By Dmitry Orlov for the Saker Blog
Or maybe he, like Bundeskanzler Olaf Scholz, grandson of Fritz von Scholz, SS lieutenant-general who supervised the slaughter of Jews in Poland and the Ukraine, thinks that genocide is a joke? Let’s explore…
A reader has asked me to comment on a recent post by Roberts titled “The Kremlin Has Missed the Opportunity to End the Provocations of Russia that Are Bringing the World to Nuclear War.” And so I took a look at it. At first, it made me angry, but only for a moment, because there is no possibility of actual harm from his scribbling: his unsolicited advice to “the Kremlin” will pass unnoticed and therefore unheeded. Rather, it made me sad. I used to think highly of Roberts, but now he is just another confused old man who, like our friend Brendan, has missed a perfectly good opportunity to hang it up and fade away. Mind you, I am trying to be kind and polite here.
Roberts saw it fit to write that “If Russia had hit Ukraine with a devastating conventional all-inclusive attack, the war would have ended before it started,” and, after some additional musings, that “the failure of Russia to impress the West with an overwhelming exercise of military force in Ukraine means another step has been taken toward nuclear armageddon.” And then he rambles along to “The Kremlin’s inability to be proactive and unwillingness to clear Washington’s fifth column out of Russia’s ruling circles will be the hallmarks of Russian defeat.”
Really? No, not really.
I should make no assumptions on what you or Roberts know or don’t know about the Ukraine or “the Kremlin,” so I will simply state the obvious.
There is no easily discernible difference between Russians and Ukrainians: same culture, language, religion and history. As a state, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic is a failed state; as a territory, it is part of Russia. Therefore, an all-out attack on the Ukraine would be essentially an attack on Russia itself. Apparently, Roberts feels that Russians should kill millions of other Russians in order to impress the West. That’s really cute, you know, in a genocidally maniacal sort of way, but completely impossible.
The complexity of the Russian Special Operation in the Ukraine had to do with disentangling the civilian population (which needed to be evacuated) and the regular Ukrainian military (which needed to be given a chance to surrender peacefully) from the Nazi battalions (which need to either be killed in battle or captured, convicted by a tribunal and shot). That is not something that can be done quickly.
There are other, less important but still very significant reasons to take it slow:
1. There is a rather large group of Ukrainians who wanted the Ukraine to be part of Europe, not part of Russia. These are now departing Ukrainian territory, mostly to Poland, and that, from the Russian point of view, is a wonderful thing because the Ukraine isn’t Europe, it is Russia, and those who believe it is Europe or want it to be Europe should be given a chance to go to the Europe of their dreams and stay there forever, helping Europe’s general dire demographic predicament and specific shortage of white people. For this reason, it has been important to keep the Ukraine’s western border open to exiting migrants, even though this allows weapons and mercenaries to filter in (for the Russians to blow up).
2. The Europeans’ willingness to absorb millions upon millions of Ukrainian migrants, whereas they balked at accepting anywhere near similar numbers of migrants from the Middle East or North Africa, exemplifies their essential racism. As it is, two-thirds of the world is either neutral or supports Russia in its effort to reclaim the Ukraine; as the message that the EU and NATO are essentially white supremacist organizations sinks in around the world, more and more countries will shift from neutral to supportive without Russia having to lift a finger to convince them. From this point of view, it is really helpful that a lot of the Ukrainians like to draw swastikas on monuments and shout Nazi slogans such as “Slava Ukraini” (of World War II Nazi collaborator vintage) and “Ukraina ponad use” (the Ukrainian version of “Ukraine über alles.”
3. Russia has a great and prosperous future as a wealthy, well-educated, civilized, vast and resource-rich country, but this future has nothing to do with Europe or the rest of the West, which are going to collapse. The fact that Russia has been rather tightly integrated with the West ever since Peter the Great moved the capital to St. Petersburg has complicated its transition away from the West and its turn eastward. Western sanctions, rampant Russophobia and the application of cancel culture to Russian culture has made this transition inevitable in the eyes of most Russians, but the process takes time. It would not be helpful if tensions with the West decreased prematurely or if anti-Russian sanctions were removed before they are made completely irrelevant. Also, the West’s unwillingness to buy Russian energy, metals, fertilizer and other essentials speeds up its collapse timeline and that, for Russia, is also a positive.
4. Immediately after Russia commenced its Special Operation in the Ukraine, much of Russia’s remaining fifth-columnists departed for other lands. They already had no impact on Russian politics, but they still exerted some amount of influence in culture and education, and their departure has been most welcome. Given the absolutely overwhelming public support for the Special Operation in Russia, those liberals who have spoken out against it have thereby excused themselves from Russian public life, making room for new talent and new blood. This is also a process that needs to run its course and should not be rushed.
5. The Special Operation has allowed Russia to demonstrate the overwhelming superiority of its armed forces vis-à-vis NATO. All of the weapons that the West has managed to infiltrate into the Ukraine are either being destroyed by rocket attacks or are accumulating in stockpiles after being abandoned by retreating or surrendering Ukrainian troops. None of the obsolete Stingers, Javelins or other military junk has made much of a difference at all. There is very little of any significance that the West can do to hurt Russia’s careful and measured progress in the Ukraine. Once more, time is on Russia’s side: it will take another few months for it to register in the West that all those billions spent on aid to the Ukraine have gone into a black hole with nothing to show for it.
6. Finally, there is what Russia has to do beyond taking care of the situation in the (former) Ukraine, and that is to dismantle NATO. This will require some sort of small demonstration project: take over some small, insignificant NATO member and watch all the other NATO members run away instead of going to war against Russia over it. The myth of NATO as a defensive (as opposed to an offensive) organization would be dispelled and NATO would be no more. The demonstration country could be Lithuania, for instance: Peter the Great purchased the Baltics from Sweden for 1000 pieces of silver at the Treaty of Nystad on September 10, 1721, so it’s Russian territory. Unlike the Ukraine, which is huge, Lithuania is tiny and the entire campaign would be over in about a week. But if Finland or Sweden would like to volunteer for the role of exemplary victim by attempting to join NATO, that would be fine too. Finland’s security is guaranteed by its commitment to neutrality, based on which Russia (USSR at the time) removed its military base from Finnish soil. If Finland moves to renege on that treaty, it would forfeit its security.
Roberts seems to believe that Russia’s refusal to destroy the Ukraine with overwhelming force makes nuclear war more likely because it “gives Washington control of the explanation.” Russia’s superior position with regard to any potential nuclear provocation is subject for another article, but I assure you that it has absolutely nothing to do with “Washington’s control of the explanation” because how the hell would Washington explain its desire to commit national suicide over the Ukraine? The thesis that “Russia’s failure to quickly destroy the Ukraine raises the likelihood of nuclear war” is… I am grasping for a word here… stupid.
