I am very much afraid that if Trump wins re-election that the Globalists running the White House will seek to land us into a hot war with Russia as a “poison pill” gift to the incoming administration. Assuming they do not use an open war as a pretext to suspend transfer of power and to effectively suspend our Constitution.
I'm worried about that too and have written about in parts of my recent pieces, but I don't think they'll launch a first strike against Russia, nor do I expect Russia to bite the bait and launch a first strike against NATO's EU members either. I think that MAD will remain in force.
If anybody intends landing you in a Hot War with Russia it is the Harris camp perpetuating what the Biden Regime started. Trump is most definitely Not that idiotic when it comes to Russia, however he is just as Idiotic as Biden and Harris when it comes to China, which makes them a equally dangerous, and is the reason why President Putin mocked the US political system and it's Presidential candidates, when he said he preferred Harris in a recent interview.
Harris will do the same. They all work for Raytheon et al. No matter who wins the election, we lose. Oh, Harris is cool with slaughtering women and children but she's pro women's rights, unless you're a Palestinian or Muslim woman. Both candidates only serve the US empire.
"Although the risk of World War III breaking out by miscalculation continues to grow as a result of these irresponsible Western escalations, it’s unlikely that Putin will radically respond by authorizing his forces to hit targets inside of NATO, let alone launch a nuclear first strike. If he was indeed planning to do so, then there wouldn’t be the need for this political choreography, he’d just do it, plus this latest escalation won’t result in reshaping the military-strategic dynamics of this proxy war in NATO and Ukraine’s favor."
It is abundantly obvious that Russia does not want this war and does not have the stomach to fight it. The West sees this as contemptible weakness and calls bluff after Russian bluff. Russian indecision will be and has been used as a justification for the next escalation.
Had Russia used appropriate force from the outset, the point would be moot, but at every stage, Russia has drastically underestimated Western sociopathy.
Yes, in hindsight, I personally wish that political goals were put aside in favor of military ones such as bombing the Dnieper bridges and high-profile targets in Kiev.
By not doing so, withdrawing from Kiev, "getting led by the nose" over and over, and then fighting a protracted trench war, the West was emboldened, not deterred.
Think about how surreal it is that world leaders and even celebrities flood into Kiev on a weekly basis to meet with Zelensky while he occupies pre-2014 Russian land!?
How else could the West interpret Russia's restraint (which I understand but believe is long-overdue for some changes) than as weakness?
By trying to avoid WWIII, Russia inadvertently made it more likely, though thankfully the West is only escalating step by step instead of going all in to overwhelm Russia.
I have seen speculation that perhaps some of Putin's restraint is deference to the sensibilities of his BRICS partners. But I agree this is less than compelling. Another thought I had is that he is using this war as a mechanism for controlled building of Russia's miltary-industrial capability and a large trained and experienced military force.
I despise "5D chess conspiracy theorists" who've misled a lot of well-intentioned but naive people.
People should support or oppose Russia based on what it actually is, not what they wish it was.
That's another reason why so many lie about Russian-Israeli ties because they think others won't like Russia if they learned that it isn't anti-Zionist like Iran for example.
A lot of Alt-Media is lies and wishful thinking laundered with a few facts thrown in between to make the narrative more believable.
Mostly, alt-media and its supporters live in an elaborate fantasy world.
Like russiagate or Qanon, and the same rationalizations come out, over and over. Not to mention, they apparently get their world view entirely from Marvel Comics, where good guys win in the end, and lots of drama and plot twists.
Only this time I don't believe that President Putin is making an idle threat.
I believe that the Russian government has reached a parallel point to that which initiated the SMO in the first place.
You can only talk so much to those who don't listen, before you act decisively.
Only this time Putin and the Russian government won't be naive enough to send a "small force" to persuade the West, but send a message that will leave the West stunned, and realising that the West has overstepped its bounds.
The messages coming out of the Pentagon in regard to Not using long range weapons inside Russia, is telling, and suggests that they realise that they have reached the limit of Russian tolerance.
I don't see why he'd start bombing NATO when he, his government, media, and experts have already been saying for around two years by now that NATO is waging a proxy war on Russia.
The ATACMS, HIMARS, etc. are also linked to NATO satellite targeting, then there's long-range drone strikes against the Kremlin, strategic airfields, early warning systems, etc.
In the meantime, NATO has moved more forces onto Russia's border so the time to strike would have been a year or two years ago, not now when they have contingencies in place.
We also have Ryabkov acknowledging that Russia knows that a decision on this was already made, this was most telling of all and confirmed that everything is political choreography.
Neither Russia nor NATO is preparing for war, there are absolutely no signs of that here in Moscow or in the US from what I can tell from friends, family, and media contacts, zero.
A lot of people want to think that Putin will "finally" attack NATO, most from what I can tell support this due to their sense of justice, but he's not going to spark WWIII.
As for the Pentagon messages, again, Ryabkov already let the cat out of the bag, and the Pentagon has played games in the run-up to every escalation thus far.
So the precedent suggests that they'll likely go through with this too, but whether they did or not, it doesn't change any of the conflict's dynamics.
Considering that, Putin would be suicidal to start World War III over this, but he's proven himself very cool, calm, collected and rational thus far.
What signs do you see, and I'm asking this sincerely to try to learn more, that Putin is losing his cool and about to flip out? I don't see any whatsoever at all.
I think you're really overlooking the real position the West has created for both Russia and China, so you can forget the political choreography BS.
The US is desperate, as are the G7 to save political and economic face and will do something Stupid, which will result in Russia having No alternative but to strike back with by something far more strategic and impact full than just the mere bombing of a few NATO countries. Whatever Russia has Decided to do, will most certainly Not be visible in political or other circles to anyone, but wi be of such an impact full nature ( it may only be a single event), that the West will be forced to just Shut Up and sit down, to avoid a repeat or an escalation of such events. NATO is already fighting in Kursk and have been in other areas of the the Ukraine, and what exactly have they achieved, besides being killed???
You place far too much emphasis on Russia needing to have any fear of NATO, however the Russian military powers that be have realised that NATO will continue sending Cannon Fodder to fight for the Ukraine, and therefore merely bombing NATO nations wi also have little to no effect on NATO Idiocy, and only serve to extend a war that NATO is also incapable of winning, hence the need for a little something that shocks the West into reality and the realisation that they they cannot continue to lean on Russia without suffering the mere dire consequences of losing NATO troops, and destroying a neighbour or two of the Ukraine. What's more is that NATO/ EU/US have basically disarmed themselves and couldn't in real terms think of beating Russia on a battlefield, and it's going to be a lomore difficult to conscript Europeans into a war with than Ukrainians, and EU resistance is already building. You obviously haven't seen the posters already going up on the streets in Italy.
I've been analyzing the West's dual containment of Russia and China for years, actually for a decade now since I began doing so in 2014.
