The west has been wrong the whole time. Russia's economy would have collapsed 3 years ago run out of missiles after 2 months, has to steal chips, all troops are dead and at the same time grows and will invade the EU.
Russia transformed its economy and weapon production so it can sustain the war for years. Ukraine +1 million dead, millions left and won't come back, economy destroyed, there's no viable Ukraine anymore. The EU itself is bankrupt, they can't keep supporting Ukraine. Germany will cut pensions and work till 73 so Ukraine can kill Russians. In the end there can't be an Ukraine left.
Clean up legal system? The US forced the sale of TikTok, EU steals Russian money, now The Netherlands steal a Chinese company.
These games of Tomahawks or not are fun until Russia strike NATO.
Russia wants to solve the problem once and for all. So it has to demographically and economically destroy Ukraine. It may take them 5 more years but they are willing to do it. Progress on the ground is of little importance. They can win a war of attrition even by retreating.
The Russian economy, according to experts, should have collapsed years ago. I predict that European economies may collapse sooner than the Russian one.
President Trump cannot offer the Russians a good deal. The neocons and the media will not allow it. And even if he could, why should the Russians believe that any deal would be honored by him or the next president? It is too late and too early for a diplomatic solution. Not before one of the two sides collapses.
Trouble with this "Russia wants to destroy Ukraine" theory which is sooften banded about is that so far there are only 13,000 civilians out of 20 or 40 million dead.
Now official or media minimal figures claim 13k civilians and perhaps 200k Ukrainian soldiers are dead - which would make it the most civilian friendly war ever.
Reality is more like 15-20k civilians (not all victims of Russia) and 1-1.5 million Ukrainian military.
Even the media figures make it very very clear that Russia has a very soft approach to war with its Slav Brothers. Nazis aside Russians actually seem to like Ukrainians.
Yes Ukraine is making zero impact on the Russian economy or its psyche.
And yes US has long been недоговороспособен to Russia
When US backed the attack in Qatar on Hamas negotiators, US became unable to negotiate for everyone.
It is not necessary to commit genocide. You can simply neutralize those who are willing to fight. How many more Ukrainians do you think will emigrate or defect in the next two years? How many European governments willing to finance Ukraine or even accept it into the EU will be in place two years from now? The whole situation is a tragedy primarily for the Ukrainian people but also for the Russians. I deeply respect the way the Russian administration is trying to minimize civilian casualties. Even if it means prolonging the war
I interpret the Russian approach 2 ways. Firstly a perhaps naive belief that if they can demonstrate how superior the Russia army is that Ukraine and decent Nato country leaders would quickly come to realise that a peace deal on any terms is essential. But it does appear that not just Biden's US, but EuroNato went into this quite committed to destroy any hope of any Ukrainain culture remaining ever. For the Americans chaos is a success - as it was in Libya and is in Syria.
Secondly and much more shrewdly they have always known that a mad charge into Ukraine would win a lot of territory which would soon be ungovernable, providing genuine photo ops of civilian deaths for western media, and would have been perfect for a renegade Ukrainian/Nazi force to cause mayhem to both Russian forces and any remaining Russian speaking Ukrainians in Guerilla warfare. The goals of demilitarisation and de-nazification would become impossible.
Quite what the Russians hope for Ukraine though is hard to say. I don't think they want a rump Ukraine with a population of 15m which it looks like becoming. They certainly don't want to finance it (and have still not targeted the infrastructure in ways that are not reparable).
Ideally Germany would have turned NS2 back on and financed a new EU entrant. instead they are buying expensive gas from US and sending them their car factories - this looks likely to continue.
incidentally I doubt many more will leave as so many have gone already. But I doubt any man under 65 will return unless Kiev is run by a very Russia friendly and very stable government. The threat of war and call ups is too great.
Tragedy for Russia?
I think Russia see themselves as leaders with China in a new world where the old Empire is being overthrown (I do anyway). And that this is very good news to Russia (and for 85% of the world).
In general I agree. In my opinion the Americans do not want the conflict to stop. They are using Ukraine and to a large extent Europe to weaken Russia and keep it locked in the Ukrainian conflict. It is one, perhaps the most important, of the fronts of the global conflict. I think they will do anything to preserve the old order of things. We will see.
