I repeat my comment posted on Simplicus earlier, but I gnerally agree. A man who is incapable of running for POTUS appears to have taken the decision to cross one of the few red lines the Russians have actually put down. My guess is that a response will come but not in the way that NATO expects.
"So I have read this, and all the comments, and a lot over on MoA, and those on ZH, and half a dozen articles in the MSM. Apart from the usual hawks, no one seems to think that long range strikes on Russia using NATO ISR etc is a good idea. It is universally recognised as an escalation, no one thinks it will change anything much, and all agree that resources are lacking.
The MSM are using the Norks as an excuse (yet to see any evidence here but a lot of hot air) and talk about long range strikes in Kursk - eh??? That sounds short range to me if you can read a map. There is little coverage on how it is that a senile old man in the shape of Biden appears able to take a decision of this magnitude just before the Trump team takes over with the express aim of ending the fighting.
My take is that a faction within DC has pushed this, possibly Blinken and his crew, and the hope is that it will scupper Trump somehow. That might help explain why Starmer and Scholtz (another has been soon to go) are keen to join in this exercise. I hope the Pentagon faction slow walk this thing.
Frankly though, I am a little perplexed. I simply cannot see any advantage accruing to the West that is commensurate with the risks being run. Do they honestly think that Russia will be coerced to the peace table? Or maybe they simply don't want peace talks at all? However I have yet to hear a convincing argument that explains why this decision has been taken and why now?"
The "advantage" is that it may just derail Trumps efforts to strike a peace deal. And it may thus "force" Trump to continue the support for the Ukraine.
I doubt it will, but it seems to be all they have.
It would seem that the best way to deescalate this is for Trump to announce his disapproval of this and to state clearly that any American lives lost due to a Russian retaliation will be on the democrats.
I’ve followed your comments, and have no arguments that others have not already made. [This is not a challenge.] What do you think Russia should have done or should do?
I have said it many times before - Russia should have used overwhelming force from the outset. Start with a relentless SEAD campaign, not flying over enemy territory with no SEAD loadouts. Enough troops and equipment to force the issue, not letting surrendered Ukrainians just go home. Destruction of any infrastructure that might be of any military value.
Given the people he selected for several positions, I think that Trumps focus will be on the US. Rest-of-world will at best be an "also ran". (And not to forget, he can always dump the Ukraine on the EU)
The correct headline would be: "A crazed Putin has gotten us one step closer to WWIII by invading Ukraine, deploying nukes in Belarus, deploying North Korean troops in Europe, supporting Iranian weapons development, etc." You are deep into blame the victim mode. The cause of this crisis is the paranoia and hubris of one man: Putin.
Stick to the wall, for heaven's sake. All this shit started long before Putin's invasion, at least to 2014... but there was no overthrow of the elected Ukie gov, right. Tell Miss Vickie, bud.
This does nothing more than move up the expiration date on Zelensky. The Russians are either going to take him out or, more plausibly, his own people with take him out. There is no win for Zelensky's Ukraine at this point and Zelensky has become desperate like a kidnapper who has been surrounded but, instead of trying to persuade him to give up, the authorities are giving him more guns and ammunition to kill not just the hostages but the authorities as well.
I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean. If you are concerned about an insurgency, that's just another cope Russia supporters tell themselves to excuse their indecision. If you look at successful insurgencies, the one thing all of them have in common is a young population.
The median age in Ukraine is over 40, and that from before the war. The median age in Yemen is 19.
So, an autocrat that started a war of aggression, bombs with impunity ALL of Ukraine and keeps escalating is to be taken at this word, but Biden is to be ridiculed for offering Ukraine a consolation bone? Is this really about Biden's senility or rather his attempt at setting up a booby trap for Trump's plans to hand over Ukraine to Putin?
Gee, if only the United States had not toppled the elected government of Ukraine in a coup! And suppose Ukraine had uphled Minsk or Minsk-2?
