missiles - or provide the target data to a connected nearby (the target) middle or close range SAM, if there is any. Given the size of the RF, it is clear that it is not possible to cover the whole territory with all kind of SAM.
Agree on the specs. And I am no expert on either AD or S400.
Just hasnt seen any reports that S400 has defeated those low-fliers or that it is the purpose with the missile.
”Western sources” says they are for defeating Cruise missiles also.
Will leave that question until we see either Tomahawks flying or S400 knocking them from the Sky.
Until WWIII starts and satellites start raining down, Tomahawks can be easily tracked by satellite surveillance, and interceptor aircraft dispatched to shoot them down. There are currently three players with the requisite capabilities, USA, China, and Russia.
Ofc S400 can shoot down Tomahawk. It can literally shoot down everything, down to artillery shell (which happened on occasion). Tomahawk is pretty much standard fodder for this systems.
The British Storm Shadow missile is also a low flying missile, and although of shorter range than the Tomahawk, is nonetheless a more modern and sophisticated missile. Russia shoots down the Storm Shadow on a regular basis now. It will do the same with the less sophisticated, but longer range, Tomahawk.
AFAIU, Tomahawks are deadly against non-peer enemies. Any state with extensive satellite surveillance (currently USA, Russia, and China) will be able to track them from orbit as they make their slow way across, so that they can be mowed down by fighter planes. They will be sitting ducks this way, until the satellite network is taken down at the commencement of actual Armageddon.
Russian troops disguised as civvies or civilians assisting their liberators?
Across Ukraine this nasty gansgster regime is having to contend with a growing population that hates it. Just saying.
Nobody cares, as long as the regime's orders are obeyed.
Re: US coordinating strikes. I also heard water is wet
Re: negotiations with Russia. I read somewhere that the strategy during the USSR days was to bluff and bluff big, and that the Soviets would always back down. Seems approach hasn't changed
The Soviets backed down all the way into breaking apart their own country.
Indeed. I should have mentioned that the strategy worked! Now the US is a bit of a 1-trick pony, esp under Trump. Bluff, and bluff big. If you're the EU or Korea - you fold. If you're China, you respond. If you're Russia, you just take it
GM here is using reverse logic here.
By making what happens to Russia appear to be it's own fault, the implications are that:
"it's led by imbeciles".
"They're losers".
"it's not worthy of our attention",
"We shouldn't sympathize with it"..
This eventually leads to:
"Y'know, maybe we should support Ukraine".
And then General Maestro himself, ever generous with his time, will have us get out our hymnals and sing praises to Ukraine.
Still, GM doesn't hold a candle to the Duran's troll on Rumble. The guy we have to put up with daily at the Duran has 30+ alt accounts he uses to punish us with downvotes, and himself upvotes. On Rumble the down votes sink and close up posts. No mods over there.
If I had to pick a troll to put up with I'd take GM over the psycho troll on Rumble.
Still we get a lot of serious discussions on Rumble. But not like here, the discussions here I find to be amazing. The Duran guys read Simplicius. Most of your serious geopolitical analysts do.
So yeah, the Duran and Simplicius are gonna attract derailer trolls.
Like you - r baker the Jew stooge.
Your list is a list I'm proud to be on, son. Unless you're a hardened biker plastered with tattoos, I'd bet that in twenty years you'll recant all of that Nazi stuff.
Nazis aren't nice people, not even to each other. If you get sick, your Nazi friends aren't coming over with chicken soup.
Break your Jew programming you pleb.
"Most of your serious geopolitical analysts do."
Don't kid yourself. Nobody of influence and authority gives a rat's ass what the cranks here think.
Otherwise, the board would be flooded with trolls and bots.
Well, I've seen you on MoA give serious and thoughtful comments, and you're here too. At least there's a Feral Finster there too.
Plus Simplicius is a hands on site owner. He's more than willing to toss out the trolls, if they get ornery enough. I've seen him warn GM before.
The persons of influence I'm speaking about aren't the ones in MSM power, they're counter-narrative people.
That Feral Finster is the same cat as me.
If anyone cared, the trolls and bots would flood this place so quick, faster than Simp could ban them. And nobody cares what counternarrative people think. They're not the ones in the room when the decisions are made.
They broke the system because not even the communist nomenklatura could stand any more time the economic stagnation, personal lack of liberty and boring silliness of it all.
I insist, I lived in the URSS and know what the real conditions were. After the initial period of just homicidal brutality, it became just political surrealism and Russia is still paying the price for it.
What we will really need to seek out here is the level of involvement the US has to perform at the programming and guiding process of each Tomahawk missile. These missiles try to follow the terrain very closely as they maneuver toward their targets in order to maximalise their chances for success. Does that mean that each missile has to be custom programmed depending the geographic locations it flies over? The price is ranging from about 1.8 to 4 million dollars, not exactly an inexpensive toy that you can hand over to a Ukraine drone operator who is used to playing with $1,000 drones. The range is rather high, 1,000 miles and more. The speed is not really spectacular at 600 miles, it can be taken out. The problem is that in-flight reprogramming is possible. The path can be corrected during approach so evasive maneuvers are possible to throw off defenders. Because of the decades long development of this weapon literally countless options are available for the ground operator, but this assumes years of training and hands on experience.
Do you really have any doubt about the level of US involvement? Given what you said, isn't it only logical to conclude involvement is (for all practical purposes) 100%?
Yes, the reason these Ukrainian UAVs can traverse such long distances through Russian defenses is because US ISR maps the way through weak points in Russian air defense. Why are there weak points in Russian air defense? Because Russia is a huge, huge country, virtually impossible to completely shield, so the most critical areas are given the best coverage, leaving the lesser critical to shorter range protection like the Pantsir. Although some UAVs actually reach their targets and cause damage, you will note that most are downed before they reach them.
I do note that. I also note that when it comes to nuclear weapons it doesn’t take a whole lot of them to get through. Air defense is not enough: deterrence is required, and I have to agree with GM that Russia is not creating enough of that.