I have read Mr, Robert’s as well as Mr Orlov’s articles over the years, and have linked both. My problem is when people write articles for the purpose of deriding someone else. People have different opinions, we don’t need to cause division when searching for the truth!!!
“People have different opinions”
The facilitators are some people have different beliefs obfuscated by the assignment to them of the designation “opinions” – not tested hypotheses with benefit of outling datastreams addressed, methods used to establish/ evaluate these datastreams, examples of divergent opinions with benefit of which datastreams they addressed using which methods to establish/evaluate, and substantiated outcomes of the testing of hypotheses including doubts and lacunae derived therefrom.
“searching for the truth!!!
Since omniscience is not an option outwith belief, the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth can never be perceived, although as Mr. Schoedinger observed since change is a constant it can exist temporarily – undermining the notion of continual understanding ergo belief asserted elsewhere through this portal – since change is a constant whose variables include trajectories and velocities, which some attempt to wholly conflate with time.
PCRs writings may be based on an descriptive view rather than a prescriptive view even if it doesnt sound like it or it maybe just that his style of writing may come across as aggressive and unappealing to some
Irrespective, in all fairness, PCR, even at an old age is very sharp, highly analytical, and is able to develop logical frameworks of analysis and strong conclusions with minimal writing effort – and that takes a huge mental capacity to accomplish
This is quite amazing! I ask a simple question: “Does PCR like genocide?” And in response there are 133 comments, only 2 of which even mention genocide. Ignoring the elephant in the room, some commenters see it fit to praise PCR as a good accountant. Sure, he is a genocidal maniac, but he is good with numbers. Many people pointed out that PCR is an American… genocidal maniac? And that goes without saying? I am not sure what to make of this. The moral blindness on display here is quite stunning.
I am not second guessing Russia’s military operation whatsoever but if Russia bombed administrative buildings and electrical grids throughout Ukraine it might not be smart but it would not be genocide.
Even if there were a discernable difference between Russians and Ukrainians, to commit genocide against Ukrainians would be immoral.
Having said that, if some military ever did a “shock and awe” against Israel or USA, I would not have problem with that.
“The thesis that ‘Russia’s failure to quickly destroy the Ukraine raises the likelihood of nuclear war’ is… I am grasping for a word here… stupid.”
Fair word. “Genocide” would be too much. You indicate now that you meant to say he likes genocide. I see no reason to say that. He would say “no!” He likes to think he is smarter than others, looks like.
I began to get alarmed when that word “dumbshit”, which already extended to a lot of people, then went into Russia, didn’t it, and it began to hit people there left and right (only not Kadyrov?).
The article regarding PCR and questions raised is accurate. I used to listen to RT which has Americans that will never be heard on MSM. That doesn’t mean that they are not Americans first. That means the preservation of America first,as bad as they might have seen it deteriorating. It is happening to many more than PCR. It could also mean imprisonment that they fear or even worse.
Most of these people have worked for the “man” in one way or another, but don’t anymore. They all know that this is potentially the collapse of America, and they have been trying to prevent it. No one was listening.
I knew for years that Russia has the military means to destroy Europe and whatever USA has in those parts. Please remember time and time again USA repeatedly say: ” we are not going to war with Russia”. But they are with everything else ( sanctions, propaganda, weapons, sabotage, training etc.), but it is war, in a different way.
At the start of this necessary purge, I was hoping like PCR for Russia to just destroy Ukraine, but then I never knew the real complexity of the deep ethnic connections that Russia has to the people there. Hence the waiting.
The war unleashed against Russia via sanctions and thieving their wealth is not working, and the “boomerang” effect will hit hard and very soon. Russia does not need to stop the oil, gas, minerals, wheat etc. right now; but it is coming. One can only look on at the complete chaos that is America and see it was always doomed to fall.
The Russians have withstood the worst thrown at them, and will take their time to take back the entire east Ukraine. Hopefully, they will bomb the living hell out of kviv and Lvov, but a landlocked Western Ukraine is for the west to fix. Well all of you can see how well they have fixed the middle east after destroying it. They only know to sell weapons and promote war.
China is waiting for you off they’re coast,and they don’t have to distinguish between the Hispanic, blacks, and the racist whites; it will be thousands of missiles greeting you. These two countries do not need anything from the west, but you keep on bullying, pestering, trying to enlist others, but they both warned you: ” you are playing with fire”.
Given your comments about flooding Europe with millions of Africans and Muslims….what makes you any less genocidal in your own special way? That’s a mighty large African-Muslim Gang Rape Army….you know….
Is anything that PCR says ever taken onboard by the Russian hierarchy? Nuff said.
Great article, though.
I don’t know. I think they probably read his columns because they must want to know what an American like him thinks and there are not many like him, and he has been a govt. official, successful author, etc. Someone like Peskov probably reads him or would. He lost readers with his opinions on Covid and this war. He lost me, I can say. I used to read his columns regularly. Actually, this issue of this post was what made me conclude that it was not worth the time to read him regularly. I had already been struck by his stupid views on a Covid-19 conspiracy to depopulate the world without even attempting an explanation of how Russia or China fit into that conspiracy. He never admitted that the Russian vaccine was better or at least very different from the mRNA vaccines, and he miserably lumped them all together to condemn all the vaccines together more easily. He had me on the edge with that, and then came what Mr. Orlov criticizes. I refused to be a “dumbshit.”
PCR seems to be in agreement with the Russian leadership that Russias battle in Ukraine was inevitable given the animosity of the west towards Russia
Where he differs with the Russian leadership seems to be over the timing of the battle
His view seems to be that Russia and the world would fared much better and the world would have paid a lower price had the Russian leadership acted earlier and didn’t wait this long granting the west all the needed time and resources to arm the Ukrainian anti Russian nationalist
Why does that sound out of place to the writer?
“…the timing of the battle”
The right timing for that battle could be debated endlessly. What is certain is that all had to be done to try to avoid that battle.