Yes. Certainly the China vs US rivalry is the dominant factor in the world.
The war in UKraine is 3 things:
West Ukraine vs E Ukraine civil war (nazis vs russians speakers)
US/Nato/Ukraine vs Russia - global war
US vs EU (or vs Germany) - Economic war to cut EU off from trading with BRICS and China and leave a great big chasm at the end of the simplest land route for the silk roads.
The importance of the goal seems to have blinded many in US and Europe to the near impossibility of defeating Russia without nukes. The superiority of Russian conventional military over European military was a known factor pre-2022 but it appears Nato believed its own media spin.
Very interesting to read how you have swallowed the propaganda being sold by the Ukrainians and (to) Keith Kellogg. You list judgment after judgment, but I wish you had provided some convincing proof that you are correct and that the Russian explanation on each subject is wrong.
It would take a longer essay that you wrote to cover it all.
I am open to a reasoned conclusion filled with evidence that shows the US Proxies are somehow going to win if the Russians don't hurry up and do so, which seems a partial summary of your thesis (please correct me if what I read did not convey your intent).
You certainly seem to have the standard MI6 Financial Times grasp on the relative economic and citizen unrest in Russia, compared to the USA.
It seems to me that you illustrate the American narrative well, which is an interesting story. I found it very a bit surprising that you seem to agree that who wins the Ukraine war is much more important for the Russians than for the USA and NATO to suffer a defeat.
Prokrovsk is in a factual cauldron as we speak. It appears the West has great difficulties to understand the Russian approach. Minimize civilian casualties, fight a war of attrition. Now, there is only a 7km long way out of Prokrovsk over open fields, during a mud season, with no cover. Some argue, Prokrosvk was only closed now to maximize casualties...
One more thing, the angrier the Russians become, the less of Ukraine will remain.
Russia is, in real asset terms, the wealthiest country in Europe. Furthermore, these Ukraine drone strike are pin pricks compared to the massive oil and gas dominion known as Russia.
All of this talk about Russia needing bailouts and game changing missiles for Ukraine are pure fairy tales.
Russia is more dominant in Europe than even during the Cold War. The Soviet Union was always an inefficient blob that couldn’t adapt itself out of a paper bag.
Russia is the real deal… exceeded only by China in battlefield capabilities.
This kind of narrative-switch beta testing isn't going to work. Russia clearly has the upper hand in Ukraine; the US would not be considering launching nuclear-capable strategic missiles into a nuclear-armed rival. "Idiocy" doesn't do justice to the idea. Trump will be blamed and he is losing support in the heartlands where he campaigned on sanity and de-escalation. He has likely lost my vote and that of every other millennial I know who voted for him.
Suppose I were a junior PR person working for a Nato intelligent unit or say MI6, and given the job of writing a piece that justified nato supporting Ukraine further and ignoring all the internal advice that says save the next million middle aged Ukrainians and save rump Ukraine's hopes of being an independent country and quit asap.
I'd compare the damage to energy facilities in Ukraine and Russia and pretend that Russia is getting the worst of it - never mind that only a fraction of Russia is within range of any missiles Ukraine has. I might even have a word with a scribe at the FT and tell them accurately Ukraine is hitting targets right now - probably have to highlight how much help they are getting from US to make it credible.
Then I'd tell the world how Russia is about to collapse and how the population is turning against the war and suffering. Cock and bull story I know, but plenty of Brits still believe it.
And dismiss Iran for good measure. That does double duty - shows how wonderful US weapons are and backs up all those who have been writing for our team. We don't want people repeating that claptrap about Iran forcing Israel to get the Americans to intervene and stop that war in 12 days.
So long as Israel doesn't attack Iran again and make a fool of all of us I should be good with this nonsense for a few more weeks.
Somehow, one sometimes gets the impression that you suffer from bipolar disorder. Posts with deeper reflections alternate with posts that merely parrot the usual Western propaganda. Here we seem to have another post from the latter category.
Undoubtedly, there are sectors that are not among the strengths of Russian industry, and in which the country is dependent on imports for better products. But isn't that true of every country on earth? Is there any reliable evidence for the alleged economic crisis? How about a more in-depth analysis of Tomahawk deliveries? Isn't this “threat” a paper tiger? With what delivery system would Ukraine use Tomahawks, pray tell?