When it comes to nukes, it is all over anyway. Even one nuke will result in a massive exchange which ends it all for us. Russia has over 5000 nukes poised to strike the US and is vassals - that is all the deterrence necessary and the US knows this full well. Besides, when the crazies in the White House decide that it is time for first strike, they will not do it with a few nukes. They will go all in, convinced they can knock out Russia's ability to respond.
I don’t say you aren’t making sense, just that I’m convinced that many of the US decision-makers aren’t operating in that real world. I think they want to do it. I think they might try a sneak attack. After all, look at what GM keeps saying: a nuke here or there and people will stop fighting. American generals could feel the same thing and try a similar tactic. In my view, GM is not a nut, not a troll, and not alone.
Russia is clear on this point - a nuke here or there against Russia will result in a massive response - and the American generals are well aware of this.
GM is not a nut - but he is a troll. And you are right - he is not alone.
Nuke here or there is an opinion. He also said if Rus used nukes, everybody would chicken out, but then he told us that Rus used tactical nuke and got four in response. Then he says Rus should nuke Europe and US would chicken out. Nothing better for US than nuking Europe. Exactly what they want, a nuclear war in Europe leading to another 1945 devastation to waltz in.
Rus, on the other hand said that once it gets real then US gets razed. If we get to this stage, I hope I will have time to observe perfidious albion burning ;)
The whole premise of this war is that the West will keep escalating up to the point Russia nukes something. And if Russia does not nuke anything ever because its elites refuse to do it (due to the destruction of the country being less damaging to them than defending it, as it was in 1989-1991), then it will be destroyed.
Then there is a question of whether the West actually has a technological trump card and if Russia nukes something, the West will hit it hard and destroy it directly.
Based on public evidence that isn't the case.
But if there is something secret like that, then Russia has to buy time to develop countermeasures to whatever that secret US weapon is and carry out a first strike that disables as much of the American offensives potential as possible. Maybe that is what is happening behind the public facade of humiliation, but it doesn't look like it. Everything is much easier to explain with the refusal to do a counter-Perestroika.
"GM is not a nut, not a troll, and not alone"
He is, he is, and he is.
You seem to be having a love affair with the troll AKA General Moron. Maybe when the nukes the troll loves so much start flying you two can get down and dirty in a bunker under his trailer.
>Even one nuke will result in a massive exchange which ends it all for us
No, it won't.
Evidence -- the events since 2023.
NATO is convinced that Russia doesn't have the stones, and even if they did, nuclear war is survivable for the rulers. As for the peons, who cares?
It's like a gamble, isn't it - like "FAFO".
Time will tell.
And the rulers won't survive a major exchange, even in thier bunkers. Most haven't done a day's real work in their lives and have no working man skills. If they survive and come out of their bunkers, they will be met with devastation - no economy, no industry, bleak, darkened skies, no agriculture and importantly no worker bees (you know, the peons you mention?) to do any work for them, and if any 'peons' survive, they will have the rulers for dinner.
So, what does Russia propose to do about it?
Cry "No fair!"?
What they are doing now - prosecuting the Ukraine war, of course. Fairly minimal damage is done by these drones even though they make a big splash.
Keep telling yourself that. For that matter, pretend that Russian munitions were hitting US refineries.
We would not be hearing excuses for American indecision, as the response would be unmistakable, immediate and brutal.
Which is why nobody does it.
That's because Russia is the only adult in the room, knowing from experience the ravages of war, unlike Americans. The Russians, by international law, have every right to attack America just so, but won't, not because they don't have the balls, but because they know what the consequences would involve hitting a peer level nuclear power and the terrible escalation that would bring with it.
The trouble with Americans and Europeans is that the only way they know how to deal with adversity is blowing people up and bullying them into submission. Not all people are like that and would rather find other ways to settle things. I know that sounds like big girl's blouse to you, but if you knew what real war is as the Russians, you would do everything possible to prevent it, not encourage it.
Tomahawk production started over 40 years ago. The older generations were fully preprogrammed and Ukraine will likely get these as they are easier to use and cheaper. ALL models have to use high quality satellite guidance systems, something the Comedian does not have. The various versions produced in the last two decades have so many programming options (both, ground and in-flight) that it would take several pages to list them. In addition we can be sure that not all capabilities are published. During the early deployments against Iraq many Tomahawks flew off to Iran, Saud Arabia, etc. as the targeting was anything but precise. Supposedly later on these problems were corrected. Considering that (supposedly) Ursula’s plane was deprived from satellite navigation in the middle of Bulgaria by nasty Russian teddy bears, the early Tomahawks might end up digging into Ukraine/Russian potato fields for $2 or 3 million each, not an inexpensive trick to dig up rotting potatoes. There is no simple answer to your question, too many unknown variables there. One thing is sure; The US is taking some chances here. If the Tomahawks end up going the Abrams tanks way that is the Russians figure out ways to take out most of them with electronic sabotage, laser (they fly very low) and other countermeasures, we will see Putin’s face with a broad smile calling America a ‘paper tiger’. He might even demand the return of Texas and California to Mexico:))
I get that you don’t think the Tomahawks would make it through. What I don’t like is that the Russians seeing them in flight have to guess whether they’re nuclear or not, and I note the earlier comment that the US is not by any means above sneaking a few nukes into the mixture in hopes of a decapitation strike.
I don’t say that would be smart, but then I don’t think the US is particularly confining itself to doing smart things. And I don’t think the price of any of this makes the slightest difference to the war mongers. They’ll just cut off benefits to a few more of the disabled or something. Not a problem.
I think this might take time but the Russians will figure out how to make Tomahawks rain from the sky, off targets. All models theoretically can be taken over by hostiles because of their GPS dependence. Their flight time into deeper Russia is an hour or two. Even the faster Russian fighter jets can race them and take them out with machinegun fire. If the Ukrainians will not use Belarusian airspace the Tomahawks will be detected very early from the presently occupied territories and there will be ample time to meet the Tomahawks inside Russia, long before they reach targets.
The Russians should re-program the Tomahawks in flight with a return to sender message.
LOL!
"the US is not by any means above sneaking a few nukes into the mixture"
Do you have a precedent or any basis in fact for such a claim? The US has considered nukes on a number of occasions and each time have concluded it would lead to a massive nuclear exchange. Have all the nuclear armed Russian subs disappeared?