The various neonazi paramilitaries supporting the Kiev regime gladly accept foreign volunteers. If you wish to gamble with lives, gamble with your own.
Well, in Ukraine itself they're talking about the collapse of the southern front, where several pincers threading the Ukrainian forces.
About NATO forces in Ukraine, except for the specialist and mercenaries already being there, you are dreaming or whatever it should be named. Poland etc. are not going to send in troops, and at least for one of several reasons, they don't have the skills or weapons to fight in this brutal war
As much as I want to say it is all Biden’s fault….he could not do this without the support of the RINOs in both Cambers….the same group who have vowed to stop Trump at all costs….these RINOs are sly dogs who use political favors to stay in their positions to thwart any MAGA elements…they need
During Monday's missile attack, targets in Mukachevo were hit. That town is half an hour's drive to Slovakia or Hungary. I can understand how the Biden administration could feel it has to respond in some way. Doing nothing while the Russians drop bombs right on NATO's doorstep would be a weak posture.
I do not think Biden's decision has anything to do with targets like Mukachevo. Seems to me they are trying to cover up the defeat of Ukraine's army, which will happen soon.
It's rather odd to announce the deployment of these missiles prior to their use if they're supposed to serve a tactical purpose. Hiding from Lancets is hard enough as it is.
If we follow the probable chain of further developments more closely , it will probably turn out that this is ...A dummy?! Oh yes, Joe! While everyone is running around with this "permission" like chickens with severed heads, Trump will take office and "cancel" this "permission"! "Exit strategy": Biden ...Did you put straws on Trump ?
I just posted a Note on the Biden administration's approval of ATACMS use on Russian territory. The bottom line is the administration may be backtracking. The reception in the US to the announcement is very negative and the State Department has not answered questions about it, meaning that they are unsupportive. While the Europeans were surely briefed ahead of time, the French may have pulled back and the British obfuscated the meaning of Biden's approval. The Germans refused again on Taurus. Only the EU, a crowd of warmongers, liked it.
❗️Главы МИД ЕС не приняли общего решения об отмене ограничений на применение западного оружия на территории РФ, каждая страна решает сама, сообщил Боррель.
It's obvious, that Ukraine is losing this war. But less illuminated is that it is not only Ukraine losing, but also the western world. Hardly any pundit have raised the question, what will happen to Europe and USA, when Ukraine have become a Russian puppet, instead of a western puppet?
First of all the dominant states in Eastern Europe, Romania and Poland will be out of reach for their masters in Germany and USA. Germany, the Mediterranean countries including France will be pragmatic and start dealing big time with Russia again, just look at the suffering of German manufacturing sector. The will lee the way for the nationalism in those countries, shaking the foundation of European union the core of European liberal-democrats. That is, Europe will start leaning towards the new master - Russia and will the rest of the world, and especially the ever-so-inportant "global south".
What does that sum up to for the US? US might lose the only reliable allied in the struggle against the Industrial powerhouse, China.
So a lot is at stake for the liberals in Europe and USA. This war is not only existential for Ukraine or Russia, but also for the so-called western values.
What does it mean, this thread of existence for the liberals? At least what they can try to do is weakening Russia at it's military-industrial complex or the military itself for future fighting. So that's what Biden is doing.
Poland's situation is (and probably will be) definitely better than Romania's, which has become for years, like in Carlo Goldoni's play, a servant to two masters: the USA and the EU (EU meaning the bureaucracy in Brussels). Things will not change, at least in the near future. Unfortunately, Western values have also transformed (you say, "so-called Western values") and increasingly resemble a Popsicle left in the sun.
Both Poland and Romania will feel abandoned by the West and might do something crazy out of fear. I don't see any of the two in a good position when this war is over and Ukraine have become a Russian puppet. But you could elaborate, please.