In 1914 the world sleepwalked into a war no one wanted. If we're not careful, the same thing will happen here. We have no real interests here. Ukraine could be swallowed by a giant sinkhole without effecting the US. We need to get out and let Europe deal with it.
As for Tomahawks, where is Zelensky going to find a submarine or missile cruiser to fire them?
Or is Trump going to give him one of the 4 currently operable very expensive, vulnerable, and difficult to operate Typhon land-based launcher systems supposedly destined for the Pacific theatre?
There are heritage systems that some imagine could be adapted, and an untried new smaller privately developed 'Oshkosh' system... but as you suggest that's just pie in the sky, and American Pie (in the sky) is not in this context a game-changer :-)
Seems to me that the Chinese have more effective levers controlling the eventual outcome than we do. If they choose to completely shut off the supply of drone components to Ukraine, the AFU would be left with no means of stopping Russian armor. Or they can selectively restrict certain components to weaken the AFU in response to actions by the West. Meanwhile we’re down to talking about sending nuclear-capable missiles.
There’s no doubt that China is invaluable in keeping Russia’s economy humming and its military awash in semiconductors and electronics that it needs. This is a win-win relationship as China knows Russia is defending its north and west while China’s zone of responsibility is South and east. In this way you have unstoppable force.
The west fantasizes about friction between the 2 - but for both countries, keeping the other alive and well is self-serving.
There is no way China would allow Russia to lose in Ukraine in the same way Russia would never allow China to lose in Taiwan.
Back to back and side to side. The logic makes too perfect sense.
It will be interesting to see how the Chinese embargo on rare earths for military purposes and the processing technology to go with them pans out in the West. I wonder if they arranged this with Russia years ago: "Drain the Natozis of their weapons, then we will stop them replacing them."
Most advanced weapons need rare earths: China supplies 99% of these advanced components. I think that's a pretty decisive "game changer".
It beggars belief that Western strategists relied so much on a country they persist in calling an enemy for these commodities.
Russia's response to the American attacks on her energy infrastructure has been to bomb/drone Ukraine to the stone age. The Americans are not going to do their carrot and stick schtick with Russia this time.
It is just such a fake description of what has really been incredibly civilian friendly SMO/War
Now US invading Iraq - Shock and Awe - that would certainly have fitted your description.
Recently Russia has targeted Ukraine infrastructure in retaliation and military manufacturing and storage. The rest of Ukraine remains very much in the 1970s - ie where it was in 2021.
The expression 'to the stone age' is refers to removing things like electricity, running water, etc., and not mass death. Russia is destroying Ukraine's ability to sustain technological modernity. Russia is not killing large number of civilians. The energy war, though, could be considered a sort of indirect ethnic cleansing, if it is successful.
There have been short periods of bringing the electricity network down yes.
Relative to any other large scale war these have been extremely minor - again compare Iraq.
There has been no attempt to affect the water supply (something Ukraine has done seeveral times). No Russian attacks on Nuclear plants (againt Ukraine has attacked 3 including Chernobyl as a false flag). The civilian trains and even the rail track have not been attacked by Russia although they are constantly used by the military. Rail electricity stations have been though.
All the Russian attacks are on reparable hubs not the distribution networks. The clear point to Ukrainian civilians being that everything can go back to normal once Kiev gives up.
The very very clear impression you should have of Russian actions is how very very hard they try to leave civilians unaffected.
Of course that is very different to the impression western media tries to show.
Putin made his conditions for ending the war very clear to Trump. If Washington did not understand them or decided to put pressure on Putin, you can try. It's going to end the same way it did with Biden.
The west has been wrong the whole time. Russia's economy would have collapsed 3 years ago run out of missiles after 2 months, has to steal chips, all troops are dead and at the same time grows and will invade the EU.
Russia transformed its economy and weapon production so it can sustain the war for years. Ukraine +1 million dead, millions left and won't come back, economy destroyed, there's no viable Ukraine anymore. The EU itself is bankrupt, they can't keep supporting Ukraine. Germany will cut pensions and work till 73 so Ukraine can kill Russians. In the end there can't be an Ukraine left.