My view has always been that the US could attempt a first strike against Russia at any time but it has yet to do so or signal any such intent due to MAD.
It wants to escalate below the nuclear threshold and through proxy means, albeit increasingly direct ones like in this case.
As for what the Russian military thinks, it actually doesn't matter since they remain loyal to Putin and won't act without his approval.
A lot of military-affiliated Telegram channels have been agitating since the get-go for a more muscular approach towards the SMO yet it hasn't happened.
Russia won't even bomb a single bridge over the Dnieper so it's clearly not doing it's all to stop NATO in Ukraine since political goals continue to predominate.
On the topic of those posters in Italy, it's not hard to recruit people for a guerrilla marketing campaign or encourage them to do so on their own.
It's the same as anti-government graffiti in Belarus and Russia: it gets airplay on the West but doesn't accurately reflect local sentiment.
I acknowledge that the posters in Italy might be a more accurate representation of sentiment, but do you REALLY think it'll influence policy formulation?
Come on, we both know that it's going to have zero effect. This is all political choreography, both the posters and this brouhaha over long-range weapons.
They're busy aiding and abetting Israel's genocide. They're playing the long game with Russia. The Eastern world has been ridiculously tolerant of the US empire's wars around the world. How much longer will their patience last🤔
If you posit a President who is absent and unmanaged bureaucracy, is it possible that two branches, DOD and State, are working at cross purposes? I have suspected the same dynamic may have been at work in the Afghanistan withdrawal. Separately, a Russian response neednt be so blunt as a direct attack on a NATO country. It seems like a lot of the messaging around who can and cant operate missiles is establishing the idea that NATO set the precedent for the supplier to assist a proxy in an attack. I would think this might make NATO military bases potential targets if the provocations continue.
The posters in Italy most certainly don't influence Idiotic EU policy, which controls Italian policy, however it does have a major Influence on the sentiment of the people and their willingness to be the cannon fodder, and is also a reflection of existing sentiment of the people, and this can be said for the whole of the EU.
President Putin has been extremely patient with the West thus far, and has held back, which has been understandable and savvy of him, which reflects that he is the Only adult currently in the Ukraine war room, however just like he was patient with the West in regard to NATO for at least a decade and a half, he did act Feb 2022, and by now he realises that being patient with the West has limited to no success, in overcoming their beligerance, hence the need arising for a surprise and shock mechanism. I am not for a moment doubting that the Russian military are not loyal and obedient to the commander in Chief, but they have most certainly prepared to dish out whatever shock treatment they are holding in abayence until Putin gives the greenlight, which he has no doubt decided in advance what he considers to be a trigger, so you can stop banking on a theory of who is going to shoot first, when it will most probably be a series of events, and not a physical first shot, which triggers a Russian military shock response.
Public sentiment means nothing if it's not translated into political action, ideally through truly free and fair elections whose winners remain committed to their platform and don't change it like Meloni did in some notable cases.
Wrong, public sentiment and your failure to be able to conscript/ draft troops or support your austerity measures required to go to war against Russia, will have a Major impact on your ability to wage war, and I know, I am South African, and it was internal resistance within our country that made the government think twice before perpetuating the war in Angola and SWA/ Namibia.
The lack of bridges didn't stop the Ukraine's perpetual attempts to transfer troops into Krynki, now did it.
Look carefully at the limited regions where Russia has attacked and destroyed bridges, those were purely tactical and strategic as the Russian military has no intention of advancing in that direction again, however they now realise that crossing the Dnieper into Western Ukraine although undesirable, may become necessary, and the bridges will be critical.
Besides, as Russia draws closer to the Dnieper, the Ukrainians will in all probability destroy the bridges themselves, however the Ukrainians destroying the bridges themselves will be a sign of their admission of defeat, which will have an even greater shock impact on the West and the Ukraine, than if Russia had destroyed them.
Now that would be both a political and military strategic victory for Russia!
PS! Tell me your story again, when US long range missiles hit multiple targets deep inside Russia, be they military or civilian, and Russia responds with something extraordinary.
Buddy, NATO satellites have already helped Ukraine bomb the Kremlin, the Crimean Bridge, strategic airfields, and even early warning systems.
ATACMS have already been authorized for use across Kharkov's border in Belgorod though the suspected approved range is likely larger.
And don't even get me started on how many times the HIMARS have been used within Russia's new regions that unified with it in 2022.
They're just as much a part of Russia as Tver for example, yet once again, Russia declined climbing the escalation ladder.
I'll ask you once more: what signs have you seen from Putin other than the speech the other day suggesting that he's ready to fight World War III?
I live in Moscow and would be vaporized if that happened, yet nobody is hoarding food, there aren't any drills, nothing, it's as if everything is normal.
Don't you think Russia would at least try to save it's own capital's people if it was about to spark World War III? Or nah, we're just expendable pawns, eh?
My assumption is that it could if it wanted. In my mind it could be a handful of anti ship missiles with crews, the missiles are fired, done, with plausible deniability (houthis did it). Just like what nato is doing in Ukraine. I may be wrong, in which case the slow incremental escalation is going to continue until the Russian resolve is degraded and huge cost in lives and material is inflicted, which was the plan B, (plan A being a colour revolution or some such catastrophic event for Russia, from within)
Really, are you really that Stupid that you haven't been able to assess that Russia has stepped up the destruction of Ukrainian troops, equipment and infrastructure on each occasion.
If so what about Russian attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure and storage which has brought the energy grid to its knees because of drone attacks on Russian energy facilties???
What about the recent killed and wounded combination of Ukrainian and NATO troops and officers at a training base, with a missile attack???
The number of casualties has now increased to over 700.
So you really think Russia is making idle threats???
In addition, the past threats have almost all been in regard to attacks on Russian Sovereign territory, and right now the Russians are systematically destroying the Ukrainian Incursion into Kursk, which has now lost approximately 400 military vehicles of various types, and lost approximately 12 700 of the estimated 20 000 troops sent into Kursk.
So do you really still think the Russians are not carrying out their threats???
If you want to see another threat carried out, wait until the Ukraine launches any missile attacks deep into Russia.
That's got more to do with Western Fucking Stupidity, and the fact that they don't care about the lives of the Ukrainians or NATO troops, rather that Russia not carrying out it's threats!!!
It's all about frustration and finding a way to stop it getting the better of you (the self). I hope I haven't compounded your (anyone's) frustration by adding a flippant element of confusion.
On the other hand, if you (one) take(s) your(the)self too seriously...
I have nothing intelligent to add but my exasperation with the world muppets playing with all our lives right now for their own gain and agendas.
UK’s new Labour government (supposedly left and for working people …yeah) have decided to scrap winter fuel allowance for pensioners saving the grand sum of 1.3bn although charity says cold homes (in 2016) costs the healthcare 1.36bn!
So the grannies they all pretended to care so much for 2020 can now happily freeze to death (or soon get assisted suicide).