About values - Mackinder wrote in 1918 something like, that rights of Human being will only be extended. Like an inevitable process. He was right
Being a puppet is a disaster, whoever manipulates you... (that's what I think, not those at the helm of various European states, for whom personal profit matters first and foremost: staying in power and an illusory prestige...) And "madness" is not a word in the dictionary of these leaders. When you bet on small (often petty) but certain gains, suddenly jumping from one boat to another is an unacceptable risk, and neither does the history of the last hundred years of Poland and Romania, but especially their communist period, indicate that such a repositioning would be possible. Not to mention the fact that the current puppeteers have every interest in not letting the puppets escape their hands. And fear, as a manipulation technique, is used precisely in this sense.
We do not know, of course, what the more or less distant future will look like. History is also fascinating for its sinuosity...
Thanks your reply. I don't see Romania or Poland wanting to go back to the Russian sfare of influence. Both countries look at themselves as the leading Powers of eastern Europe and at least for Romania have territoriale claims against neighbours (Moldova). They are revisionist powers. But are USA kicked out of Europe, and the US will when Russia have won this war, than Poland and Romania will be under Russian influence for sure.
About knowing the future or not, than we can have some pretty good estimates, there are reason and reflexion behind nations acting. Knowing the national interests of a given country will give you a hint about a given country's course and behaviour in the future
I'm sorry, but you don't know the history of the Romanian lands at all.
Romania is not a "revisionist power”.
The current Republic of Moldova, a territory where the same language as in Romania is spoken, that is Romanian, was called Bessarabia/ Basarabia, after the name of the Romanian ruler Alexandru Basarab.
In the 15th and 16th centuries, the Turks conquered this territory.
Following the Russo-Turkish War of 1806-1812, won by the Russian Empire, the area between the Dniester/ Nistru and Prut rivers came under Russian rule, a period in which attempts were made to erase the Romanian history of Bessarabia.
In March 1918, the then leadership of Bessarabia, called the Council of the Country, decided to unite with the motherland, that is Romania.
In 1940, following the Hitler-Stalin Pact of 1939, Romania was given an ultimatum by the Soviet Union to cede Bessarabia and northern Bukovina. If it did not comply within 48 hours, the USSR would declare war on it. The civilian population suffered enormously at the hands of communist commandos and the NKVD. After the annexation, the Soviets divided it into 3 parts, the central one being called the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic. The south and north were assigned to Ukraine.
In 1941, after Romania entered World War II, Bessarabia returned to the Romanian state for 3 years.
In 1944, the Soviet army reoccupied Bessarabia.
After the dissolution of the USSR, in 1991, the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic declared independence under the name of the Republic of Moldova.
Very briefly, it is a painful history.
Since 1991, Romania has continuously helped Moldova (economically, culturally), supporting it in its desire to join the European Union, by virtue of all the ties that no one can erase.
The wish to expand the territory of a given state is revisionism, and you don't seem to disagree. My point is just, that it spells trouble for Romania and Poland, and those nations will start acting very irrational, just like Ukraine did after the maidan.
I often disagree but here We agree entirely. This is a dangerous foolish move. Demented or not. I don’t hear any outcry from either side of the political sphere. Terrible
I keep saying it, western leader/politicians are mentally ill. These are career politicians that live in their own fantasy world. You can see that with their climate policies. You have to be mentally ill to claim being fossil free, net zero, saying wind and solar is the cheapest form of energy, destroying their own economy,... they really believe themselves and are doubling down.
So I would love to see Russia targeting EU weapons depots and weapon factories. European leaders will get hysteria, call it act of war, unprovoked,... the idea that their actions have consequences doesn't even come to their mind. Well that's because these career politicians never had consequences, responsibility or accountability for their actions. They can't comprehend that this a war declaration and that missiles fall on their country. They are just sick in the head. Can't explain it in English like I would.
You think if China attacks Taiwan the US is going to fire missiles at China? I think it's pointless and stupid of the US. If the US fires one bullet at China, we are at war. A war that the US will lose. So you place as many weapons you want, it's war or no war. I don't think the US want to go to war over China. That means US deterrence is completely pointless.