Clean up legal system? The US forced the sale of TikTok, EU steals Russian money, now The Netherlands steal a Chinese company.
These games of Tomahawks or not are fun until Russia strike NATO.
The comparison with Gaza is anecdotal.
Russia wants to solve the problem once and for all. So it has to demographically and economically destroy Ukraine. It may take them 5 more years but they are willing to do it. Progress on the ground is of little importance. They can win a war of attrition even by retreating.
The Russian economy, according to experts, should have collapsed years ago. I predict that European economies may collapse sooner than the Russian one.
President Trump cannot offer the Russians a good deal. The neocons and the media will not allow it. And even if he could, why should the Russians believe that any deal would be honored by him or the next president? It is too late and too early for a diplomatic solution. Not before one of the two sides collapses.
Trouble with this "Russia wants to destroy Ukraine" theory which is sooften banded about is that so far there are only 13,000 civilians out of 20 or 40 million dead.
Now official or media minimal figures claim 13k civilians and perhaps 200k Ukrainian soldiers are dead - which would make it the most civilian friendly war ever.
Reality is more like 15-20k civilians (not all victims of Russia) and 1-1.5 million Ukrainian military.
Even the media figures make it very very clear that Russia has a very soft approach to war with its Slav Brothers. Nazis aside Russians actually seem to like Ukrainians.
Yes Ukraine is making zero impact on the Russian economy or its psyche.
And yes US has long been недоговороспособен to Russia
When US backed the attack in Qatar on Hamas negotiators, US became unable to negotiate for everyone.
It is not necessary to commit genocide. You can simply neutralize those who are willing to fight. How many more Ukrainians do you think will emigrate or defect in the next two years? How many European governments willing to finance Ukraine or even accept it into the EU will be in place two years from now? The whole situation is a tragedy primarily for the Ukrainian people but also for the Russians. I deeply respect the way the Russian administration is trying to minimize civilian casualties. Even if it means prolonging the war
Yes I agree with a lot of both your comments.
I interpret the Russian approach 2 ways. Firstly a perhaps naive belief that if they can demonstrate how superior the Russia army is that Ukraine and decent Nato country leaders would quickly come to realise that a peace deal on any terms is essential. But it does appear that not just Biden's US, but EuroNato went into this quite committed to destroy any hope of any Ukrainain culture remaining ever. For the Americans chaos is a success - as it was in Libya and is in Syria.
Secondly and much more shrewdly they have always known that a mad charge into Ukraine would win a lot of territory which would soon be ungovernable, providing genuine photo ops of civilian deaths for western media, and would have been perfect for a renegade Ukrainian/Nazi force to cause mayhem to both Russian forces and any remaining Russian speaking Ukrainians in Guerilla warfare. The goals of demilitarisation and de-nazification would become impossible.
Quite what the Russians hope for Ukraine though is hard to say. I don't think they want a rump Ukraine with a population of 15m which it looks like becoming. They certainly don't want to finance it (and have still not targeted the infrastructure in ways that are not reparable).
Ideally Germany would have turned NS2 back on and financed a new EU entrant. instead they are buying expensive gas from US and sending them their car factories - this looks likely to continue.
incidentally I doubt many more will leave as so many have gone already. But I doubt any man under 65 will return unless Kiev is run by a very Russia friendly and very stable government. The threat of war and call ups is too great.
Tragedy for Russia?
I think Russia see themselves as leaders with China in a new world where the old Empire is being overthrown (I do anyway). And that this is very good news to Russia (and for 85% of the world).
In general I agree. In my opinion the Americans do not want the conflict to stop. They are using Ukraine and to a large extent Europe to weaken Russia and keep it locked in the Ukrainian conflict. It is one, perhaps the most important, of the fronts of the global conflict. I think they will do anything to preserve the old order of things. We will see.
Yes. Certainly the China vs US rivalry is the dominant factor in the world.
The war in UKraine is 3 things:
West Ukraine vs E Ukraine civil war (nazis vs russians speakers)
US/Nato/Ukraine vs Russia - global war
US vs EU (or vs Germany) - Economic war to cut EU off from trading with BRICS and China and leave a great big chasm at the end of the simplest land route for the silk roads.