For context, UK package to “Ukraine” = 12.7bn + about 1bn in energy/rebuild etc.
And that is just the visible above board stuff and I’ve probably missed lots.
And of course housing and paying for over officially 200.000 new Ukrainians in the UK.
Am I the only person that beliieves that Putin is just as much a member of the globalist gang as Macron, Biden, Starmer, Trudeau, Meloni or almost any other President or Prime Minister across the West that you care to think of across the West?
Putin followed every element of the globaliist cabal's long-prepared plan to use a supposed 'Covid crisis' to serve as the pretext to terrorize billions of people worldwide into lbeing injected with the Covid 'vaccines'; to pushing the totally fraudulent and non-existent 'climate crisis' and 'carbon zero' scams; to forcing biometric digital ID on the populations; to establishing programmable digital money... and so on.
I predicted at the outset of Russia's 'invasion' of Ukraine by a force so small that it could not possibly achieve its supposed objectives that Putin would merely go through the motions of an invasion, but would ensure that it never took the capital, Kiev, or threatened the globalist regime in Kiev, and instead, just kept a war of attrition rumblilng on pointlessly in the East of Ukraine, while Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs, US arms manufacturers, and Wsetern politicians - through vast hidden kickbacks from their 'aid' to Ukraine - alll made unimaginable fortunes from the war.
What invasion in history - of any country - does not seek to take the capital city of the invaded country as their top objective? None. Yet the moment that Russian forces neared Kiev (seemingly to Putin's surprise), Putin quickly pulled them back with the ludicrous excuse that the Kiev regime had promised a peace deal - as I predicted he would.
The peace deal that Putin and the Kiev regime agreed, prior to the globalist puppet Boris Johnson being kent to scupper it (resulting in a further million people being killed since) gave the Kiev regime (as Putin publicly stated and even boasted of) almost every single that they could have dreamed of.
What is the point of invading a country at the cost of vast numbers of your own country's soldiers - if you are going to then do a peace deal leaving the regime running the country in power - the supposed neo-Nazis whom you had pledged to remove from power - and giving them virtually everything they could have dream of from a peace deal?
And now, a milllion deaths in Ukraine later after Boris Johnson's rushed intervention to skupper the peace deal, Putin publicly states that he will give the Kiev dictatorship virtually the sameunimaginably sweet deal again that he gave them the first time around!
In what universe does leaving the globalist and neo-Nazi dictatorship in place in Kiev constitute the 'deNazification of Ukraine' that Putin promised the Russian people? Of course, it doesn't, at all - showing that the supposed 'deNazification' of Ukraine stated by Putin as a key objective of the invasion was total rubbish from the start.
But... but...Putin is a traditionalist, upholding traditional Russian (and until the globalist takeover of the West, Western) values, many will say. He can't be a globalist!
Well, what do you expect him to say to the Russian people - the vast majority of whom would oppose any leader who did not uphold traditional values?
Politicians with any brains ook at what their power based want them to say - and say it, regardless of what they actually think, and regardless of what their true objectives are!
Look at Boris Johnson, a bought & paid for globalist puppet like all UK Prime Ministers for decades, wrapping the union jack around him and pretending to be a Brexiteer campaigning for Britain's independence from the globalist EU!
If he didn't pretend to be a Brexiteer, it would have been 100% impossible for him to have won Tory members' votes to become the Tory leader - so of course he said he was a Brexiteer, while all the time taking his orders from the globalist cabal who would never in million years have allowed Britain to become an independent country again in reality. A fake and totally meaningness 'Brexit' was required - and that is what May and Boris delivered, with the support of an almost 100% globalist and anti-Brexit Tory party in Westminster, with a bunch of Tory MPs pretending to be pro-Brexit, of course.
And look at Trump - who promised to 'Drain the Swamp!' - and who promptly betrayed his supporters by appointing globaliist Swamp creatures to almost every to position in his government!
No, Putin will not use nukes, nor anything else serioius against the globalist gang of crooks busy deliberately destroying their own countries for the vast enrichment of their multi-billionaire and global corporate masters.
It's all just a piece of theatre for the suckers.
- and that the Ukraine war is merely a long-planned part of the globalist plan - providing as it did the needed pretext for driiving energy prices through the roof in the West; for swiitching Europe to depend on US gas at 3 - 4 times the price of Russian gas
He may be a lot of things but not that. The main issue with Russia is precisely because he is not. He showed that when he expelled those royal duch or whatever oil company. That’s when the globalist gang understood that he was the enemy.
This piece just continues to beg the question for me of why this thing got to this point and why it just keeps being drug out...
My working theory was the West armed up Ukr, inflicted sanctions thinking that they would be sufficient to make Russia economically and politically unstable, and then Ukraine would be unleashed to go divide up Russia. But all the assumptions proved to be wrong.
Instead, the West gave up the Donbas and all its mineral wealth, cut off Europe from its cheap energy, shoved Russia into an alliance with China, sparked creation of an alternative global trading system, and finally very publicly unmasked the West as nothing but a bunch of colonialist vandals. When do you shoot off enough toes that it makes sense to stop shooting and put the gun away?
This charade intended to avoid accidental escalation betrays the existence of some Western intelligence that otherwise appears totally absent. Most attribute the West's behavior to insanity, which as this piece shows just seems an unsatisfactory explanation.
When juxtaposed with what happened in the Middle East the Ukraine situation has the appearance of possibly being part of some bigger game, but by all appearances the US, forget about Europe, is not positioned economically or in a military-industrial sense prepared for anything bigger. Does the US expect its adversary to ship medicines and vital parts to it during a war?
Please make it all make sense, because I'm definitely missing something.
Once you understand that the objective of almost all Western governments - which are actually all just one government - is to destroy their own countries, societies and economies....
- then everything starts to make a llot more sense.
I've entertained this, and I think China shares this pov to some extent. But, if the West wanted to destroy itself, seems like provoking an over-reaction would be a good way to do it.
I get there's some historical enmity in the UK they just cant get over, but we seem to be playing no limit hold 'em with 2-5 off suit and everyone playing knows it.
If Putin was genuinely the anti-globalist, nationalist, patriotic figure that he is painted as being, genuinely working for the Russian people against the West, there are a few things that he would definitely have done.
He would definitely have used a very strong card which he possesses against the West - namely, to halt all exports from Russia of minerals and other resources which are absolutely essential to the West.
He did no such thing - even though the mere threat of doing that would certainly have caused the globalist gang running the West to hesitate to pursue their actions against Russia.
He would certainly have denounced the genuinely criminal WHO - but instead, Putin has loudly praised this key pillar of power of the globalist gang, and has pushed the development of the poisonous, DNA-changing mRNA 'vacxcine' technology by Russia.