You’re arguing practicalities, I was making a statement of principles: the US has shown itself to be unprincipled and treacherous. Whether they would actually do it? Another question - not one that I’m happy about risking my life, or most of the other lives on the planet, on the assumption that the US will do the right thing.
Titanium framed Russian nuclear submarines are multiplying like bunnies in Australia.
Both Russia and the US are able to respond to a first strike with a devastating blow. This is what was called MAD and is it today more feasible than ever.
Yawn, we hear the same cope at every western escalation.
If Russia figures out ways to bring down the Tomahawks they will suddenly have the hottest worldwide defense weapon seller. US forces, warships, carriers and nuclear submarines carry many thousands of Tomahawks. This would be an incredible blow to the US military reputation.
To add insult to injury, China just might be smart enough to figure out that there is an opening here. If China attacks Taiwan suddenly the larger part of the US Navy will rush to the South China Sea to join the party. As soon as they make it there the Russian and Chinese shadow fleets can unload a few shiploads of medium and long-range missiles to their newly discovered friends, the Venezuelan, Cuban and Mexican ‘Freedom Fighters’. Part of the US Navy will starts another mad rush, back to the Gulf of Mexico, allowing easier operations into Taiwan by the Chinese. Under no conditions are you allowed to send this Top Secret material to China!!!
Tomahawk is a vastly simpler proposition to shoot down than Storm Shadow was. The only reason Russian AA systems aren't "flying off the shelves" to outside buyers is because Russia kind of needs them for the SMO....
China does NOT want to take Taiwan militarily, unless it really, really HAS to. The only thing Taiwan has, of any great value, is TSMC, and the US has *promised* to B2 those Fabs into oblivion (watch Nvidia, AMD, Apple etc stock price tank if that happens! It would make the dot comm bust look like a party popper)
TSMC is the least important thing of Taiwan.
Taiwan is very important strategically, to avoid blockades against China and avoid that it can be used as means to attack the mainland.
Also is used to install deep ocean sonars that cannot be installed in the shallow China sea.
The level of US involvement in launching a Tomahawk approaches 100%. Any reduction from that would be due to the use of the Polish Aegis Ashore installations as the launch platform (slight caveat, a Tomahawk and a Storm Shadow are very similar in size/weight, so *in theory*, something that can fire the latter can be adapted to fire the former).
ALL of the flightpath and terrain following data has to be supplied by the US, any video/data sent by the missile MUST use US military comms satellites, as would any in flight changes to targeting.
There's almost literally no way for the US to whitewash its involvement in the use of Tomahawk.
GM may yet get to see his beloved nukes fly, if saner heads do not prevail.
I was suspecting the proper answer to the question is along the lines of your writing. Putin said it a few times that Russia is being pushed toward a nuclear confrontation and he just might be correct here. The fact is that the Tomahawks can be set up to carry nuclear warheads as they were already used for that some years ago.
The nuke variant is a very specific one, and absolutely can only be launched from a US platform (ie sub, B-52, B-1/2) and I suspect that is the straw that the pro-Tomahawk US clowns are clinging to. i.e If a US nuke specific firing platform is NOT used in firing a Tomahawk, then Russia has no reason to go all doctrinal and nuke the shit out of the West, so we should be good to go... idiots
You still fail to understand the difference between analysis and advocacy.
I am explaining to people here all the time that it is an objective fact dictated by cold hard logic that Putin has dug Russia into such a hole that nothing else but the large-scale use of nukes will dig it out of it, and that Putin's incompetence/suspect loyalties/outright treason is the reason for having ended up in such a situation that we didn't have to be in and wouldn't have been in with more competent, decisive and timely action in the interests of mother Russia, which is one of the major reasons I am so unhappy with Putin.
Then I get called a troll and a genocidal nut for explaining these objective cold hard facts.
Any use of nukes against a nuclear capable nation will set off an instant mass hysteria. There will be no thinking, no negotiations just immediate acts to nuke the other party’s nuclear establishments, military industries and major population centers. All navy ships will be destroyed and there will be a desperate search for submarines. The life expectancy of carriers will be measured in hours, at the most. They are very large and are constantly followed, impossible to hide. If Russia is nuked China and North Korea will also reply in kind. Even if they will not be under direct attack, blowing up hundreds of nukes in Russia will cause the destruction of their own nations as well via pollution and the following nuclear winter. You need to study nuclear war strategies.
wishful thinking
I am not the one here wishing for a nuclear war.
nobody said you did but make no mistake, if russia starts to lose china and nk will wash their hand like nobody's business, pontius will be put to shame.
brics is just a fantasy, ussr really tried something but the truth is that the so called 3rd world countries want exactly what the west wants, consumerism and somebody else to work.
"set off mass hysteria" -- you are committing the fallacy of judging others by how you yourself would act. These nuclear scenarios are all planned out in advance in meticulous detail, there is no room for knee-jerk emotional reaction in the staff bunkers.
Also, the US nuclear doctrine states that, when a first strike is launched, it must be launched against both Russia and China (and NK, FWIW), because no major power must be allowed to be left standing. So Russia and China are in effect joined at the hip, and well aware that they cannot avoid a common fate. They will stand or fall together, regardless of their respective wishes. That is why China will respond to a first strike on Russia, not out of any concern for "pollution".
You need to study nuclear war strategies.
‘there is no room for knee-jerk emotional reaction in the staff bunkers.’
The top decision makers will override any policies they find to be against their best PERSONAL AND CLASS interests. Personal or government responsibility, accountability will become nonexistent in minutes. Events will play out at such high speed that most who have permits will not even make it to any bunkers. Chaos will be an unavoidable organic part of the process. NOBODY will read the ‘US nuclear doctrine’ and most will not even remember it. Top government and military officers will try to make desperate attempts to reach nuke safe shelters but most will never make it. Communication will be nonexistent except in exceptional situations, for people with access to hardened, independently functional electronic systems. The nation that initiates first strike will have a decided advantage but will be also trashed. The concept of nuclear war grew out of a class of mentally disturbed people, was nursed to maturity and manipulated, forced on the population of this planet. If sanity ruled their minds they would have nipped this in the bud already in the 1940s and 1950s at the latest but this was certainly not the case.