The oil drill baby drill mentality will and has caused ys trillions in climate change destruction. Wake up and smell the smoke. But while you do that get your boat ready for the floods
What a joke this is and it again show the double standard of the West. Ukraine is allowed to use the long range missiles in Kursk. Everyone know that Kursk is Russian territory, not Ukrainian. Is this about self defence, or about something else? Well, let the game begin. Aside from hitting Ukrainian infrastructure even harder, the Russians may want to cause another wave of Ukrainian refugees. Alternatively, they should supply anti ship missiles to Yemen and Iran or more sophisticated weapons to proxies in Iraq and Syria. Let the Americans taste their own medicine. And if Ukraine indeed manages to hurt Russia deep inside. Well, then may God safe us all...
My sense is that Putin has two plausible options: (1) Destroy all the NATO launching sites on Russia’s border. (2) Totally decapitate the Ukrainian state, including the assassination of Zelensky and all his senior staff. I expect that Putin will choose the latter.
They can't and won't kill Zelensky. That would create another Stephan Bandera, that is being honored by Ukrainian fascists. Bandera should have never been allowed to have a grave either, just like Hitler. Russia would rather capture him alive, so people can forget about him somewhere in Siberia.
I repeat my comment posted on Simplicus earlier, but I gnerally agree. A man who is incapable of running for POTUS appears to have taken the decision to cross one of the few red lines the Russians have actually put down. My guess is that a response will come but not in the way that NATO expects.
"So I have read this, and all the comments, and a lot over on MoA, and those on ZH, and half a dozen articles in the MSM. Apart from the usual hawks, no one seems to think that long range strikes on Russia using NATO ISR etc is a good idea. It is universally recognised as an escalation, no one thinks it will change anything much, and all agree that resources are lacking.
The MSM are using the Norks as an excuse (yet to see any evidence here but a lot of hot air) and talk about long range strikes in Kursk - eh??? That sounds short range to me if you can read a map. There is little coverage on how it is that a senile old man in the shape of Biden appears able to take a decision of this magnitude just before the Trump team takes over with the express aim of ending the fighting.
My take is that a faction within DC has pushed this, possibly Blinken and his crew, and the hope is that it will scupper Trump somehow. That might help explain why Starmer and Scholtz (another has been soon to go) are keen to join in this exercise. I hope the Pentagon faction slow walk this thing.
Frankly though, I am a little perplexed. I simply cannot see any advantage accruing to the West that is commensurate with the risks being run. Do they honestly think that Russia will be coerced to the peace table? Or maybe they simply don't want peace talks at all? However I have yet to hear a convincing argument that explains why this decision has been taken and why now?"
good comment but Scholz is running for cover and says no Taurus missiles.
This is nothing but revenge: the proverbial doody bag set aflame on Trump's porch.
The "advantage" is that it may just derail Trumps efforts to strike a peace deal. And it may thus "force" Trump to continue the support for the Ukraine.
I doubt it will, but it seems to be all they have.
Likely this is seen by these idiots as a way to force Trump to keep the war going.
There will be no response, just as Russia has foolishly backed down at every previous escalation.
If you want to die I could care less but there are easier ways than global dopistruction.
Has nothing to do with what I want.
Had Russia used adequate force from the outset, the war would be over and nobody firing missiles at Russia.
It would seem that the best way to deescalate this is for Trump to announce his disapproval of this and to state clearly that any American lives lost due to a Russian retaliation will be on the democrats.
LOL, Team D would pounce, howling "Putin puppet!" until Trump folds again. Trump remains weak, stupid and easily maniupated.
Trump's silence is deafening, here.
The silence is deafening because this is a “deep state” maneuver and Trump is a captive…just like all presidents have been now for decades.
I don;t think Trump is a captive. Rather, he is an imbecile, too stupid to know that he is captured, and too narcissistic to care.
I’ve followed your comments, and have no arguments that others have not already made. [This is not a challenge.] What do you think Russia should have done or should do?