Putin would certainly, were he an honest person, instead of being a globalist gang member, have denounced the mRNA poison 'vaccines' and would have exposed them as the bio-weapons which they are - but instead, like all globalist puppet leaders, he praises this mRNA bio-weapon technology threatening alll of humanity. and ihas publicly stated that Russia must be a major player in developing it.
If Putin had genuinely wanted to win the Ukraine war, he would have destroyed the bridges over the Dnieper riiver at the beginning of the war - the blindingly obvious measure which would have crippled the Ukrainian side at a stroke.
But he didn't - citing blatantly ridiculous excuses for not doing that - when the real reason for not doing that is that it would have severely disrupted the profit-making operations of Russian oligarchs wh, together with the globalist cabal, control Putin.
In addition, if he had destroyed those bridges, it would have been far more difficult for him to keep a war of attrition rumbling on, wiithout actually achieving anything to take control of Kiev and overthrow the globalist / neo-Nazi regime there: everyone would have been asking: 'Well, why don't you take Kiev - to actually achieve the de-Nazification which you said was a key objective of the war?'
And that would have been awkward - since it would have been difficult to find excuses not to advance on and take Kiev... which Putin and his controllers clearly do not want to do, which is why Putin pulled his army back from its position near Kiev in the early stages of the war, when Russia could easily have taken the capital.
If Putin had wanted - as he claimed - to 'deNazify' Ukraine, how could he possibly do that, without taking control of the political power centre of Ukraine - Kiev?
Well, of course he couldn't. But that was never his intention.
The Ukraine war was needed by the globalist cabal to provide the pretext and 'justification' for many of their operations, policieis and scams which they have carried out in the West, in addition to providing a supposed 'enemy' of the supposed 'democracies' of the West, almost all of which are actually totally fake 'democracies'.
If Putin was an anti-globalist, he would have exposed another key operation and scam of the globalists - namely the totally fraudulent and non-existent 'climate crisis' and 'carbon zero' scams, which provide the supposed justification for the globalist gang to transfer trillions of dollars, euros etc. from the nation states of the West into the pockets of the multi-billionaires and global corporations which control Western governments and entire political establishments and mass media.
But he didn't expose the totally fraudulent 'climate crisis' and 'carbon zeros' scams of Western governments, global corporations and mass media - but instead, pushed the very same scams inside Russia!
If Putin was even remotely an anti-globalist, would he have said after Tucker Carlson's interview of him that Carlson is 'a dangerous man'?
No - but every globalist politician regards Tucker Carlson as a 'dangerous man' - dangerous to their interests, just as Putin clearly views him, because he exposes their lies and their true agenda.
I could go on and on, showing endless further examples of how Putin has been implementing the same scams and Hitler-style Big Lies of the globalist cabal in Russia as Western governments have been doing - but the point should be clear.
Putin has no alternative but to pretend to be a champion of traditional values - because if he didn't, he would very rapidly lose his popularity with the Russian people.
Hello Andrew! Thanks for this insightful piece. I believe you’re correct in viewing this dreadful situation through the lens of “perception management”. I was uncertain what you meant to convey in these next couple of sentences. Could I please ask you to explain? Thanks.
“and give Russia the time to prepare for the next escalation so that it’s not totally off guard and thus considers “overreacting” like some hawks have wanted. Observers should remember that the West is only just now doing this 2.5 years down the line.”
Thanks, Fawad! What I meant to convey was that gradually escalating reduces the chances that the adversary will jump up the escalation ladder in response ("overreact") instead of symmetrically escalating in kind.
For instance, if the US sent HIMARS, ATACMS, F-16s, etc. to Ukraine right after the SMO began, Russia might have perceived that whole package as implying the start of a full-fledged NATO intervention, after which it might have actually resorted to nukes or whatever else.
But by "boiling the frog" through gradual escalations, all of which are telegraphed through the media and officials far in advance, Russia can prepare accordingly and therefore isn't as surprised, thus reducing the chances that it'll do something unexpected out of desperation.
"These tasks can only be performed by professionals who have worked with these systems for a long time and know how to operate them."
Oh dear, this is awful: I hate submitting to this primordial delight in the loss of potentially good, human life; but, under the circumstances, it's difficult not to be at least relieved, if not deeply satisfied, that so many were killed in the airstrike on the Poltava academy a couple weeks ago. Terrible though any loss of life is, I find great comfort in the fact that so many (hundreds) of them were NATO trainers and their aspiring servants.
"...hit targets inside of NATO..."
How about an aircraft carrier at sea? One could probably be sunk without even nuking it, and the Americans always have such a chest-thumping wank when they roll one out to frighten the world into submission, and the British have just spent far, far more than they could ever hope to afford on floating a new one... Couldn't just one be sunk, a long way from anywhere where anyone other than militant psycho-fruitcake sailor boys would be hurt?
"...much more realistic options..."
Yeah, but... The Americans have such fun killing and hating, even by proxy; it seems only fair everyone should get some.
I guess that's the problem with being an adult: you have to sacrifice all the fun to grow up.
I guess it's a cultural thing: what makes something fun?
"...it just gives Kiev the chance to kill more Russians."
If Russia won't submit, that's all they want. How come they get to have all the fun?
"...much more is going on behind the scenes than meets the eye."
I understand that, but I'd still like to see an aircraft carrier sunk.
Oh, OK, maybe not; if you're that sure it shouldn't be necessary, I concur.
I am very much afraid that if Trump wins re-election that the Globalists running the White House will seek to land us into a hot war with Russia as a “poison pill” gift to the incoming administration. Assuming they do not use an open war as a pretext to suspend transfer of power and to effectively suspend our Constitution.
I'm worried about that too and have written about in parts of my recent pieces, but I don't think they'll launch a first strike against Russia, nor do I expect Russia to bite the bait and launch a first strike against NATO's EU members either. I think that MAD will remain in force.
If anybody intends landing you in a Hot War with Russia it is the Harris camp perpetuating what the Biden Regime started. Trump is most definitely Not that idiotic when it comes to Russia, however he is just as Idiotic as Biden and Harris when it comes to China, which makes them a equally dangerous, and is the reason why President Putin mocked the US political system and it's Presidential candidates, when he said he preferred Harris in a recent interview.
Harris will do the same. They all work for Raytheon et al. No matter who wins the election, we lose. Oh, Harris is cool with slaughtering women and children but she's pro women's rights, unless you're a Palestinian or Muslim woman. Both candidates only serve the US empire.
It won't matter. The War is coming, no matter who wins.
"Although the risk of World War III breaking out by miscalculation continues to grow as a result of these irresponsible Western escalations, it’s unlikely that Putin will radically respond by authorizing his forces to hit targets inside of NATO, let alone launch a nuclear first strike. If he was indeed planning to do so, then there wouldn’t be the need for this political choreography, he’d just do it, plus this latest escalation won’t result in reshaping the military-strategic dynamics of this proxy war in NATO and Ukraine’s favor."