If the Kremlin leader had been like Roberts, the two proposals seeking to avoid a confrontation would not have been sent so as not to sidetrack the battle or delay it “needlessly.” There’s no understanding in that. The timing issue matters in the context of the two proposals. I commented before that when the two proposals arrived, they represented a “political cauldron” that was almost closed already, with the only one way out being to agree to the proposals with some amendments added. Besides for the fact that it would have made it a different world, the West should be wishing that it had been first in sending its own proposals early last year, in mid-year, or even before last year, because more negotiations are possible and better than not having them – but it’s a closed political cauldron now. The timing is very much an issue, right. (I wrote about negotiations in a comment on an article by Pepe Escobar: http://thesaker.is/the-total-war-to-cancel-russia/#comment-1065545)
There’s also the “Monday morning quarterbacking” issue: There is what must be done or attempted. Later, they may do what someone else says should have been done from the beginning. It does not make them wrong and the critic right.
Well, the launch of Russia’s Sarmat missile was preceded with an informed call to the relevant US authorities, so that the US is not under the mistaken belief that Sarmat is being fired at them. This test alone should be enough to give the West the message that PCR is referring to, but it is not going to target Ukraine but the decision centers of Ukraine’s current handlers.
Btw, I had no idea that the Baltics were Swedish territories purchased by Russia. Thanks for the history lesson. Yes, the Baltics too need denazifying.
I hope you don’t mind me making a comment out of complete ignorance, but that’s precisely my point if I may: I don’t know what to trust about what I am reading.
That said, I am repeatedly told by the people who lied to me for two years about the pandemic, that I should trust what they say now. Hence, why I value your site
Further, I spent a pleasant few years working on expatriate assignments in Moscow and St Petersburg with my family living and participating in everyday life, and while my memories may be fading with time, they remain reasonably accurate and I retain an affection for the average Russian citizen. Like people around the world, “ordinary” people are generally good people and do not mimic or reflect accurately the aspirations of either their governments or their country’ opposition.
Anyway, I have found your site a refreshing source of alternative explanations. While I’m just a cog in the global machine, it has been very helpful to for me and my family to hear another point of view. Thank you.
I came across the “Heavenly Jerusalem” project for the five South-east Oblasts of Ukraine, am I crazy or does that show some very, very odd proceedings?
„Or maybe he, like Bundeskanzler Olaf Scholz, grandson of Fritz von Scholz, SS lieutenant-general who supervised the slaughter of Jews in Poland and the Ukraine, thinks that genocide is a joke? „
Olaf Scholz IS NOT the Grandson of that SS-General. Very poor style and research, sorry.
Von Scholz is a name signaling nobility and was of Austrian descent.
Olaf Scholz is German and non noble
“‘Murica’ wiped out the ‘Indians’. Now they are wiping themselves out.”
Au contraire, mon frère. “Colonialism” wiped out the ‘Indians,’ just as “Colonialism” is now wiping out the Muricans. Whose “Colonialism?” you might ask.
The author misses the critical point which PCG got right.
PCG understnad how delusional the Western leaders are. Many of them trully believe they are on the path of “winning” over a “backwards” Russian despotate.
Anything that reinforces that notion – even things which are militarily/physically a win for Russia and a loss for the West – is dangerous as it increases the likelyhood of those “fearless” fools going for a first strike when the shock hits how screwed they were.
PCG addresses the (pato)psychology of the Western elites which he intimately knows and is VERY VERY scared of.
Well, I’m Swiss and don’t really speak English, but I still want to tell you what Roberts meant.
You’re reading a little too much into him.
But of course, Roberts is impatient, he gets tougher and more direct with age…… as you get older you have less to lose, you make fewer compromises. I see that in myself too. Not all get this mildness of old age.
Roberts says……that Russia is not respected because it has always acted reasonably.
My experience tells me that’s exactly how it is, it’s terrible, but true.
Russia is predictable, but the USA just doesn’t respect that, because they want to make Russia look ridiculous.
The predictable always has the 2 on his back when dealing with the unrestrained criminal.
If Russia were to show itself violently and brutally here, the knowledge would hit like a bomb that Russia is now a real opponent.
The street thug who hits everything and everyone often gets more respect than the nice, sensible boy next door, who deserves much more respect.
I hope that’s understandable.
Not stupid. Rare are the people who attack their own opinions to discard them or improve them. It’s like “contra naturam” to do it, “painful” depending on the person. All top thinkers do it! I’m not changing this last even though it seems like an exaggeration. Would they hit their prime in their early 20s? It’s a common mistake and more common among columnists than most other professions: The people read and are unforgiving of mistakes; they do not applaud them and may look down on you the more you recognize them. So, why smash one’s own opinions? You give an opinion. You marry your own opinion. Then it can’t be wrong. Then you go deeper into it. You fight for your opinions all the harder. It can be a path to madness, of course, no matter the occupation. Some get that far, thankfully not all or…You know what I mean?
The most terrible example I know of is Adolf Hitler. He wrote that if a man reaches the age of 25 and makes any major mistakes after that, it disqualifies him from leadership forever. He made sure that he never recognized or accepted a “major” mistake from himself – I think even before then. I looked for such a recognition in the last day – twenty-four hours – of his life, for any hint of it. He didn’t in his last night, though they say he didn’t sleep at all. He blamed his Generals for everything the following morning. He had gone crazy long ago. There ought to be a song: “Fathers, teach your children to be top thinkers” because the school won’t, neither will the university.
The proximate cause of the Ukraine operation was the expansion of NATO to Russia’s western border.
Continual US aggression towards Russia indicates that the US wanted this war. US policy is first to defeat Russia and then take on China.
The Ukraine operation is therefore actually a war between Russia and the United States, with the US using Europe as a battlefield, as in WW2, but this time the US may not escape unscathed, because of Russia’s long range offensive missile capability. Hitler lost out in 1945 because the German V2 rockets could not reach New York and Washington.
Years ago a man injured his thumb very badly and it became grossly infected before he could finally get to a doctor. The doctor informed him it would be necessary to cut off the thumb. He replied, “I want you to cut off the hand.” But, the doctor refused. A while afterwards, with the thumb removed, the hand became severely infected. The doctor then said, “The hand needs to be removed.” And the man replied, “No, I want you to remove the arm up to the elbow.” Later still, the arm became infected and the same type of conversation followed. The point is, eventually the patient died. The point of all this is that Russia should cut off the entirety of Ukraine before it eventually results in the destruction of Russia itself, even if much destruction has to take place.
It is sometimes really incomprehensible, that for many people such simple considerations as those, which the author presents at the beginning, are not accessible.
And P.C.R. has already attracted unpleasant attention with similar advice in the past.
What to say: He is just an American. He sits behind the “big pond” in somehow still supposed security.