You need to study human nature.
‘And please keep in mind: The fundamental role of U.S. nuclear weapons is to deter nuclear attack on the United States and its allies and partners.’ I hope this is vague enough for you.
https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organization/263730.pdf
Core personnel is on rotation at all critical posts, they will not "make desperate attempts to reach". But it is good that you at least concede that there ARE "people with access to hardened, independently functional electronic systems", because the rest of your post assumes there are none.
As for "top decision makers", they will be responsible for the initial press of the button, the cadres on duty will take it from there.
You have no military experience, do you?
They will likely also nuke India, Europe and Japan too, possibly even places like Brazil, for the same reasons.
Your “facts” are from a neocon comic. Try this
https://open.substack.com/pub/chandragupta/p/russias-way-of-war-sequencing-restraint?r=2jojoi&utm_medium=ios
You ARE a troll... Or a NATO agent, if not those, then you are very low IQ.
It has been PAINFULLY obvious that your "analysis" is nothing more than blowing NATO's own trumpet, and every suggested Russian action you make ALWAYS benefits OTAN over Russia, and sends Russia on a path to its own destruction.
That you fail to see those consequences of your suggested actions is once again, direct evidence of either your low IQ, or your pro-Bandera sympathies.
The few faulty Tomahawks conspicuously gifted to Ukraine can serve as a red herring to obfuscate a surprise attack actually carried out from a US cruise missile sub in the Black Sea. "It was Zelensky that did it! These Tomahawks came from Odessa!"
With that speed, Tomahawk missiles are about as capable as WWII-era Stuka stormers, except that possibly carrying a nuke. They are sitting ducks to anyone who can track them from above, i.e. by satellite surveillance. Formidable against Iran, especially by surprise. Less so against a peer adversary.
"The Third World War will begin in 2028 — this is the forecast made by British military analysts in their leading headquarters."
Interesting to hear Brits forecasting when the UK will cease to exist, as assuredly it will if WWIII starts. They seem to imagine that Russia has to slog its way through Europe to get to them, with no recognition of what Russia can lay on them from afar.
That might be a happy day for the actual Brits, when their major cities full of foreigners are eliminated.
I wouldn't believe the Brits.. They are simply believing their own propaganda as Golda Meir once stated about the Jooz..
You'd have better luck asking a Jehovah's witness when Armageddon is coming:
1970: "Any day now".
1980: "real soon".
1990: "like I said, next Tuesday".
2000: "our dear leader said...".
2010: "very soon".
2020: "I got tired of waiting, I'm going to have fun".
My dream of seeing the Atlantis by 2030 might actually come true then.
Maybe one should open a tour business with submarine trips to see the former British empire?
Not sure where they will get their chips from, but at least they wouldn't be running out of fish down there.
"All of Eastern Europe will be engulfed in flames.". A real WW3 prediction would be all of Europe burning with extra missiles for the UK, but that might scare their own population and decrease enthusiasm for the war.
Thx, Simplicius!
It was almost inescapeable to not mention the Offensive on Russian Refinerys.
Of course Deep State actors can create pressure on Trump with those articles and ”truths” out of the blue but I think it is more of a Perception War against their own people. ”Look, we the US/West are already doing harm to Russia and our support to Ukraine is 100%”
In fact everyone will be totally flabbergasted once the whole truth escape the prison of information ambiguity. The involvement has been far reaching and as much as was needed.
As for the ”maximalist” option or directives. We are way beyond the horizon of a SMO.
The enormous scale of lies and deceptions in the West regarding the causes of the conflict, who has done what and the reality of the War that has been going along for 4 years deserves a clean retribution. A ceasefire and a ”settlement” of the conflict will NOT bring the truth at the table.
Russia will forever, in the western media, bear the guilt and blood-sodden reputation.
Putin, Kreml, Russia and its population should be aware of who is going to be the writer of the History. Them or others?
We are certainly way beyond the horizon of a SMO. It seems as ihough the West is now engaged in a low intensity but widespread war against Russia: shooting-information-economic. Whether this entanglement of both sides is through accident or design I could not say, but suggest any plan rarely remains static once the shooting starts and historically speaking, as wars progress, original war aims change, expand and harden.
Now as someone who lives in Western Europe, I would quite like it to remain in a condition which does not involve widespread nuclear fall out. However for reasons which escape me, our leaders keep pushing us to escalate the war - without seeming to realise this is existential for Russia. Well the West's leaders seem to have convinced themselves (but not yet their populations) that this is also an existential struggle for them - rather than a war of choice.
Seems I don't really get a say in the matter so I hope for the best and fear the worst. Either way, I cannot see how the West is supposed to "win" against Russia, particularly as it will be supported by China and perhaps BRICS generally. Russia simply finds itself - like Ukraine - maybe a proxy in a wider conflict. However its actions in the SMO need to be viewed against this wider conflict. And in good Russian fashion, it is maintaining large contingency reserves of both capabilities and options.
However IMO it has sufferred from the boiling frog syndrome and tolerance and restraint have simply emboldened the West and encouraged more escalation.
Disagree that the west has been emboldened and encouraged: these malicious politicians don’t need such motivation and will always spin it in the way that benefits their agenda. Harse responses from Russia would have just fueled the Russophobia.
And as Insaid many times: Russia is not working in a vacuum, it has to take into account their allies and not alienate them.
Weakness is what alienates allies and not decisiveness.
"Seems I don't really get a say in the matter"
Don't you live in a "democracy" ? Isn't that what most europeans fill their mouths with, when talking about everyone else, as if they are superior ?
If you are a democracy, then you do have a say in the matter and you are also responsible for the literal nazis in power in Europe. Sorry to be so blunt, but that's the reality. Europeans love to criticize others and claim to be better, because they are "democracies", but when their "elected" leaders are the worst fascisrts ever, europeans "can never do anything about it, it's not their fault..."...Please...give me a break.