It is abundantly obvious that Russia does not want this war and does not have the stomach to fight it. The West sees this as contemptible weakness and calls bluff after Russian bluff. Russian indecision will be and has been used as a justification for the next escalation.
Had Russia used appropriate force from the outset, the point would be moot, but at every stage, Russia has drastically underestimated Western sociopathy.
Yes, in hindsight, I personally wish that political goals were put aside in favor of military ones such as bombing the Dnieper bridges and high-profile targets in Kiev.
By not doing so, withdrawing from Kiev, "getting led by the nose" over and over, and then fighting a protracted trench war, the West was emboldened, not deterred.
Think about how surreal it is that world leaders and even celebrities flood into Kiev on a weekly basis to meet with Zelensky while he occupies pre-2014 Russian land!?
How else could the West interpret Russia's restraint (which I understand but believe is long-overdue for some changes) than as weakness?
By trying to avoid WWIII, Russia inadvertently made it more likely, though thankfully the West is only escalating step by step instead of going all in to overwhelm Russia.
I have seen speculation that perhaps some of Putin's restraint is deference to the sensibilities of his BRICS partners. But I agree this is less than compelling. Another thought I had is that he is using this war as a mechanism for controlled building of Russia's miltary-industrial capability and a large trained and experienced military force.
The all-in part will come after the US elections.
And yes, Russia has dithered and been indecisive. Mostly, supporters have trotted out excuse after excuse.
I despise "5D chess conspiracy theorists" who've misled a lot of well-intentioned but naive people.
People should support or oppose Russia based on what it actually is, not what they wish it was.
That's another reason why so many lie about Russian-Israeli ties because they think others won't like Russia if they learned that it isn't anti-Zionist like Iran for example.
A lot of Alt-Media is lies and wishful thinking laundered with a few facts thrown in between to make the narrative more believable.
Mostly, alt-media and its supporters live in an elaborate fantasy world.
Like russiagate or Qanon, and the same rationalizations come out, over and over. Not to mention, they apparently get their world view entirely from Marvel Comics, where good guys win in the end, and lots of drama and plot twists.
lol well said
Only this time I don't believe that President Putin is making an idle threat.
I believe that the Russian government has reached a parallel point to that which initiated the SMO in the first place.
You can only talk so much to those who don't listen, before you act decisively.
Only this time Putin and the Russian government won't be naive enough to send a "small force" to persuade the West, but send a message that will leave the West stunned, and realising that the West has overstepped its bounds.
The messages coming out of the Pentagon in regard to Not using long range weapons inside Russia, is telling, and suggests that they realise that they have reached the limit of Russian tolerance.
I don't see why he'd start bombing NATO when he, his government, media, and experts have already been saying for around two years by now that NATO is waging a proxy war on Russia.
The ATACMS, HIMARS, etc. are also linked to NATO satellite targeting, then there's long-range drone strikes against the Kremlin, strategic airfields, early warning systems, etc.
In the meantime, NATO has moved more forces onto Russia's border so the time to strike would have been a year or two years ago, not now when they have contingencies in place.
We also have Ryabkov acknowledging that Russia knows that a decision on this was already made, this was most telling of all and confirmed that everything is political choreography.
Neither Russia nor NATO is preparing for war, there are absolutely no signs of that here in Moscow or in the US from what I can tell from friends, family, and media contacts, zero.
A lot of people want to think that Putin will "finally" attack NATO, most from what I can tell support this due to their sense of justice, but he's not going to spark WWIII.
As for the Pentagon messages, again, Ryabkov already let the cat out of the bag, and the Pentagon has played games in the run-up to every escalation thus far.
So the precedent suggests that they'll likely go through with this too, but whether they did or not, it doesn't change any of the conflict's dynamics.
Considering that, Putin would be suicidal to start World War III over this, but he's proven himself very cool, calm, collected and rational thus far.
What signs do you see, and I'm asking this sincerely to try to learn more, that Putin is losing his cool and about to flip out? I don't see any whatsoever at all.
I think you're really overlooking the real position the West has created for both Russia and China, so you can forget the political choreography BS.
The US is desperate, as are the G7 to save political and economic face and will do something Stupid, which will result in Russia having No alternative but to strike back with by something far more strategic and impact full than just the mere bombing of a few NATO countries. Whatever Russia has Decided to do, will most certainly Not be visible in political or other circles to anyone, but wi be of such an impact full nature ( it may only be a single event), that the West will be forced to just Shut Up and sit down, to avoid a repeat or an escalation of such events. NATO is already fighting in Kursk and have been in other areas of the the Ukraine, and what exactly have they achieved, besides being killed???
You place far too much emphasis on Russia needing to have any fear of NATO, however the Russian military powers that be have realised that NATO will continue sending Cannon Fodder to fight for the Ukraine, and therefore merely bombing NATO nations wi also have little to no effect on NATO Idiocy, and only serve to extend a war that NATO is also incapable of winning, hence the need for a little something that shocks the West into reality and the realisation that they they cannot continue to lean on Russia without suffering the mere dire consequences of losing NATO troops, and destroying a neighbour or two of the Ukraine. What's more is that NATO/ EU/US have basically disarmed themselves and couldn't in real terms think of beating Russia on a battlefield, and it's going to be a lomore difficult to conscript Europeans into a war with than Ukrainians, and EU resistance is already building. You obviously haven't seen the posters already going up on the streets in Italy.
I've been analyzing the West's dual containment of Russia and China for years, actually for a decade now since I began doing so in 2014.
My view has always been that the US could attempt a first strike against Russia at any time but it has yet to do so or signal any such intent due to MAD.
It wants to escalate below the nuclear threshold and through proxy means, albeit increasingly direct ones like in this case.
As for what the Russian military thinks, it actually doesn't matter since they remain loyal to Putin and won't act without his approval.
A lot of military-affiliated Telegram channels have been agitating since the get-go for a more muscular approach towards the SMO yet it hasn't happened.
Russia won't even bomb a single bridge over the Dnieper so it's clearly not doing it's all to stop NATO in Ukraine since political goals continue to predominate.
On the topic of those posters in Italy, it's not hard to recruit people for a guerrilla marketing campaign or encourage them to do so on their own.
It's the same as anti-government graffiti in Belarus and Russia: it gets airplay on the West but doesn't accurately reflect local sentiment.
I acknowledge that the posters in Italy might be a more accurate representation of sentiment, but do you REALLY think it'll influence policy formulation?
Come on, we both know that it's going to have zero effect. This is all political choreography, both the posters and this brouhaha over long-range weapons.
The US has also proven that it isn't as desperate as some people, myself included, earlier thought that it was.
They're only just now considering long-range weapons for Ukraine 2,5 years after the proxy war began in earnest.
That's because they're reluctant to escalate in a way that risks provoking Russia into "overreacting" by sparking World War III.
What nobody who thinks the US wants World War III so badly can answer is why it's only just now doing all of this stuff?