What is it with Russians intellectuals as the Saker, Martyanov and Orlov all have a wicked sense of humor when analysing serious issues such as those confronting humanity today!? :D
Always a pleasure reading Dmitri’s articles and best wishes for The Pascha…
+ Christ Has Risen, Indeed He’s Risen!!! +
Come on, PCR is a friend – don’t be so harsh on him. Absolutely no need. The last thing the good guy need is to lose another friend in the West.
“There is no easily discernible difference between Russians and Ukrainians: same culture, language, religion and history. As a state, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic is a failed state; as a territory, it is part of Russia. Therefore, an all-out attack on the Ukraine would be essentially an attack on Russia itself. Apparently, Roberts feels that Russians should kill millions of other Russians in order to impress the West. That’s really cute, you know, in a genocidally maniacal sort of way, but completely impossible”.
I am not to doubt this description, coming from a Russian. However, from Western point of view even differences between Serbs and Croats are really not that huge. And try to unite them in same country….
I am trying to say that a lot of animosity against Russia was artificially installed in Ukrainian minds, in probably last 20 years or so. In wider context, Ukrainian identity had been strenghtened systematically by Poles and Austrians even before WW I. However, that is another argument to take it slow, without causing too much civilian suffering: only so will majority of Ukrainians in whatever political form they will live maybe rediscover their deep connection with “Russian world”.
“However, from Western point of view even differences between Serbs and Croats are really not that huge. And try to unite them in same country….“
Catholic and Orthodox, speaking the same language. Religion can be a terrible divider; in particular the split between Byzantine and Roman patriarchates, purely on the question of who is boss, as the theological issues were recognized by both sides to be non-existent.
“I am trying to say that a lot of animosity against Russia was artificially installed in Ukrainian minds, in probably last 20 years or so. In wider context, Ukrainian identity had been strenghtened systematically by Poles and Austrians even before WW I.”
It is not as simple as “Poles and Austrians”, indeed when they ruled Ruthenia they repressed ferociously ruthenian xenophobic nationalism. The roots of ruthenian xenophobic nationalism are much longer than that.
Just like Austria was a huge independent empire with its own culture even before Germany was unified, there was a Kingdom of Ruthenia even before Russia was a thing, then there was the lithuanian-polish-ruthenian empire that was for some centuries the biggest empire in Europe, and was destroyed by Catherine II in the 1790s, so relatively recently; and many poles and ruthenians (and even lithuanians) can’t get over that, anymore than Erdogan can get over the end of the ottoman empire. And the lithuanian-polish-ruthenian empire was largely catholic (even if it was founded by lithuanian pagans).
It is clear that Roberts think like US mil. Generals, Hollywood movie style, no regard for anything except killing and destroying, very shallow!!!🤠
whereas Orlov thinks like a Russian, with complex strategy that includes multiple aspects and facets. 👌
«It is clear that Roberts think like US mil. Generals, Hollywood movie style, no regard for anything except killing and destroying»
The relevant Hollywood movies are “LA confidential” and “The Godfather”. Many USA oligarchs are essentially racket mobsters, and USA generals and politicians are their minions (or “consigliere”s) and share that mindset.
“Russia’s failure to quickly destroy”
The creations of “The United States of America’s” illusions as to the purposes and modes of facilitating these purposes, framed in the “exceptionalism” of we-hold-these-truths-to-be-self-evidentness that we are the audience of significance, are the bases upon which Mr. Roberts seeks to rely.
Self-delusion by opponents facilitate opportunities for others, and this is enhanced by others limiting the datastreams which they broadcast – perceived by some as Russia’s defeat in the “information war” – , rendering the opponents’ subsequent “interpretations” mostly linear extrapolations upon their initial speculations, which increasingly diverge from reality, a developing chasm which they often seek to bridge by iteration of other linear extrapolations upon their intital speculations.
This is a form of constrained over-reach ; a linear process in attempted denial/frustration of a lateral process, known to some as Pinocchio’s nose routine.
As to your comments, some would not comment upon them to encourage Pinocchio’s nose routine, but would simultaneously acknowledge your co-operation in facilitating this ongoing lateral process by some, and linear process by the opponents.
Just for the record: I am no fan of Olaf Scholz, but his grandfather was a civil servant for the railways in Hamburg and not the Austrian citizen Fritz von Scholz.
PCR is correct. The west intends to destroy Russia and can only launch a real war if they can control the narrative (explanation). The narrative is not aimed at Russia and the rest of the world, but only at the American populace, who will support the idea of a just war against Russia if they are successfully convinced into believing in it.
“… like Bundeskanzler Olaf Scholz, grandson of Fritz von Scholz, SS lieutenant-general who supervised the slaughter of Jews in Poland and the Ukraine …”
Would be fantastic if you could offer any kind of evidence for this claim, except perhaps that it serves quite well as a teaser for your posting. Just asking because “they” already picked it up and try hard to debunk it as dangerous fake new. Thanks in advance.
I have a feeling that all 3 countries in the Baltics will get an SMO in time. Russia will have a longer Baltic sea border that way. Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians total population is 4.475million, the rest are Russians, and a few Poles. They can emigrate to Scandinavia, if they don’t want to live with/in Russia. Well?
PRC does not like genocide, he simply sees forward to a much worse war with many more people perishing, and thinks it could have been avoided by conquering Ukraine. I have no idea who is in the right and I certainly have no desire to see one more violent death. But to characterise PCR – even in the form of a question – as wishing for genocide is not fair.
Further animosity radiates from the statement that Europeans are racists for making room for Ukrainian refugees.
I agree with Dmitry’s outlook vis-a-vis Ukraine and I believe Russia’s mission as the aggressor, especially illuminated by how the conflict has progressed, has been vindicated of all its mendacious accusations.
Still he speaks total bollocks about Lithuania being Russian. It might be necessary to bloody the nose of NATO in some way but ‘taking Lithuania’ because some Tsar paid a chest of silver for it 300 years ago is literally retarded. Australia is not British land, neither is Marahashtra or Jamaica, which were both British clay in the timeframe he is speaking and belonged to other people and polities both prior and since. Lithuanians are linguistically, genetically, and religiously alien to Russia although culturally alike.
Today’s German state has considerably more of a right to Kaliningrad than Russia has to Lithuania.
So just relax a bit with the big boy Russia talk.
Other than that – very cogent piece.
t. Australian who resides in the Baltics
Your talking nonsense. Lithuania is Russian land, not Russkiy land. Just like Chechnya and Dagestan are Russian land but not necessarily Russkiy land.
All the railways are russian-gauge.in Lithuania, a large slice of the present borders of Lithuania, including the capital city and main part of the economy – came from Stalin ordering parts of Poland into Lithiania.