As an european myself, I at least understand that we are NOT democracies. I understand that as the fascist dictatorships that we live in, in Europe, we can't do anything to change things, unless a vast majority of the population revolts and acts accordingly. And I don't mean peaceful protests on the streets, if I'm making myself clear.
But since most europeans either support fascism or are more concerned with football (or both), nothing will change and that's the european people's fault. it's no one else's fault. Dictators like von der Leyen, Macron, Merz, etc can't do shit without the support of the majority of the people. And that's exactly what they have now. If they didn't, the people would've already removed them, by force if needed. Realityt is most europeans either support all this or don't really care about it.
You are a bit hateful and a shows a lot of disrespect.
You must know that the systems built over hundred of years enables guys like Macron to sit his Presidency with only 17% of the votes.
You cant accuse the people of supporting fascists.
They are ignorant, yes. They are dumb or mislead, yes.
You certainly have real evil supporters and a lot of ”dont carers” but most people are peaceful.
That's your interpretation of it. I'm simply stating the facts, the reality of the situation. I also apologized for being blunt, but those that don't know reality, only benefit from knowing it. At least, that's my view.
Your reaction is inline with what most europeans and north americans do, when confronted with reality. The one talking about reality, is immediately criticized...how dare he burst my bubble that I live in a "democracy" and that I am "free". It's another symptom of those that want at all costs, to live in fantasy land and often use that fantasy as an "argument" to gloat about their self perceived superiority. I mean, that's what europeans do almost every day. They are "gardens" of democracy and freedom, while everywhere else it's a "jungle" of dictators and war. Reality of course is most of the west are nothing but fascists dictatorships, where their people are propagandized to think the most outrageous and unbelievable things and that their censorship., their authoritarianism, their fascism, their warmongering is all about defending "democracy" and "freedom".
I dont count me in that generalization you make about ”europeans”. You clearly despise them all. I feel for them.
I don't hate them, but I am frustrated that so many people don't see what's in front of their eyes and clear as water.
Which means they either do see it and support it or they don't see it, because their brains don't work or worse even, don't care...All these options are really, really bad...Democracies, true democracies require people caring about it. Most western people don't. They just claim they do and that's it.
And what do the 83% do about it?
Macron may be unpopular, but his orders still are carried out and that is all that matters.
The 83% cant organize themselves. Old people, children, sick, ignorants, people who has something to socially lose etc. You had a couple of ”Yellow vests” that protested. 200 of them had their eyes shot out with rubber bullets 3–4 cm in diameter. That is what you call repression.
In Canada you had truckdrivers who protested. They had their bank accounts freezed…
Macron may be unpopular. Yes. Orders are followed. Yes.
Heard that in Nuremberg too…
It works.
The people have been fooled and disarmed.
"Democracy" is Jewish dictatorship.
Sure and like Mark Twain said "it's easier to fool someone, than to convince them they were fooled".
If someone is fooled and understands they were fooled, that's the first step in the right path. But most people in the west, don't care about the fact they were fooled. And if presented with the arguments AND proof that they were fooled, they will cover their eyes and ears and shout LALALA, ignoring everything that is being exposed to them.
In reality most people in the west don't want to move a finger to actually be a "democracy" or actually be "free". They just believe that whatever is written on paper will somehow protect them from censorship, being arrested for wrong think and other clearly anti-democratic and authoritarian policies being applied on a daily basis in any western country. When confronted with the fact that there are people suffering from these measures, they don't believe it and just stick their head sin the sand. In other words, for most people in the west., it's not a problem, unless it happens to them.
…most people…yes.
Then not sure where you disagree with me...Is it just that I'm blunt about reality, instead of sugar coating it ?
Unfortunately, liberty is incompatible with equality in most cases. It should be no surprise that democracies routinely violate natural rights in the quest for the establishment of a more equal society. By thriving upon envy and greed, democracies erode the moral foundation of a society. While the intentions of democracies are noble, their results are not. A free order will be one based upon the freedom of association and property rights rather than democracy.
Well...I don't really see where this "quest for the establishment of a more equal society" is happening in the west, where the claimed "democracies" supposedly exist. There is no equality not an attempt to reach it in the west. There's just propaganda of equality. Meanwhile, rich people get richer and laws are passed to benefit rich people even more. Corruption is rampant and poor get poorer and the middle class, if it still exists, is being literally murdered, just for going to a supermarket...
But then again, the democracies you refer to cannot be in western countries, because there is no democracy in any western country. There are only oligarchies. There is only the rule of unelected elites, over the many, while the many think they elected someone that actually does anything for them, when in fact he/she that was "elected" works directly for the oligarchs, the elites. This is not democracy, nor equality. it's the exact opposite.
nah man, the reality is that they(we, as a european) directly profit from this, let's be serious.
everybody knows at a subconscious level that the current level of prosperity w/o hard work wouldn't be possible w/o nato and what nato does.
exactly how germans knew about the holocaust but ignored because economic(mostly) reasons.
Agree in your clear analysis.
Russias symphathetic approach with reasonable talks about the root causes and showing restraints both in objectives in Ukraine and actions in the War (mostly reactions on the Wests provocations) has not rendered them any good will.
After four years that strategy has certainly boiled the Russian frog more than the Western.
It is only wishful thinking by dissidents in the West that (((they))) will fail and crumble into a heap of dust. Money printing is easy and 400 million people can be misinformed, deceived, used and misused as cannonfodder almost at will.
And the ”will” is very unclear and probably a moving target where opportunists from different fractions, deep hidden agendas, open agendas (as the Rand Corporation) and others scavenges the table.
History is full of examples of slow-grinding inescapable geostrategy movements going on for centuries AND sudden flashes of events that turns everything upside down (for a while at least). We are in a middle of such events just before that moment.
Your leaders are convinced that Russia doesn't have the stones, and besides, they and theirs will survive any nuclear war, snug as a bug in a rug. As for peons like you and I, who cares?
Ever seen "Don't Look Up!"?
I look forward to V der L being eaten by a stripey cute faced reptile...
And quite a few others.
My fault, but I don't have a vote anywhere these days. And the difference that makes...???