Why not send F-16s, ATACMS, HIMARS, long-range weapons, etc. right after the SMO began? Why wait until now? What's the point in dragging it out?
If they want World War III, why don't they just launch a first strike? Why go through all these motions, which are prolonged instead of rapid at that?
Because their death throes confuse them?
In all seriousness, you're quite right, and I'm sure Putin's adult patience will prevail.
They're busy aiding and abetting Israel's genocide. They're playing the long game with Russia. The Eastern world has been ridiculously tolerant of the US empire's wars around the world. How much longer will their patience last🤔
If you posit a President who is absent and unmanaged bureaucracy, is it possible that two branches, DOD and State, are working at cross purposes? I have suspected the same dynamic may have been at work in the Afghanistan withdrawal. Separately, a Russian response neednt be so blunt as a direct attack on a NATO country. It seems like a lot of the messaging around who can and cant operate missiles is establishing the idea that NATO set the precedent for the supplier to assist a proxy in an attack. I would think this might make NATO military bases potential targets if the provocations continue.
The posters in Italy most certainly don't influence Idiotic EU policy, which controls Italian policy, however it does have a major Influence on the sentiment of the people and their willingness to be the cannon fodder, and is also a reflection of existing sentiment of the people, and this can be said for the whole of the EU.
President Putin has been extremely patient with the West thus far, and has held back, which has been understandable and savvy of him, which reflects that he is the Only adult currently in the Ukraine war room, however just like he was patient with the West in regard to NATO for at least a decade and a half, he did act Feb 2022, and by now he realises that being patient with the West has limited to no success, in overcoming their beligerance, hence the need arising for a surprise and shock mechanism. I am not for a moment doubting that the Russian military are not loyal and obedient to the commander in Chief, but they have most certainly prepared to dish out whatever shock treatment they are holding in abayence until Putin gives the greenlight, which he has no doubt decided in advance what he considers to be a trigger, so you can stop banking on a theory of who is going to shoot first, when it will most probably be a series of events, and not a physical first shot, which triggers a Russian military shock response.
Public sentiment means nothing if it's not translated into political action, ideally through truly free and fair elections whose winners remain committed to their platform and don't change it like Meloni did in some notable cases.
Wrong, public sentiment and your failure to be able to conscript/ draft troops or support your austerity measures required to go to war against Russia, will have a Major impact on your ability to wage war, and I know, I am South African, and it was internal resistance within our country that made the government think twice before perpetuating the war in Angola and SWA/ Namibia.
PS! How do you know that not bombing the bridges over the Dnieper is a political decision, and not a strategic military one?
Just look at the total destruction of Eastern Ukraine and so many targets in Western Ukraine, and attempt to justify that political argument again.
Because it's common military logic to cut off the logistics of one's enemies, yet these have remained unimpeded since the SMO began.
The destruction in Eastern Ukraine is due to urban warfare brought about by Kiev's refusal to responsibly withdraw from villages, towns, and cities.
The lack of bridges didn't stop the Ukraine's perpetual attempts to transfer troops into Krynki, now did it.
Look carefully at the limited regions where Russia has attacked and destroyed bridges, those were purely tactical and strategic as the Russian military has no intention of advancing in that direction again, however they now realise that crossing the Dnieper into Western Ukraine although undesirable, may become necessary, and the bridges will be critical.
Besides, as Russia draws closer to the Dnieper, the Ukrainians will in all probability destroy the bridges themselves, however the Ukrainians destroying the bridges themselves will be a sign of their admission of defeat, which will have an even greater shock impact on the West and the Ukraine, than if Russia had destroyed them.
Now that would be both a political and military strategic victory for Russia!
PS! Tell me your story again, when US long range missiles hit multiple targets deep inside Russia, be they military or civilian, and Russia responds with something extraordinary.
Buddy, NATO satellites have already helped Ukraine bomb the Kremlin, the Crimean Bridge, strategic airfields, and even early warning systems.
ATACMS have already been authorized for use across Kharkov's border in Belgorod though the suspected approved range is likely larger.
And don't even get me started on how many times the HIMARS have been used within Russia's new regions that unified with it in 2022.
They're just as much a part of Russia as Tver for example, yet once again, Russia declined climbing the escalation ladder.
I'll ask you once more: what signs have you seen from Putin other than the speech the other day suggesting that he's ready to fight World War III?
I live in Moscow and would be vaporized if that happened, yet nobody is hoarding food, there aren't any drills, nothing, it's as if everything is normal.
Don't you think Russia would at least try to save it's own capital's people if it was about to spark World War III? Or nah, we're just expendable pawns, eh?
Why would he bomb NATO directly when houthis coul sink a bunch of important ships for him?
Russia isn't arming the Houthis though. There were rumors about it but they were ultimately unfounded. I elaborated here:
https://korybko.substack.com/p/fake-news-alert-russia-isnt-arming
Some additional insight from a slightly different angle:
https://south24.net/news/newse.php?nid=4116
My assumption is that it could if it wanted. In my mind it could be a handful of anti ship missiles with crews, the missiles are fired, done, with plausible deniability (houthis did it). Just like what nato is doing in Ukraine. I may be wrong, in which case the slow incremental escalation is going to continue until the Russian resolve is degraded and huge cost in lives and material is inflicted, which was the plan B, (plan A being a colour revolution or some such catastrophic event for Russia, from within)
We hear that at every idle threat.
Which "supposed" idle threats are you talking about, please be specific?
Russian officials have frequently threatened a response to western escalation, a response that never comes.
There is a reason that the West is calling Russia's bluff.
Really, are you really that Stupid that you haven't been able to assess that Russia has stepped up the destruction of Ukrainian troops, equipment and infrastructure on each occasion.
If so what about Russian attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure and storage which has brought the energy grid to its knees because of drone attacks on Russian energy facilties???
What about the recent killed and wounded combination of Ukrainian and NATO troops and officers at a training base, with a missile attack???
The number of casualties has now increased to over 700.
So you really think Russia is making idle threats???
In addition, the past threats have almost all been in regard to attacks on Russian Sovereign territory, and right now the Russians are systematically destroying the Ukrainian Incursion into Kursk, which has now lost approximately 400 military vehicles of various types, and lost approximately 12 700 of the estimated 20 000 troops sent into Kursk.
So do you really still think the Russians are not carrying out their threats???
If you want to see another threat carried out, wait until the Ukraine launches any missile attacks deep into Russia.
Boy, that sure stopped those western escalations, yessiree!
That's got more to do with Western Fucking Stupidity, and the fact that they don't care about the lives of the Ukrainians or NATO troops, rather that Russia not carrying out it's threats!!!
So try that unfounded argument again.
[chant] Nuke a ship, nuke a ship, nuke a ship!
And achieve what???
Just (semi-)joking.
It's all about frustration and finding a way to stop it getting the better of you (the self). I hope I haven't compounded your (anyone's) frustration by adding a flippant element of confusion.