The importance of the goal seems to have blinded many in US and Europe to the near impossibility of defeating Russia without nukes. The superiority of Russian conventional military over European military was a known factor pre-2022 but it appears Nato believed its own media spin.
I like this m droy chap: solid
Excellent summary.
Very interesting to read how you have swallowed the propaganda being sold by the Ukrainians and (to) Keith Kellogg. You list judgment after judgment, but I wish you had provided some convincing proof that you are correct and that the Russian explanation on each subject is wrong.
It would take a longer essay that you wrote to cover it all.
I am open to a reasoned conclusion filled with evidence that shows the US Proxies are somehow going to win if the Russians don't hurry up and do so, which seems a partial summary of your thesis (please correct me if what I read did not convey your intent).
You certainly seem to have the standard MI6 Financial Times grasp on the relative economic and citizen unrest in Russia, compared to the USA.
It seems to me that you illustrate the American narrative well, which is an interesting story. I found it very a bit surprising that you seem to agree that who wins the Ukraine war is much more important for the Russians than for the USA and NATO to suffer a defeat.
Prokrovsk is in a factual cauldron as we speak. It appears the West has great difficulties to understand the Russian approach. Minimize civilian casualties, fight a war of attrition. Now, there is only a 7km long way out of Prokrovsk over open fields, during a mud season, with no cover. Some argue, Prokrosvk was only closed now to maximize casualties...
One more thing, the angrier the Russians become, the less of Ukraine will remain.
Russia is, in real asset terms, the wealthiest country in Europe. Furthermore, these Ukraine drone strike are pin pricks compared to the massive oil and gas dominion known as Russia.
All of this talk about Russia needing bailouts and game changing missiles for Ukraine are pure fairy tales.
Russia is more dominant in Europe than even during the Cold War. The Soviet Union was always an inefficient blob that couldn’t adapt itself out of a paper bag.
Russia is the real deal… exceeded only by China in battlefield capabilities.
This kind of narrative-switch beta testing isn't going to work. Russia clearly has the upper hand in Ukraine; the US would not be considering launching nuclear-capable strategic missiles into a nuclear-armed rival. "Idiocy" doesn't do justice to the idea. Trump will be blamed and he is losing support in the heartlands where he campaigned on sanity and de-escalation. He has likely lost my vote and that of every other millennial I know who voted for him.
Suppose I were a junior PR person working for a Nato intelligent unit or say MI6, and given the job of writing a piece that justified nato supporting Ukraine further and ignoring all the internal advice that says save the next million middle aged Ukrainians and save rump Ukraine's hopes of being an independent country and quit asap.
I'd compare the damage to energy facilities in Ukraine and Russia and pretend that Russia is getting the worst of it - never mind that only a fraction of Russia is within range of any missiles Ukraine has. I might even have a word with a scribe at the FT and tell them accurately Ukraine is hitting targets right now - probably have to highlight how much help they are getting from US to make it credible.
Then I'd tell the world how Russia is about to collapse and how the population is turning against the war and suffering. Cock and bull story I know, but plenty of Brits still believe it.
And dismiss Iran for good measure. That does double duty - shows how wonderful US weapons are and backs up all those who have been writing for our team. We don't want people repeating that claptrap about Iran forcing Israel to get the Americans to intervene and stop that war in 12 days.
So long as Israel doesn't attack Iran again and make a fool of all of us I should be good with this nonsense for a few more weeks.
Somehow, one sometimes gets the impression that you suffer from bipolar disorder. Posts with deeper reflections alternate with posts that merely parrot the usual Western propaganda. Here we seem to have another post from the latter category.
Undoubtedly, there are sectors that are not among the strengths of Russian industry, and in which the country is dependent on imports for better products. But isn't that true of every country on earth? Is there any reliable evidence for the alleged economic crisis? How about a more in-depth analysis of Tomahawk deliveries? Isn't this “threat” a paper tiger? With what delivery system would Ukraine use Tomahawks, pray tell?
I don't parrot any propaganda and am not bipolar. Your should mind your mouth.
You cultivate an audience of vatniks. Enjoy ...