And of course it might be me, but it seems as if syntax and grammar errors creep into my posts after I have checked them. But apologies for fat thumb syndrome. Especially after lunch.
It happens to many of us. It is very tiring to write via a mobile phone.
Eh, I make typos all the time, probably because I don't have thumbs.
No, the likes of Merz, Macron, Starmer would not survive a nuclear war, bunkers or no bunkers, and they know it
They apparently think they know something that you do not.
Merz, Macron, Starmer, and the other YGL are not the actual leaders. They are stooges selected from banking and masonic families on three criteria: narcissistic amorality, incompetence, and hardcore kompromat, and guided with an iron hand by Cabal handlers. They are disposable, just as Renfield was disposable. The actual vampire masters rule out of Geneva and Zurich, and have bunker complexes under the Swiss Alps. All of Switzerland is one massive fallout shelter.
It is very unlikely that there will be only one narrative about this war.
This happens when there is a decisive victory and defeat and the vanquished can no longer make their point.
No one is going to occupy Moscow or Washington and judge the defeated side.
Maybe, just maybe, the Western narrative will be accepted by many in the Western countries. In the rest of the world this is practically impossible.
You are right. I truly hope that Russia will influence enough what History will be written.
"Russia will forever, in the western media, bear the guilt and blood-sodden reputation."
Lol. Russia was demonized by the West for centuries. Doesn't matter whether it's Imperial, Soviet or Modern Russia, whether it's monarchy, communist or capitalist. It's always "aggressive", too vast, too mysterious, uncivilized and too rich for its own good. Russian people are always dehumanized and portrayed as barbarians that West is indoctrinated to fear and hate unconditionally.
But Russia is done with the West and couldn't care less what West thinks.
It is the perspective from the little brits who has poisoned us for so long.
And later the American ”brothers” with the ”special bond” to UK…
We were on the way to turn around it to a more balanced view and truthfull one in the beginning of this century.
I dont think the Russian are done with West. And that was not my point either.
The World need Russia and their culture - pity if we get another Wall.
No matter who started it, this is an objective reality. I also doubt it will ever change. And I sincerely hope that Russia cuts ties with West for good. This sick relationship has brought Russia nothing but grief and rivers of blood spilled by arrogant people with colonial mentality who dream of destroying Russia, looting its riches and exterminating its people.
"It’s also likely an attempt at some kind of grandstanding “message” to Russia, but I still remain very skeptical any Tomahawks will ever be delivered."
Well, I'm taking the other side of that coin. Global leaders have seen a lot from POTUS 47, mainly talking about peace while escalating several wars. Prior US Presidents have been pressured to attack Iran, certainly George W Bush and Obama, both refused. Trump actually attacked Iran.
Also 47 accepted a golden (exploding) pager as a gift. Whatever the facts may be, both Hamas and Iran believe that 47 lured them into peace talks so they could be targeted in decapitation strikes. Putin has admitted that 47's words are meaningless, and that the RF only pays attention to his actions. Well, 47's administration continues to foment regime change operations while aiding, arming and funding multiple wars, and committing murders via piracy in the Caribbean. As bloody as the last 80 years have been, the US is as aggressive now as it has ever been.
According to Borzzikman, TU-160s have been flying (well offshore) the coast of Florida. If true, this would be rather more than an expensive training exercise, it is a pointed warning that the RF has a robust nuclear triad. Would a man with a golden pager groom the RF into accepting flights of nuclear capable Tomahawks as normal, only to, when it is least expected, deliver a nuclear decapitation strike via Tomahawk? I have no doubts that strategic planners in the RF are quite aware of this possibility and trying to deter it, if possible.
I think every word of this makes sense.
I noticed a qualitative difference in Trump's stance toward Gaza and Israel before and after the golden pager. Trump clearly has no particular fear of death since he has been facing it since 2016, and did not back off.. However he is deathly afraid of insignificance.
The golden pager itself will be placed in public archive with other gifts to officials, by law. But its form was a glaring symbolic threat. I conclude it once held a photo gallery of 'gotchas'. Trump is being blackmailed.
No. Zion don is a Jew puppet.
‘Putin has admitted that 47's words are meaningless, and that the RF only pays attention to his actions.’
During graduate school I was the ultimate, constant promoter of the idea that no politicians’ words should be ever taken seriously, only their actions should be considered. (The only exception is when they clearly state that they want to exterminate their own populations, as that is already obvious.)
You get a better leading indicator of politicians' actions by watching who is giving them money than from listening to their words
Nailed it
Also: who has other types of leverage ….🧐
Taking money is an act.
I think Trump is sinking into dementia and the Uniparty is back in control.
Other than the fact western media is admitting that actual NATO/US personnel are crewing the missiles using American ISR and hitting targets assigned by American overall command, this is not news.
Way back when the last nazis surrendered under the industrial plant in Mariupol, they shot the NATO officers and burned the bodies. Sufficient passport fragments were left to identify that these were French, British and Americans.
There are Telegram interviews of Chechen and Yakut servicemen who killed off the last American and Polish soldiers in the Kursk region.
There are several reports over the last years I've read of missiles taking out NATO underground HQs and hotels with foreign soldiers.
The only aspect of this directly NATO orchestrated war that is odd, is the fact that Russia officially plays along with our media that this is a "Ukranian" war. As though the Kiev regime is a sovereign, popularly elected victim of Russian aggression.
The 2023 Ukraine offensive out of Rabotina, Zaparozhe region, which never reached the 1st line of defense was completely commanded by the US. Absolutely failed leadership.
This strategy of defending every town to the last man and bullet, reminiscent of the Wermacht in 1944/1945 is insane. Reckless waste of Ukranian lives, ordered by their "allies"!
To be fair, Russia has been saying that this is NATO's war against Russia pretty much from the beginning. But it's true that for whatever reason, even though Trump does all the escalation possible, Putin especially, still wants to "please" Trump and not directly attack him. I find that very dumb and stupid. They don't need to attack him directly, but they need to criticize his bipolar nature, which creates more tension.