On the other hand, if you (one) take(s) your(the)self too seriously...
It's gotta be down to you, innit?
I have nothing intelligent to add but my exasperation with the world muppets playing with all our lives right now for their own gain and agendas.
UK’s new Labour government (supposedly left and for working people …yeah) have decided to scrap winter fuel allowance for pensioners saving the grand sum of 1.3bn although charity says cold homes (in 2016) costs the healthcare 1.36bn!
So the grannies they all pretended to care so much for 2020 can now happily freeze to death (or soon get assisted suicide).
For context, UK package to “Ukraine” = 12.7bn + about 1bn in energy/rebuild etc.
And that is just the visible above board stuff and I’ve probably missed lots.
And of course housing and paying for over officially 200.000 new Ukrainians in the UK.
Apologies Sunday rant over.
Am I the only person that beliieves that Putin is just as much a member of the globalist gang as Macron, Biden, Starmer, Trudeau, Meloni or almost any other President or Prime Minister across the West that you care to think of across the West?
Putin followed every element of the globaliist cabal's long-prepared plan to use a supposed 'Covid crisis' to serve as the pretext to terrorize billions of people worldwide into lbeing injected with the Covid 'vaccines'; to pushing the totally fraudulent and non-existent 'climate crisis' and 'carbon zero' scams; to forcing biometric digital ID on the populations; to establishing programmable digital money... and so on.
I predicted at the outset of Russia's 'invasion' of Ukraine by a force so small that it could not possibly achieve its supposed objectives that Putin would merely go through the motions of an invasion, but would ensure that it never took the capital, Kiev, or threatened the globalist regime in Kiev, and instead, just kept a war of attrition rumblilng on pointlessly in the East of Ukraine, while Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs, US arms manufacturers, and Wsetern politicians - through vast hidden kickbacks from their 'aid' to Ukraine - alll made unimaginable fortunes from the war.
What invasion in history - of any country - does not seek to take the capital city of the invaded country as their top objective? None. Yet the moment that Russian forces neared Kiev (seemingly to Putin's surprise), Putin quickly pulled them back with the ludicrous excuse that the Kiev regime had promised a peace deal - as I predicted he would.
The peace deal that Putin and the Kiev regime agreed, prior to the globalist puppet Boris Johnson being kent to scupper it (resulting in a further million people being killed since) gave the Kiev regime (as Putin publicly stated and even boasted of) almost every single that they could have dreamed of.
What is the point of invading a country at the cost of vast numbers of your own country's soldiers - if you are going to then do a peace deal leaving the regime running the country in power - the supposed neo-Nazis whom you had pledged to remove from power - and giving them virtually everything they could have dream of from a peace deal?
And now, a milllion deaths in Ukraine later after Boris Johnson's rushed intervention to skupper the peace deal, Putin publicly states that he will give the Kiev dictatorship virtually the sameunimaginably sweet deal again that he gave them the first time around!
In what universe does leaving the globalist and neo-Nazi dictatorship in place in Kiev constitute the 'deNazification of Ukraine' that Putin promised the Russian people? Of course, it doesn't, at all - showing that the supposed 'deNazification' of Ukraine stated by Putin as a key objective of the invasion was total rubbish from the start.
But... but...Putin is a traditionalist, upholding traditional Russian (and until the globalist takeover of the West, Western) values, many will say. He can't be a globalist!
Well, what do you expect him to say to the Russian people - the vast majority of whom would oppose any leader who did not uphold traditional values?
Politicians with any brains ook at what their power based want them to say - and say it, regardless of what they actually think, and regardless of what their true objectives are!
Look at Boris Johnson, a bought & paid for globalist puppet like all UK Prime Ministers for decades, wrapping the union jack around him and pretending to be a Brexiteer campaigning for Britain's independence from the globalist EU!
If he didn't pretend to be a Brexiteer, it would have been 100% impossible for him to have won Tory members' votes to become the Tory leader - so of course he said he was a Brexiteer, while all the time taking his orders from the globalist cabal who would never in million years have allowed Britain to become an independent country again in reality. A fake and totally meaningness 'Brexit' was required - and that is what May and Boris delivered, with the support of an almost 100% globalist and anti-Brexit Tory party in Westminster, with a bunch of Tory MPs pretending to be pro-Brexit, of course.
And look at Trump - who promised to 'Drain the Swamp!' - and who promptly betrayed his supporters by appointing globaliist Swamp creatures to almost every to position in his government!
No, Putin will not use nukes, nor anything else serioius against the globalist gang of crooks busy deliberately destroying their own countries for the vast enrichment of their multi-billionaire and global corporate masters.
It's all just a piece of theatre for the suckers.
- and that the Ukraine war is merely a long-planned part of the globalist plan - providing as it did the needed pretext for driiving energy prices through the roof in the West; for swiitching Europe to depend on US gas at 3 - 4 times the price of Russian gas
Putin
Maybe he'd like to be, but the US was too blinded by UK-inspired ideological hatred to allow it.
He may be a lot of things but not that. The main issue with Russia is precisely because he is not. He showed that when he expelled those royal duch or whatever oil company. That’s when the globalist gang understood that he was the enemy.
it's perception management 101 and a distraction for the home audience.
Recall that 100's of billions lent to Ukraine all have repayment durations and interest included.
And the most rabid proponent of sticking it to Putin is the UK.
However, Ukraine placed all debt & interest repayments on hold in August.
Fitch re-rated them C - serious risk of default.
The flow on effect is a financial crisis re-igniting two years after then PM Liz Truss blew up the Gilts market and pension funds.
That's the real reason PM Starmer is in Washington
GFC 2 on steroids fermenting behind the scenes desperately need Fed Funds Rate to drop fast & far.
Chest thumping about Rockets on Russia just the political sleight of hand illusion delusion.
NATO taking on Russia - no happy ending possible
https://alexkrainer.substack.com/p/the-coming-collapse-of-britain
Andrew, you’re a troll
This piece just continues to beg the question for me of why this thing got to this point and why it just keeps being drug out...
My working theory was the West armed up Ukr, inflicted sanctions thinking that they would be sufficient to make Russia economically and politically unstable, and then Ukraine would be unleashed to go divide up Russia. But all the assumptions proved to be wrong.
Instead, the West gave up the Donbas and all its mineral wealth, cut off Europe from its cheap energy, shoved Russia into an alliance with China, sparked creation of an alternative global trading system, and finally very publicly unmasked the West as nothing but a bunch of colonialist vandals. When do you shoot off enough toes that it makes sense to stop shooting and put the gun away?
This charade intended to avoid accidental escalation betrays the existence of some Western intelligence that otherwise appears totally absent. Most attribute the West's behavior to insanity, which as this piece shows just seems an unsatisfactory explanation.