Much of the industry and infrastructure has a soviet and Russian legacy .
Because they don’t recognise that and bow down to Russia for this, then as Dmitry says, Russia are entitled to take Lithuania out.
That way Russia has conducted itself during this difficult period have left me utterly impressed.
The only thing I blame them for is being too naive to evil, and that is frankly a virtue.
Orlov again displaying his absolute genius
the only important question remaining to be answered is:
Biden = Andropov ?
Biden = Chernenko ?
My two cents worth: PCR has become very confused as to what is at stake in Ukraine. It is also extremely disheartening when the « moral blindness” is exhibited by a majority of commenters.
Dear Sir Dmitry Orlov, please ignore the intellectually challenged. Please do share any pearls of wisdom so that the ignorant might learn something before its too late
Excellent summary! Thank you very much.
Roberts is entirely correct. For those of us of the West, living in the West, seeking a regime change in our homelands, the Russian slo-mo military actions in the Ukraine makes our work much harder. Russian lollygagging had emboldened the liberal fascist ruler and makes the Russian military capability look weak and timid. I surely don’t care if pro-Russian observers don’t like this viewpoint. It’s not our business to care about or interfere in Russian business. Our business is our business to decide and act upon. And those fighting in the West will not take interference or direction from pro-Russians even where our interests co-incide.
Good article. But unnecessarily too harsh on PCR. He has been frustrated with Washington elite long and their crazy, stupid schemes drive him mad. But PCR ain’t nuts. His view is what would make Western leaders to cease and desist their constant provocation of a nuclear power, Russia.
He thinks demonstrations of force would help in that regard. I don’t think so too, but I do not think he means genocide of anyone. After all he is not a military man, but an economist. Finally, just remember he writes from ‘western perspective’ not Russian. And he has been proved right in that as Special Operation grinds on, US/West keep creating narratives, false flags, increased propaganda, increased delivery of weapons etc.
I suspect Roberts was after a quick defeat for the neocons in the eyes of the establishment.
So his concern might be just as much about the american internal politics and he is frustrated for not having seen the neocons get bruised.
I dont think he expected ‘millions of dead unikrainians’
He probably expected a quick capitulation and didnt calculate that there would be plenty of Us/Nato-led pockets of resistance all over the country forbidden by their foreign masters to stop fighting.
There has never been this type of conflict before.
I think PCR has a point as he also knows very well of the US thinking, and Russian leadership seems to understand it as apparent from the recent nuclear missile test. However, it will not be sufficient and as PCR and Orlov says a demonstration is of force will be needed. Otherwise nuclear war seems quite a possibility
Dear Mr. Orlov I agree with you. I highly respect Dr. Roberts and his thinking, in spite of his age. He knows a lot about the economy and politics, and he is a honest person. All this and especially the last are remarkable personal assets nowadays. Nevertheless, he is quite capable of falling in to stupid falsifications of the modern history sometimes, or, as we can see, to the rather brutal, ‘kill ’em all and return alone’ way of thinking. He cannot escape being a westerner, I think, that is all. The inflexibility of mind that comes with age does not help there, of course. My regards.
Best comment, CSA.
Anyway, he was always so. It is more likely that he is actually in his prime as a writer and a thinker, though he is a better writer than thinker in my opinion. I remember when he was invited to ask questions of a guest in a William F. Buckley Firing Line program. I don’t remember what he said exactly but there’s a transcript of it on the internet somewhere. He went after the person somehow. Buckley cut him off saying, “…not what Firing Line is about.”
Roberts may not be a military strategist or a tactician, but he does have insight into how western elites think. And a big part of elite thinking in the west is that Russia is on the verge of a defeat. This is especially true of our political class, if not of the military class.
It may be true that all the talk of Russian military incompetence is just propaganda, but a large portion of the policy making class believes this propaganda and may seek to expand the war by deploying NATO troops in western Ukraine or by trying to impose a “no-fly zone”, which means trying to shoot down Russian aircraft. This is why American media was filled with reports of how easy it would be to destroy Russian tank formations lined up in the streets of Ukraine with a NATO airtstrike.
I think Roberts’ big fear is that the policy-making class in the west will see Russia as weak or on the verge of defeat and rely on that judgment to get into a direct confrontation with Russia. As far as I can see Roberts is not genocidal in any way. His fears may be overblown, but he is informed by a deeper understanding of America and NATAO’s political elites and how they see the world.
“but he is informed by a deeper understanding of America and NATAO’s political elites and how they see the world.”
It makes no sense for him to worry about what the “dumbshit” (as he puts it) thinks and to base a foreign policy on what or how the dumbshit may feel or not!
They have asked Syria’s Assad the question and he always responds like a president ought to: That it is none of his business what happens in the U.S. and that he does not care how its president views him, that he bases his foreign policy on his country’s interests.
Dear Mr. Orlov, I may be wrong, but from what a superficial search in the net delivers, Scholz does not seem to be related to his SS-Colonel namesake. Do not take my word for that, though, but check yourself. My regards
«There is no easily discernible difference between Russians and Ukrainians: same culture, language, religion and history.»
Only if one think that “Ukraine” means the area around Dnipro, because (southern) Ruthenia is another slavic nation.
«I even found my family on the internet! I found my mother’s 88 year old sister which meant I could go back to Ukraine as an insider not just a tourist. I really saw both halves of the country that way; westward-looking Kiev which is Catholic and very different from the east, which is a lot closer to the Soviet Union. A lot of people speak Russian in the east so in Ukraine there are two very disparate cultures in one country.»
«The population welcomed us warmly, regardless of how hard it was for them to provide food to soldiers; they always found some nice treats — some villagers boiled chicken, others boiled potatoes and cut lard (soldiers dubbed this kind of catering ‘a grandmother’s ration’). However, such attitudes were common only in the Eastern Ukraine.
As soon as we entered the Western Ukraine, that had passed to the Soviet Union from Poland in 1940, the attitude of the population was quite different — people hid from us in their houses, as they disliked and feared the Muscovites and Kastaps [a disparaging name for Russians in Ukraine – translators comment]. Besides that, those places were Bandera areas, where the nationalistic movement was quite strong.»
The xenophobic fascist ruthenians want to screw all other communities, not just the russian one, such as hungarians, romanians, bulgarians, rusyns, greeks; especially as the tiny rusyn community think they are not ruthenians.
«Rusyns formed two ephemeral states after World War I: the Lemko-Rusyn Republic and Komancza Republic. Prior to this time, some of the founders of the Lemko-Rusyn Republic were sentenced to death or imprisoned in Talerhof by the prosecuting attorney Kost Levytsky (Ukrainian: Кость Леви́цький), future president of the West Ukrainian National Republic.»