I have said it many times before - Russia should have used overwhelming force from the outset. Start with a relentless SEAD campaign, not flying over enemy territory with no SEAD loadouts. Enough troops and equipment to force the issue, not letting surrendered Ukrainians just go home. Destruction of any infrastructure that might be of any military value.
Well I won’t argue with that…
Given the people he selected for several positions, I think that Trumps focus will be on the US. Rest-of-world will at best be an "also ran". (And not to forget, he can always dump the Ukraine on the EU)
People thought something similar from 2016-2020. Trump was just as weak, stupid and easily manipulated, then.
An “also ran” or an “also Iran”? <sorry—couldn’t resist >
The correct headline would be: "A crazed Putin has gotten us one step closer to WWIII by invading Ukraine, deploying nukes in Belarus, deploying North Korean troops in Europe, supporting Iranian weapons development, etc." You are deep into blame the victim mode. The cause of this crisis is the paranoia and hubris of one man: Putin.
Stick to the wall, for heaven's sake. All this shit started long before Putin's invasion, at least to 2014... but there was no overthrow of the elected Ukie gov, right. Tell Miss Vickie, bud.
This does nothing more than move up the expiration date on Zelensky. The Russians are either going to take him out or, more plausibly, his own people with take him out. There is no win for Zelensky's Ukraine at this point and Zelensky has become desperate like a kidnapper who has been surrounded but, instead of trying to persuade him to give up, the authorities are giving him more guns and ammunition to kill not just the hostages but the authorities as well.
So, what has Russia been waiting for?
They don't want to create another Stephan Bandera.
I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean. If you are concerned about an insurgency, that's just another cope Russia supporters tell themselves to excuse their indecision. If you look at successful insurgencies, the one thing all of them have in common is a young population.
The median age in Ukraine is over 40, and that from before the war. The median age in Yemen is 19.
So, an autocrat that started a war of aggression, bombs with impunity ALL of Ukraine and keeps escalating is to be taken at this word, but Biden is to be ridiculed for offering Ukraine a consolation bone? Is this really about Biden's senility or rather his attempt at setting up a booby trap for Trump's plans to hand over Ukraine to Putin?
Gee, if only the United States had not toppled the elected government of Ukraine in a coup! And suppose Ukraine had uphled Minsk or Minsk-2?
The various neonazi paramilitaries supporting the Kiev regime gladly accept foreign volunteers. If you wish to gamble with lives, gamble with your own.
If you change Ukraine in your sentence with Gaza, your comment is about correct.
Except Biden's consolation bone to Gaza was made of plastic and smoke.
Completely nuts what the warmongering West is doing to promote instability around the world. And they’re just getting started on China, China, China.
It’s so painfully obvious but so few care to look.
Well, in Ukraine itself they're talking about the collapse of the southern front, where several pincers threading the Ukrainian forces.
About NATO forces in Ukraine, except for the specialist and mercenaries already being there, you are dreaming or whatever it should be named. Poland etc. are not going to send in troops, and at least for one of several reasons, they don't have the skills or weapons to fight in this brutal war
As much as I want to say it is all Biden’s fault….he could not do this without the support of the RINOs in both Cambers….the same group who have vowed to stop Trump at all costs….these RINOs are sly dogs who use political favors to stay in their positions to thwart any MAGA elements…they need
During Monday's missile attack, targets in Mukachevo were hit. That town is half an hour's drive to Slovakia or Hungary. I can understand how the Biden administration could feel it has to respond in some way. Doing nothing while the Russians drop bombs right on NATO's doorstep would be a weak posture.
I do not think Biden's decision has anything to do with targets like Mukachevo. Seems to me they are trying to cover up the defeat of Ukraine's army, which will happen soon.
It's rather odd to announce the deployment of these missiles prior to their use if they're supposed to serve a tactical purpose. Hiding from Lancets is hard enough as it is.