As for Ukraine's / NATO strategy, don't forget that NATO tactics come directly from german nazis, that NATO countries protected from being punished for their crimes, with things like Operation paperclip. NATO tactics are in effect a fork of nazi tactics. They attack civilians, they use civilians as shields, they sacrifice their own soldiers for the sake of propaganda, etc etc. NATO and USA in particular, is defacto nazi Germany 2.0
It is not pleasant to see the truth in this and to agree, but it is true that my country consistently destroys other countries and causes millions of cumulative deaths in the name of spreading "democracy".
The irony of creating a military dictatorship in Ukraine, destroying that modern made up contruct of disparate regions while also raping its' resources and people, while justifying commencing another operation in Venezuela.
Under our occupation of Afghanistan we were allied with the Northern Alliance of heroine cartels. Our military was importing heroine with reference to the spike in heroine addiction across our country. Just as ugly was the trafficking of boys in the sex slave trade. While our media pontificated about girls rights.
Now that the Taliban control the entire country the heroine industry is largely eliminated and boys are no longer trafficked. Yet we call Maduro a narco terrorist.
Even taking the reports of NATO casualties as true, it does not seem to be stopping NATO in the slightest.
NATO is all in while losing. The ramifications to the US, Europe and the Trump Administration when public denial is no longer possible are catastrophic. This is what makes the extreme danger of our nuclear weapon use.
Cornered rats are dangerous. Perhaps Putin is not doing everything correctly, but the pressure on him to be careful is immense. He is dealing with unstable terror sponsoring regimes that are nuclear armed.
If that is losing, then I hate to imagine what winning looks like.
Otherwise, it's just excuses.
The goal should be continental peace which is hard to achieve. Russia wants to be secure and left alone or sell gas to Europe and normal relations.
While we in the US and our ankle biting failed state colonies' business model relies on the exploitation of other countries as well as our own.
The social and economic upheavals in Europe and developing here in the states make us unstable to deal with.
We are creating a European Somalia, like we did through Siad Barre. That country never recovered.
"The goal should be continental peace which is hard to achieve. Russia wants to be secure and left alone or sell gas to Europe and normal relations."
No argument, there.
"While we in the US and our ankle biting failed state colonies' business model relies on the exploitation of other countries as well as our own."
So what? It works.
"The social and economic upheavals in Europe and developing here in the states make us unstable to deal with.
We are creating a European Somalia, like we did through Siad Barre. That country never recovered."
Take a look at prices for european government bonds. They reflect no such thing. That said, a situation like Brazil suits the elites just dandy.
Our business model works for a few, until it doesn't. The consequences when it no longer "works" is the concern I have. Dying whales can take out those around them.
Who is constantly escalating? Russia or the West? The winning side doesn't need escalation; it's already winning, it just needs time and to keep doing what it's doing. The losing side needs escalation to turn the tide. For years, it was the West that constantly escalated the situation, introducing ever more powerful weapons in an attempt to reverse the situation.
By that logic, dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima was an admission of defeat.
Intimidate the Soviets
Double comment. Not sure what is up.
I don't suppose there's any real difference between UK and US in this regard, despite the rhetoric, and I have little doubt the story is true. Grist for the hardliners' mill, not that they needed any. One wonders how long Putin will be able to keep up the charade he's been maintaining. That business of supporting Trump for the peace prize was disgusting.
I'm sure all the reporters knew all that, so perhaps the story was planted as yet another dare to Russia. The west is dying for a fight.
I think the American officers are more realistic than we are.
Not if the retired generals are any indication of American military competence. Hard to find a bigger bunch of clowns anywhere other than European leadership. But more specifically, they are convention-bound, intensely propagandized, fed only choice American intelligence, and bootlickers by profession.
Not all of them, of course, but all the ones I've heard speaking.
They climbed high up the greasy pole in an intensely political and politicised bureacracy. They didn't get there by being mavericks or telling their bosses that they were wrong.
I see your point, but I also think they're lying to preserve the narrative.
Remember it was The Pentagon who told Trump that invading Iran was unrealistic and who regularly tries to curb the State Dept's wilder schemes.The
Look at the various Majors and Colonels on line. In my opinion they are more representative of the US military as a whole than the 3 and 4 Stars.
And again the US military doesn't have the slavish culture of accepting any mission, no matter how unrealistic.
"And again the US military doesn't have the slavish culture of accepting any mission, no matter how unrealistic."
You say that, but we recently instigated an unprovoked attack on Iran, several exceedingly treacherous strikes on negotiators, and US troops have been introduced and took action in American cities in plain violation of the constitution. And of course I regard as everything we've done to help Israel as violating every tenet of decency and law. I'm sure Majors and Colonels are smarter than generals, but I have zero faith in any one person in the military taking individual responsibility for their actions and refusing an order. Some undoubtedly will, but it's always going to be a bad bet given the training and culture they have.
Of course those attacks violates every decency and law.
They also worked.
Maybe. But they at least demonstrated that individuals with power in the US military cannot be counted on to stand up to orders that violate the law.
In the US armed forces, by the time one climbs to the general tier, one has been thoroughly vetted for sycophant biddability. Individuals who show individual initiative, scruples, or even intelligence have been sidelined along the way. A similar process of negative selection "career" goes on in political parties, but in the military, with its elaborate hierarchy, it is even more effective. John is totally off-base; the "slavish culture" is enforced for the lower ranks, and becomes second nature at the top.
Prolonged, existential war upsets this pattern, allowing talent to slowly rise; but the US haven't experienced existential war since the 1860s.
Many Western retired generals are paid for stirring tensions. It is good for the accounts of the firmas that pay them some very nice complements to their pensions. Eisenhower disclosed that fact decades ago.
Words are cheap.
Commanding officers are in a different position.
They know the enemy shoots back. The front would not be a CNN plateau.
US commanding officers are currently in a war in Ukraine where the enemy does NOT shoot back. The only ones dying are Ukrainians and Russians, BOTH of whom the US is happy to see six feet under. If the war expands to include other Europeans, I’m not sure the US would object to that, either.
But to address your real point, which is the difference between command and commentary, I think it’s unclear how much of the cool aid the commanders are drinking as they dish it out to the public. The leaders seem to be imbibing freely, and the commanding officers are trained to follow orders. I don’t trust their judgment at all; they are, after all, losing the war in Ukraine on the ground.