«Now, every country besides Ukraine recognises Rusyns as a distinct people. […] Although almost all of us simply wish to be able to be who we are and our ancestors were, Ukraine still looks at us with suspicion, as if we were secret agents wishing to further destabilise the country. This is an irony that does not go unnoticed because of Ukraine’s current struggle with its own identity and wish to be acknowledged as different from Russia and Russians. Even I, a young twenty-something from the Great Plains of the Midwest, whose ancestors traveled here a century ago, still receive emails and messages questioning my validity on a daily basis, as if anyone who takes this cause seriously is a “Russian troll”. This absolute denial of Rusyn identity comes from a mix of Chauvinistic politics, modern-day propaganda and the wish to not further complicate the story of the Ukrainian state. How can no one see the hypocrisy in the way that we are treated?»
«As a state, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic is a failed state; as a territory, it is part of Russia»
The best thing about the ukrainian SSR was that like the USSR and today the Russian Federation it was a multi-national and multi-ethnic state in which the fascist xenophobic ruthenians could not oppress the rest of the malorussian, rusyn, hungarian, etc. population to create “Greater Ruthenia”. But the ruthen fascists won’t stop, with the dream/fantasy of re-creating the lithuanian-polish-ruthenian empire, or at least “Greater Ruthenia”, following the idea of Dontsov/Stsyborsky and Bandera/Shukhevych.
«Peter the Great purchased the Baltics from Sweden for 1000 pieces of silver at the Treaty of Nystad on September 10, 1721, so it’s Russian territory.»
The Russian Federation has recognized the independence of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea in 2014 and of the LPR and DPR in the Donbas this year, independence based on the principle of self-determination (as well as that of south Ossetia and Abkhazia).
I guess that self-determination is valid for Lithuania too.
Also the entire legality of the “special military operation” is based on LPR and DPR being independent states in a defensive alliance (U.N. article 51) with the RF since 2022-04-16, but attacked by the ukrainian government. So the principle of self-determination (U.N. article 1) is a pretty big deal for the RF.
Lithuania has forfeited his right to sovereignty under international law by oppressing its large Russian minority and denying it its rights.
“As a charter and constituent treaty, its rules and obligations are binding on all members and supersede those of other treaties.”
I.e. that is not a law, but a Treaty states can sign or unsign
The US knows full well that it cannot defeat both China and Russia economically or even militarily at the same time without the use of nuclear weapons, that would guarantee its own destruction.
However, one wonders who is really in control of US foreign policy.
The current Biden strategy is first to defeat Russia, and then take on China.
Roberts is right, Orlov is wrong, and no amount of ad hominem rambling from the latter changes that.
«Roberts is right, Orlov is wrong»
Both Roberts and Orlov regard the RF-Ukr. conflict as essentially a civil war; but Roberts, in the tradition of the USA civil war, thinks it should be conducted as brutally as necessary, Orlov thinks it should be conducted with restraint.
They are two view on how to win “hearts and minds”: one is through fear, the other through respect.
Then there is the fact of the Russian Federation’s inherent weakness and lack of resources, and the bad performance of the Russian Federation’s military in the chechen and south-ossetian operations, which has taken many years to remove. But V. Putin is a patient person, perhaps sometimes too patient, especially with the oligarchs, but then the RF state power is not that great.
I think both sides are under a misapprehension of some kind; Roberts thinks that the nuclear war is preventable. I don’t think it is, because the clique in America that holds literally ALL the power sees such a war as a necessary part of re-arranging the world so that America can have its collapse and emerge as the dominant force decades later. Whatever Russia does or doesn’t do, the outcome will be the same, because it isn’t about how weak they think you are, it’s about what they actually want to do. What they want to do is degrade all possible competition to a position worse than their own for at least the duration of their collapse and presumed recovery.
Orlov, on the other hand, is working under a misapprehension that the amount of killing that would in present circumstances be called genocide matters in the large scale of things. I don’t think it does; even the most strong-armed approach by Russia would probably only increase the speed of killing, not change the ultimate outcome, if Mariupol is any indication, and I believe it is. Basically, with more troops and bombs you end up with the same level of destruction in the timeframe of days instead of weeks, which might actually reduce the time civilians spend in basements starving or risking their lives looking for food and water. Also, he is thinking emotionally and not strategically, and that’s good if you’re taking care of individual people, but it’s not good if you’re trying to come up with some kind of a stable and livable scenario. For instance, let’s say Russia spares the West Ukraine. There’s no bombing, no civilians killed there. It leaves them in a better position to attack Russia later, and they have no personal experience that would advise them against this course. This results in postponed bloodshed, where Russia still has to run them over, but likely more people die, and, more importantly, more Russians die, because I don’t really care that much about the Banderites, considering how they are likely the worst people in the world.
So, the real question isn’t genocide or not. There’s going to be genocide regardless. The Ukrops are going to kill all Russian speaking Ukrainians after this. Unless they are killed, they will make a hell on Earth. Deaths and suffering are inevitable, it’s just a matter of who dies, in what way and order, and how quickly. Also, having in mind that the nuclear war is inevitable, leaving a country full of vile indoctrinated Russia-haters at your doorstep, leaving it intact and with no worry other than how to harm you more when you’re down, is a very bad idea. I agree with Roberts that Ukraine would be best completely wiped out; it would be perfectly unwise to leave them sufficiently intact and able to form a threat in the quite probable near future.
My reading of PCR is: If you want to have the respect of the (insane) Americans… Be ruthless in the war (it hurts whoever it hurts). If you want to be belittled…make a “good” war, lighter, taking into account people and their history, etc. There is logic to this. A long war will wear out and weaken Russia. USA bet on it. I sincerely hope that Russia resists and wins, if that is possible. In my view, the war only ends when the US falls. Until then, it’s a permanent state of war.
Roberts writes about “what would impress the West” ( more specifically the US )
Humanism never entered the US domain.
Low civil impact warfare is a concept completely foreign to the US mindset.
They think in “shock and awe” and
the level that would achieve “being impressed” is gigantic.
All those Hollywood Movies have numbed their minds.
Both views are right although I must admit that I tend to prefer PCRs opinion. The fact is that much of what has gone awry in the SMO has shaken many peoples belief in the Russian politician and army.
For example “Denazification” shows that Russia did not do themselves a favour with this slogan.
Azov members are terrorists of a terrorist organisation.
UAF are terrorists of a terrorist organisation.
UA government are terrorist of a terrorist organisation.