If we follow the probable chain of further developments more closely , it will probably turn out that this is ...A dummy?! Oh yes, Joe! While everyone is running around with this "permission" like chickens with severed heads, Trump will take office and "cancel" this "permission"! "Exit strategy": Biden ...Did you put straws on Trump ?
I just posted a Note on the Biden administration's approval of ATACMS use on Russian territory. The bottom line is the administration may be backtracking. The reception in the US to the announcement is very negative and the State Department has not answered questions about it, meaning that they are unsupportive. While the Europeans were surely briefed ahead of time, the French may have pulled back and the British obfuscated the meaning of Biden's approval. The Germans refused again on Taurus. Only the EU, a crowd of warmongers, liked it.
❗️Главы МИД ЕС не приняли общего решения об отмене ограничений на применение западного оружия на территории РФ, каждая страна решает сама, сообщил Боррель.
© ТАСС
Начался “бег по кругу”…
It's obvious, that Ukraine is losing this war. But less illuminated is that it is not only Ukraine losing, but also the western world. Hardly any pundit have raised the question, what will happen to Europe and USA, when Ukraine have become a Russian puppet, instead of a western puppet?
First of all the dominant states in Eastern Europe, Romania and Poland will be out of reach for their masters in Germany and USA. Germany, the Mediterranean countries including France will be pragmatic and start dealing big time with Russia again, just look at the suffering of German manufacturing sector. The will lee the way for the nationalism in those countries, shaking the foundation of European union the core of European liberal-democrats. That is, Europe will start leaning towards the new master - Russia and will the rest of the world, and especially the ever-so-inportant "global south".
What does that sum up to for the US? US might lose the only reliable allied in the struggle against the Industrial powerhouse, China.
So a lot is at stake for the liberals in Europe and USA. This war is not only existential for Ukraine or Russia, but also for the so-called western values.
What does it mean, this thread of existence for the liberals? At least what they can try to do is weakening Russia at it's military-industrial complex or the military itself for future fighting. So that's what Biden is doing.
Poland's situation is (and probably will be) definitely better than Romania's, which has become for years, like in Carlo Goldoni's play, a servant to two masters: the USA and the EU (EU meaning the bureaucracy in Brussels). Things will not change, at least in the near future. Unfortunately, Western values have also transformed (you say, "so-called Western values") and increasingly resemble a Popsicle left in the sun.
Both Poland and Romania will feel abandoned by the West and might do something crazy out of fear. I don't see any of the two in a good position when this war is over and Ukraine have become a Russian puppet. But you could elaborate, please.
About values - Mackinder wrote in 1918 something like, that rights of Human being will only be extended. Like an inevitable process. He was right
Being a puppet is a disaster, whoever manipulates you... (that's what I think, not those at the helm of various European states, for whom personal profit matters first and foremost: staying in power and an illusory prestige...) And "madness" is not a word in the dictionary of these leaders. When you bet on small (often petty) but certain gains, suddenly jumping from one boat to another is an unacceptable risk, and neither does the history of the last hundred years of Poland and Romania, but especially their communist period, indicate that such a repositioning would be possible. Not to mention the fact that the current puppeteers have every interest in not letting the puppets escape their hands. And fear, as a manipulation technique, is used precisely in this sense.
We do not know, of course, what the more or less distant future will look like. History is also fascinating for its sinuosity...
Thanks your reply. I don't see Romania or Poland wanting to go back to the Russian sfare of influence. Both countries look at themselves as the leading Powers of eastern Europe and at least for Romania have territoriale claims against neighbours (Moldova). They are revisionist powers. But are USA kicked out of Europe, and the US will when Russia have won this war, than Poland and Romania will be under Russian influence for sure.
About knowing the future or not, than we can have some pretty good estimates, there are reason and reflexion behind nations acting. Knowing the national interests of a given country will give you a hint about a given country's course and behaviour in the future
I'm sorry, but you don't know the history of the Romanian lands at all.
Romania is not a "revisionist power”.
The current Republic of Moldova, a territory where the same language as in Romania is spoken, that is Romanian, was called Bessarabia/ Basarabia, after the name of the Romanian ruler Alexandru Basarab.