You write as if the glorious US Army would be already 20 kms from Borodino on their way to Moscow.
This is not the case.
Russia is shooting back within the limits of what is called a theatre war. Both sides are careful not let things get out of control.
The Americans a little less careful, because they don't like how the show is going for them.
It is not Russia but the US, who is proposing to freeze the conflict.
Winners don't propose to freeze conflicts. Germany would have liked to freeze the war in 1944.
Does it mean the game is over? No.
Does it mean that Russia could not follow a different, more agressive plan? No.
Would a more aggressive strategy be better for Russia?
In the short run? Medium?
Long?
Do you know the answers? I don't.
Of course, some inimitable strategists in this forum know how to proceed. Nuke every thing that moves. You, traitor!
Were you responding to me? I can't see a connection to anything I've said or implied.
Supporting Trump for the Nobel was a supreme way of trolling him.
Putin even said that smiling like a rabbit.
I’m not sure you’re right about that, but even if you are I think it’s time for such trolling to stop. China is demonstrating how to respond to Trump right now - they’re spanking him an making him stand in the back of the room. Russia should at least start telling the truth about him. It’s not like he’s smart enough to understand subtlety.
You should understand that Putin praising Trump weakens him in the domestic front and saying that he should receive the Nobel for Peace makes him look ridiculous in front of the wide world. Putin is an old fox.
Putin praising Trump weakens Trump? or weakens Putin himself? I doubt the first and can’t see why he’d want the second. Whichever you mean, I think it’s counterproductive. In my opinion Putin should be labeling US involvement for what it is and directly confronting it. He obviously thinks different.
It tentatively appears to me that Putin is playing the waiting game; he is deliberately moving slowly, and the creeping attrition grind is not just a military strategy, it goes deeper. Some say he is biding time waiting for Ukrainian manpower to finally collapse, but that's not it, it's something much bigger, not just theater-scale. I wonder what he is foreseeing that we do not.
And then, of course, I could be completely wrong, and GM right :-)
Could be. I would guess he’s trying to build BRICS and multipolarity and thinks that the US may fall apart under its own weight, much the way Europeans think their umpteenth sanctions package will finally collapse Russia, but with a much better chance. Or it could be he’s wanting to destroy the Banderites and thinks it’s easier if they remain a cohesive unit. I would think either of those would be mistakes, but plenty of people wouldn’t. Perhaps he started slowly because he didn’t know the sanctions would be so ineffective… whatever the case, I think a better approach now would be to end the war rapidly, frontloading some casualties in order to reduce the ultimate toll. Reasonable minds could differ.
WWIII in 2028? By then France will not have a government, Macron will be on the assembly line of Renault, 83 % of French want him out and a majority isn’t going to war with Russia with him, moreover the national debt will have increased by some more billions. Their Ceasars and Rafales too expensive to keep them operational. For other institutions EU and gov’s Ursula included, perhaps they will become eco farmers, saving the planet from their war wet dreams.
Frenchies are useless anyway,w hat did they do in WWII? ;)
Macron will probably be dating Katy Perry or her new boyfriend Trudeau on the Riviera. The unpopularity of any of these clowns certainly does not result in their being relegated to constructive work. Nor does it even seem to slow down the mad rush to war.
Justin's wife left him amid rumors swirling about him.
Later, he attended the Barbie movie showing dressed head to toe in pink. Freed at last, I guess.
Recently he almost got ejected from Parliament for hoarsely accusing an MP of being "homophobic", like he had some personal skin in the game.
Evidently his orientation is taking some twists and turns.
His father Pierre's identity was fluid and undefinable too. Pierre was a noted swinger party bladesman.
Pierre and Justin's mother reportedly had an open marriage.
So open that Justin's mom romped with Fidel Castro, among many other high profile celebrities in the 1970's. A member or two of the Rolling Stones had a fling with her as well, adding their own buena notches on her bedpost.
Granted, the gal had some prodigious energy.
Most people see the extreme similarities between Justin and Fidel, and dissimilarity between Justin and Pierre. I don't think we need a 23andMe DNA test to tell us what likely happened.
Katy Perry has the dough, Justin has the A-list friends, and a-partying they will go.
Katy is worth $400 million. Despite what AI says, Justin's dough is a measley $5-10 million.
But again, she's got the money and he's got the time. When she runs short of money, he'll run short of time.
Justin's liberal friends owe him a lot of invites to parties, celebrity events, homages to Bacchus, hedonistic retreats, new age coke-filled engagements. He's done everything they wanted him to do, so time to call in his markers.
Remember, Justin is a guy who's official plane sat in a foreign airport for days with him in it because he was coke binging.
Katy Perry will soon be introduced to the world of high level adrenochrome zombies. She'll meet all those scaly old reptiles like Soros.
Remember when Justin went to New York to go to the UN, and the first place he went to off the plane was the Manhattan office of George Soros? Gotta kiss the ring now and then.
It'll be a whirlwind for her. For Justin it's just more of the same non-stop partying, only maybe now he can get the number for Katy's coke dealer.
hahaha - all the gossip I’ll need for months, and really what I meant to do was take a swing at Macron and Brigitte! It was a cheap shot, but then he’s a cheap imitation of a man.
Don’t waste your time on him, just watch him kissing passionately and intensely men and not even shaking hands with women.
Heh. Don't take my comment seriously, it was just a cheap shot at Macron. As I've made clear, though, I think Candace Owens has the goods on him.
Still he would love to kiss Trump on his hot lips.
Macron will fail up just like they all do.
Ursula was accusing Putin of turning the Rand study "Extending Russia" around on NATO.
I propose Ursula and Putin go out on a romantic date... see if any sparks fly. They say opposites attract big.
You are sadistic. Better than Putin and Macron or Starmer on a romantic date, but still...
Von der Lyin and her handlers must be freaking out with the election of Babis. There seems to.be enough momentum there for a significant push back. The leadership in France and Germany is at an all time low, times are looking decidedly unstable in Europe.
Babis is a billionaire. Go after his money. He will fold.