When juxtaposed with what happened in the Middle East the Ukraine situation has the appearance of possibly being part of some bigger game, but by all appearances the US, forget about Europe, is not positioned economically or in a military-industrial sense prepared for anything bigger. Does the US expect its adversary to ship medicines and vital parts to it during a war?
Please make it all make sense, because I'm definitely missing something.
Once you understand that the objective of almost all Western governments - which are actually all just one government - is to destroy their own countries, societies and economies....
- then everything starts to make a llot more sense.
I've entertained this, and I think China shares this pov to some extent. But, if the West wanted to destroy itself, seems like provoking an over-reaction would be a good way to do it.
I get there's some historical enmity in the UK they just cant get over, but we seem to be playing no limit hold 'em with 2-5 off suit and everyone playing knows it.
If Putin was genuinely the anti-globalist, nationalist, patriotic figure that he is painted as being, genuinely working for the Russian people against the West, there are a few things that he would definitely have done.
He would definitely have used a very strong card which he possesses against the West - namely, to halt all exports from Russia of minerals and other resources which are absolutely essential to the West.
He did no such thing - even though the mere threat of doing that would certainly have caused the globalist gang running the West to hesitate to pursue their actions against Russia.
He would certainly have denounced the genuinely criminal WHO - but instead, Putin has loudly praised this key pillar of power of the globalist gang, and has pushed the development of the poisonous, DNA-changing mRNA 'vacxcine' technology by Russia.
Putin would certainly, were he an honest person, instead of being a globalist gang member, have denounced the mRNA poison 'vaccines' and would have exposed them as the bio-weapons which they are - but instead, like all globalist puppet leaders, he praises this mRNA bio-weapon technology threatening alll of humanity. and ihas publicly stated that Russia must be a major player in developing it.
If Putin had genuinely wanted to win the Ukraine war, he would have destroyed the bridges over the Dnieper riiver at the beginning of the war - the blindingly obvious measure which would have crippled the Ukrainian side at a stroke.
But he didn't - citing blatantly ridiculous excuses for not doing that - when the real reason for not doing that is that it would have severely disrupted the profit-making operations of Russian oligarchs wh, together with the globalist cabal, control Putin.
In addition, if he had destroyed those bridges, it would have been far more difficult for him to keep a war of attrition rumbling on, wiithout actually achieving anything to take control of Kiev and overthrow the globalist / neo-Nazi regime there: everyone would have been asking: 'Well, why don't you take Kiev - to actually achieve the de-Nazification which you said was a key objective of the war?'
And that would have been awkward - since it would have been difficult to find excuses not to advance on and take Kiev... which Putin and his controllers clearly do not want to do, which is why Putin pulled his army back from its position near Kiev in the early stages of the war, when Russia could easily have taken the capital.
If Putin had wanted - as he claimed - to 'deNazify' Ukraine, how could he possibly do that, without taking control of the political power centre of Ukraine - Kiev?
Well, of course he couldn't. But that was never his intention.
The Ukraine war was needed by the globalist cabal to provide the pretext and 'justification' for many of their operations, policieis and scams which they have carried out in the West, in addition to providing a supposed 'enemy' of the supposed 'democracies' of the West, almost all of which are actually totally fake 'democracies'.
If Putin was an anti-globalist, he would have exposed another key operation and scam of the globalists - namely the totally fraudulent and non-existent 'climate crisis' and 'carbon zero' scams, which provide the supposed justification for the globalist gang to transfer trillions of dollars, euros etc. from the nation states of the West into the pockets of the multi-billionaires and global corporations which control Western governments and entire political establishments and mass media.
But he didn't expose the totally fraudulent 'climate crisis' and 'carbon zeros' scams of Western governments, global corporations and mass media - but instead, pushed the very same scams inside Russia!
If Putin was even remotely an anti-globalist, would he have said after Tucker Carlson's interview of him that Carlson is 'a dangerous man'?
No - but every globalist politician regards Tucker Carlson as a 'dangerous man' - dangerous to their interests, just as Putin clearly views him, because he exposes their lies and their true agenda.
I could go on and on, showing endless further examples of how Putin has been implementing the same scams and Hitler-style Big Lies of the globalist cabal in Russia as Western governments have been doing - but the point should be clear.
Putin has no alternative but to pretend to be a champion of traditional values - because if he didn't, he would very rapidly lose his popularity with the Russian people.
This glows.
Why hasn't Russia already curtailed resource exports to the West?
War is expensive.
Hello Andrew! Thanks for this insightful piece. I believe you’re correct in viewing this dreadful situation through the lens of “perception management”. I was uncertain what you meant to convey in these next couple of sentences. Could I please ask you to explain? Thanks.
“and give Russia the time to prepare for the next escalation so that it’s not totally off guard and thus considers “overreacting” like some hawks have wanted. Observers should remember that the West is only just now doing this 2.5 years down the line.”
Thanks, Fawad! What I meant to convey was that gradually escalating reduces the chances that the adversary will jump up the escalation ladder in response ("overreact") instead of symmetrically escalating in kind.
For instance, if the US sent HIMARS, ATACMS, F-16s, etc. to Ukraine right after the SMO began, Russia might have perceived that whole package as implying the start of a full-fledged NATO intervention, after which it might have actually resorted to nukes or whatever else.
But by "boiling the frog" through gradual escalations, all of which are telegraphed through the media and officials far in advance, Russia can prepare accordingly and therefore isn't as surprised, thus reducing the chances that it'll do something unexpected out of desperation.
Thanks. That’s clear to me now and I believe you’re correct.
You're welcome!
"These tasks can only be performed by professionals who have worked with these systems for a long time and know how to operate them."
Oh dear, this is awful: I hate submitting to this primordial delight in the loss of potentially good, human life; but, under the circumstances, it's difficult not to be at least relieved, if not deeply satisfied, that so many were killed in the airstrike on the Poltava academy a couple weeks ago. Terrible though any loss of life is, I find great comfort in the fact that so many (hundreds) of them were NATO trainers and their aspiring servants.
"...hit targets inside of NATO..."
How about an aircraft carrier at sea? One could probably be sunk without even nuking it, and the Americans always have such a chest-thumping wank when they roll one out to frighten the world into submission, and the British have just spent far, far more than they could ever hope to afford on floating a new one... Couldn't just one be sunk, a long way from anywhere where anyone other than militant psycho-fruitcake sailor boys would be hurt?
"...much more realistic options..."
Yeah, but... The Americans have such fun killing and hating, even by proxy; it seems only fair everyone should get some.
I guess that's the problem with being an adult: you have to sacrifice all the fun to grow up.
I guess it's a cultural thing: what makes something fun?
"...it just gives Kiev the chance to kill more Russians."
If Russia won't submit, that's all they want. How come they get to have all the fun?
"...much more is going on behind the scenes than meets the eye."
I understand that, but I'd still like to see an aircraft carrier sunk.
Oh, OK, maybe not; if you're that sure it shouldn't be necessary, I concur.