In the 15th and 16th centuries, the Turks conquered this territory.
Following the Russo-Turkish War of 1806-1812, won by the Russian Empire, the area between the Dniester/ Nistru and Prut rivers came under Russian rule, a period in which attempts were made to erase the Romanian history of Bessarabia.
In March 1918, the then leadership of Bessarabia, called the Council of the Country, decided to unite with the motherland, that is Romania.
In 1940, following the Hitler-Stalin Pact of 1939, Romania was given an ultimatum by the Soviet Union to cede Bessarabia and northern Bukovina. If it did not comply within 48 hours, the USSR would declare war on it. The civilian population suffered enormously at the hands of communist commandos and the NKVD. After the annexation, the Soviets divided it into 3 parts, the central one being called the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic. The south and north were assigned to Ukraine.
In 1941, after Romania entered World War II, Bessarabia returned to the Romanian state for 3 years.
In 1944, the Soviet army reoccupied Bessarabia.
After the dissolution of the USSR, in 1991, the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic declared independence under the name of the Republic of Moldova.
Very briefly, it is a painful history.
Since 1991, Romania has continuously helped Moldova (economically, culturally), supporting it in its desire to join the European Union, by virtue of all the ties that no one can erase.
The wish to expand the territory of a given state is revisionism, and you don't seem to disagree. My point is just, that it spells trouble for Romania and Poland, and those nations will start acting very irrational, just like Ukraine did after the maidan.
I often disagree but here We agree entirely. This is a dangerous foolish move. Demented or not. I don’t hear any outcry from either side of the political sphere. Terrible
I keep saying it, western leader/politicians are mentally ill. These are career politicians that live in their own fantasy world. You can see that with their climate policies. You have to be mentally ill to claim being fossil free, net zero, saying wind and solar is the cheapest form of energy, destroying their own economy,... they really believe themselves and are doubling down.
So I would love to see Russia targeting EU weapons depots and weapon factories. European leaders will get hysteria, call it act of war, unprovoked,... the idea that their actions have consequences doesn't even come to their mind. Well that's because these career politicians never had consequences, responsibility or accountability for their actions. They can't comprehend that this a war declaration and that missiles fall on their country. They are just sick in the head. Can't explain it in English like I would.
You think if China attacks Taiwan the US is going to fire missiles at China? I think it's pointless and stupid of the US. If the US fires one bullet at China, we are at war. A war that the US will lose. So you place as many weapons you want, it's war or no war. I don't think the US want to go to war over China. That means US deterrence is completely pointless.
The oil drill baby drill mentality will and has caused ys trillions in climate change destruction. Wake up and smell the smoke. But while you do that get your boat ready for the floods
Thanks for your great work Stephen!
We've shared the link on our daily report.
A Skeptic War Reports
https://askeptic.substack.com/
What a joke this is and it again show the double standard of the West. Ukraine is allowed to use the long range missiles in Kursk. Everyone know that Kursk is Russian territory, not Ukrainian. Is this about self defence, or about something else? Well, let the game begin. Aside from hitting Ukrainian infrastructure even harder, the Russians may want to cause another wave of Ukrainian refugees. Alternatively, they should supply anti ship missiles to Yemen and Iran or more sophisticated weapons to proxies in Iraq and Syria. Let the Americans taste their own medicine. And if Ukraine indeed manages to hurt Russia deep inside. Well, then may God safe us all...
My sense is that Putin has two plausible options: (1) Destroy all the NATO launching sites on Russia’s border. (2) Totally decapitate the Ukrainian state, including the assassination of Zelensky and all his senior staff. I expect that Putin will choose the latter.
They can't and won't kill Zelensky. That would create another Stephan Bandera, that is being honored by Ukrainian fascists. Bandera should have never been allowed to have a grave either, just like Hitler. Russia would rather capture him alive, so people can forget about him somewhere in Siberia.