You nailed it
My read is that Russia can and will keep chugging along and that Trump’s made his peace with that.
Odd how the analysis here seems (to me at least) to suddenly pivot around 180º according to Trump's whim.
In 1914 the world sleepwalked into a war no one wanted. If we're not careful, the same thing will happen here. We have no real interests here. Ukraine could be swallowed by a giant sinkhole without effecting the US. We need to get out and let Europe deal with it.
Oh, the Brits do want it
As for Tomahawks, where is Zelensky going to find a submarine or missile cruiser to fire them?
Or is Trump going to give him one of the 4 currently operable very expensive, vulnerable, and difficult to operate Typhon land-based launcher systems supposedly destined for the Pacific theatre?
There is a smaller land- based system. It wont make any real different, i think
There are heritage systems that some imagine could be adapted, and an untried new smaller privately developed 'Oshkosh' system... but as you suggest that's just pie in the sky, and American Pie (in the sky) is not in this context a game-changer :-)
Seems to me that the Chinese have more effective levers controlling the eventual outcome than we do. If they choose to completely shut off the supply of drone components to Ukraine, the AFU would be left with no means of stopping Russian armor. Or they can selectively restrict certain components to weaken the AFU in response to actions by the West. Meanwhile we’re down to talking about sending nuclear-capable missiles.
There’s no doubt that China is invaluable in keeping Russia’s economy humming and its military awash in semiconductors and electronics that it needs. This is a win-win relationship as China knows Russia is defending its north and west while China’s zone of responsibility is South and east. In this way you have unstoppable force.
The west fantasizes about friction between the 2 - but for both countries, keeping the other alive and well is self-serving.
There is no way China would allow Russia to lose in Ukraine in the same way Russia would never allow China to lose in Taiwan.
Back to back and side to side. The logic makes too perfect sense.
It will be interesting to see how the Chinese embargo on rare earths for military purposes and the processing technology to go with them pans out in the West. I wonder if they arranged this with Russia years ago: "Drain the Natozis of their weapons, then we will stop them replacing them."
Most advanced weapons need rare earths: China supplies 99% of these advanced components. I think that's a pretty decisive "game changer".
It beggars belief that Western strategists relied so much on a country they persist in calling an enemy for these commodities.
Russia's response to the American attacks on her energy infrastructure has been to bomb/drone Ukraine to the stone age. The Americans are not going to do their carrot and stick schtick with Russia this time.
?? 1 to 1.5 million Ukrainian military dead, 15-20k civilians.
Most civilian friendly war ever. By a factor of 10 or 20.
Have you not been told how soft the Russians have been?
I made no reference to civilian deaths. Are you responding to the wrong comment?
"Bomb Ukraine to the Stone age"
It is just such a fake description of what has really been incredibly civilian friendly SMO/War
Now US invading Iraq - Shock and Awe - that would certainly have fitted your description.
Recently Russia has targeted Ukraine infrastructure in retaliation and military manufacturing and storage. The rest of Ukraine remains very much in the 1970s - ie where it was in 2021.
The expression 'to the stone age' is refers to removing things like electricity, running water, etc., and not mass death. Russia is destroying Ukraine's ability to sustain technological modernity. Russia is not killing large number of civilians. The energy war, though, could be considered a sort of indirect ethnic cleansing, if it is successful.
There have been short periods of bringing the electricity network down yes.
Relative to any other large scale war these have been extremely minor - again compare Iraq.
There has been no attempt to affect the water supply (something Ukraine has done seeveral times). No Russian attacks on Nuclear plants (againt Ukraine has attacked 3 including Chernobyl as a false flag). The civilian trains and even the rail track have not been attacked by Russia although they are constantly used by the military. Rail electricity stations have been though.
All the Russian attacks are on reparable hubs not the distribution networks. The clear point to Ukrainian civilians being that everything can go back to normal once Kiev gives up.
The very very clear impression you should have of Russian actions is how very very hard they try to leave civilians unaffected.
Of course that is very different to the impression western media tries to show.
Putin made his conditions for ending the war very clear to Trump. If Washington did not understand them or decided to put pressure on Putin, you can try. It's going to end the same way it did with Biden.