Elensky is a terrorist and head of a terrorist organisation.
Thats why The slogan should be: Anti-Terror-Operation
It is in the nature of terrorists taking civilian hostages
If terrorists know that they can get away with taking hostages every operation is all for nothing.
In an Anti Terror Operation against Azov u must destroy the terrorists and u must expect colleteral damages among civilians.
Imagine Russian forces in the Anti Terror operation in Beslan would have approached in a spirit of Ukraine SMO?
The blood price is high but the message to all Ukraine terrorists would be clear.
Under this circumstances the civilians will be more motivated to fight against their ukraine terrorist only not to come in a hostages situation.
I tend to believe that too. A war on “nice” terms will not improve Russia’s image in the West. There is no way for Russia to win the communication war. Russians are mean, period. That said, it’s fighting a steady war (it’s the price to pay) and ending it as soon as possible. Nazis are bad people. Tolerance must be practiced, but once the enemy is identified and he shows no signs of changing… it is treated as an enemy (and without mercy). I hate to say this…but sometimes the righteous pay for sinners (Nazis).
WTF are you on about ?Seriously?
The Russian military is doing a superb job. A very successful job at pulverising the ukronazis. They have gained significant territory, killed a LOT of Ukronazi’s and experienced unfortunate but still SMALL losses.
All this with a force that western analysts were saying was too small for an invasion like this. What have Ukraine and NATO been preparing many years and resources for? A land bridge to Crimea.
What has been achieved already? A land bridge to Crimea
Ukraine and the EU are just the US armed wing. This one is the real enemy. Hardly the thing will end as long as they remain untouched. I don’t see any common sense on their part. Soon, it’s war and more wars…it won’t stop….will it culminate in the WTF? That’s what we’ll see (not what I want)…
superb job? It is a way of looking at the russian military performance but the other way is Fernandes. I think the comment of Fernandes is not unreasonable and examines the development of SMO from different perspective
On No 6, Russia had already, before the Ukraine SMO, demanded that the two Aegis Ashore NATO ABM Systems in Romania and Poland be dismantled and removed since they pose an offensive threat to Russia, never mind the unbelievable claim that they exist ‘to protect Europe from an Iranian attack’🙄😅 Yeah right!
Putin told NATO the Systems can become offensive weapons with just a few keystrokes of a computer done in less than 5 minutes. The offensive missiles would take just 7 minutes to reach Moscow.
These Systems will for sure be key targets of a Russian Zircon or Kinzhal hypersonic missile attack immediately after the ongoing Ukraine operation ends, the Systems are under the direct command and control of the Pentagon, and are manned by US Officers.
Russia will attack and destroy those Systems, effectively calling NATO’s bluff to retaliate. My bet is that NATO won’t dare due to the great risk of massive escalation, leading to war BOTH in Europe and the US mainland, something the US has never experienced. Problem for NATO too is that they simply don’t have the war inventory available to go to war with Russia, but Russia does.
This NATO inaction will be interpreted as unreliability and toothlessness in Europe, so expect to see some of those Nations walking out and cutting their own deals with Russia. NATO will consequently collapse. Many in the global South will no longer fear the US anymore either.
There is something still missed here.
The problem is not what PCR says about his administration, the problem is that he tells Russia what to do.
It gets too close to concepts such as ‘the white man’s burden’ and ‘manifest destiny’.
That’s true, amarynth…I think it’s more a matter of editing a comment than not noticing he does that. In boxing terms, he gets KOed for doing that. Yeah, we don’t speak Russian and do not have the clarity of view regarding the Russian people in Russia and/or Ukrainians in Ukraine like a Vladimir Putin naturally has, and on top of that has big staffs that are getting him the info. I don’t mind him going after Putin (he respects Putin too) but, as they say in boxing, keep your hands raised, move in slowly, realize he is stronger and even a better boxer, keep the right distance, look for a clear opening – or you’re going to get KOed!
I am sad to detect such disrespect towards Mr. Roberts.
His point has been, for a long time now, that treating the empire of lies as ‘partners’ is counterproductive to Russia’s wellbeing. He understands that RF’ s enemy only knows doubling down and will only be put back in its place with a strong hand.
Though I think the RF has indeed told the empire to ‘ stop’ its course of action.
Having a different opinion should not elicit your attitude towards him.
PCR has always been saying putin is not doing enough, he is not understanding the viciousness of the west.. he is kind of 6th column so the question would be: why should he have gotten any credit at any point of time ?
Thank you. I always appreciate your calm, straight forward, no-nonsense delivery of facts to those who still choose to have a working brain.
Please don’t encourage further misuse of the term “liberal” (pertaining to or suitable for free men).
I would prefer, if Russia must take over a NATO member, it be Estonia. Mostly because I’m an Estonian (alumnus of East High School), but they’ve also acted up lately.
I realize Orlov is an important Russian columnist. But really – does anyone believe that an attack on Lithuania would be in Russia’s interest? Or that it might cause NATO to pull back from Russia’s borders? And what about his call to war against Finland, a at this point in time neutral country?
Here’s what Orlov wrote:
“Finally, there is what Russia has to do beyond taking care of the situation in the (former) Ukraine, and that is to dismantle NATO. This will require some sort of small demonstration project: take over some small, insignificant NATO member and watch all the other NATO members run away instead of going to war against Russia over it. The myth of NATO as a defensive (as opposed to an offensive) organization would be dispelled and NATO would be no more. The demonstration country could be Lithuania, for instance…. Unlike the Ukraine, which is huge, Lithuania is tiny and the entire campaign would be over in about a week. But if Finland or Sweden would like to volunteer for the role of exemplary victim by attempting to join NATO, that would be fine too. Finland’s security is guaranteed by its commitment to neutrality, based on which Russia (USSR at the time) removed its military base from Finnish soil. If Finland moves to renege on that treaty, it would forfeit its security.”
If anything, I believe such moves would immediately result in a kinetic war with the West, up to and including nuclear weapons. Orlov might have been more succinct if he had written, “let’s drop a nuclear bomb on DC and that will cause the dismantling of NATO.”
Russia is approaching the Ukranian conflict in a measured and logical way. It’s logic has been summarized as a fight against armies and not land occupation or destruction of cities. For some, including Paul Craig Roberts, this methodical measured approach is bringing the world closer to nuclear conflict. I disagree completely. But, Orlov’s advocacy of an attack on Lithuania or Finland would bring the world closer to nuclear conflict. If the goal is for Russia and NATO to coexist, both Robert’s and Orlov’s positions are illogical.
A better approach is, after Russia reduces Ukraine to a de-miltarized and de-Nazified state and removes all NATO remnants from the soil of Ukraine, Russia should stage its missiles near the west Ukrainian-NATO border and say that these advanced weapons systems will remain there until the THAAD complexes in Poland and Romania are removed. That provides an incentive for the West to consider Russia’s proposals to demilitarize Eastern Europe in exchange for demilitarizing that part of Ukraine near Nato’s eastern front. Please note that under no circumstances would I advocate that Russia pull back from its control of the entire “Ukraine” Black Sea coast and whatever territory beyond the Donbass that declares its independence from Ukraine and wants to align with Russia.
It depends on Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia because, from a security standpoint, what is the difference between Ukraine and these Baltic states that are also bordering Russia? Culturally and ethnically, the Baltic states are closer to Russia than Chechnya is. All three Baltic states and Finland use demeaning language against Russia! By contrast, the language of Russia speaks of peace and commercial relations with them.
«Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia because, from a security standpoint, what is the difference between Ukraine and these Baltic states that are also bordering Russia?»
The three statelets have small militaries with small budgets (they are poor because of blind faith in extreme neoliberalism) and are too small to mount any serious offensive from. Ukraine has a lot more people and a lot more space and depth.
From a military standpoint, they are NATO countries. Largely, diplomacy exists because of the national honor of countries. The “three statelets” use derogatory terms regarding Russia in public statements (put their name next to ‘Russia’ in google). I think they should be careful, as little countries, not to offend the national honor of Russia. It’s a step towards war to do that. Russia does not offend them.
Success is the only justification for intent. Should Russia succeed in its humane methods it will have proven its superior methodology. However, if the West should determine that the humane methods reveal a fundamental weakness, Roberts’ methodology may be proven superior. It seems to me that the West has taken an absolutist position that Russia must be destroyed. If a nuclear false flag in Ukraine is necessary then that is what it will do. If biological weapons are necessary, then that is what it will do. You don’t think the biological weapons facilities are pure research, do you? Although the humane methodology among neighbors is the morally superior methodology, it yet remains to be seen if it is also an ultimately successful methodology.
“Does Paul Craig Roberts like Genocide?” is a pretty aggressive title and personal attack. I have no idea, if he has even read Dmity Orlov’s article (which I largely agreed with), but this is what PCR recently wrote on the subject of genocide, which I also largely agree with, as did a small minority (usually classed as conspiracy theorists) ,who don’t trust our governments and media to tell the truth about almost anything since 9/11.
Both these Gentlemen are highly intelligent, and should have mutual respect (which they probably have)
I concur.The title appears to be an accusation,prosecution and verdict all wrapped in one short statement.An education to PCR and PCR-minded or something similar would have been appropriate.Remember millions if not billions of people thought or expected it to go as per PCR’s take.Why,because that’s what they have experienced virtually or physically since the end of WWII.Recall Iraq(road to Basra,Mosul),Afghanistan(Trump’s badass bomb),syria’s Raqqa and Libya(Gaddafi in a culvert).Mr Orlov,you are educating lots of people ,do it humbly, the class is big and diverse.
Mr. Orlov’s diatribe is more emotion than argument and in some ways more over the top than anything PCR writes. The title framed as a question is the first shot: “Does Paul Craig Roberts like Genocide?” Then he proceeds to claim that the answer must be “Yes.”
In the first paragraph he claims all Scholzes — Jew killers, he reminds us — are related (…) and PCR must be like them and approve of genocide… Then he says that upon reading PCR’s essay (“The Kremlin Has Missed the Opportunity to End the Provocations of Russia that Are Bringing the World to Nuclear War”) it made him angry “but only for a moment.” Not so. In fact he gets angrier with each line. Trying to be “kind and polite” he declares PCR a senile old coot, like Biden, and stupid. So, PCR’s “ scribbling,” he says is “unsolicited advice” to the Kremlin. Isn’t this true of anybody’s scribblings, here or anywhere?
What provoked Mr Orlov most, it seems, is PCR’s opinion that “If Russia had hit Ukraine with a devastating conventional all-inclusive attack, the war would have ended before it started,” and, “the failure of Russia to impress the West with an overwhelming exercise of military force in Ukraine means another step has been taken toward nuclear armageddon.”
1. Would a devastating conventional all-inclusive attack have ended the war sooner? It is a fair question when one watches life in Kiev going on without restrictions, Euro-puppets coming in to meet with the penis piano player whenever they choose to, weapons still coming in, and plans made to add two more NATO threats to Russia: Finland and Sweden.
It is understandable that the “West” watching for two months the so-called Phase One, or when a village in Russia (!) was attacked and the response was something like “ don’t do it again or else,” whereupon they did twice more, concluded that Russia is somehow “weak” despite its known awesome military power, and so they increased their threats and hostile acts.
Mr Orlov does not address that question. He seems to think that such an approach is out of question because the Ukrainians are… Russian too, so to kill them would be tantamount to genocide…
With the exception of the mostly Russian people in the Donbas and in the south, the rest of the Ukrainian citizens do not show any signs that they share this loving identification with the Russians. They were not shy at all in showing their feelings for their Donbas “brothers” for eight years before the SMO, killing some 14,000 of their “brothers.” No protests in Ukraine all those years that their government was killing their brothers.
History is rife with fratricidal wars in which one side no longer identifies with the other and hates it to death. It’s the stuff civil wars are made of, whose winners are never the scrupulous humanitarians. Tragic but true.
2. PCR’s opinion that this perception of Russia may lead the “West” to take another step toward nuclear armageddon is based on observation and experience. He may not know or understand Russia but he knows the West well. One may disagree with him but ad hominem attacks on the person whose opinion you dislike do not serve. Example of malicious twisting with a sneer of what PCR says: “Roberts feels that Russians should kill millions of other Russians in order to impress the West. That’s really cute, you know, in a genocidally maniacal sort of way.”
Mr Orlov also says: “There is a rather large group of Ukrainians who wanted the Ukraine to be part of Europe, not part of Russia. These are now departing Ukrainian territory, mostly to Poland, and that, from the Russian point of view, is a wonderful thing because the Ukraine isn’t Europe, it is Russia.”
Russia belongs to ‘Europe’ inspirit and culture more than most European countries do now, as Mr Martyanov so perceptively noted recently. The lost, betrayed and reneged values of what once represented the best of European culture have been revived and are present now in the RF, not in Europe. Europe is banning Chaikovsky and Rachmaninov…As someone (Zakharova?) ironically asked: will they ban Mendeleev’n tables soon?
For my money, the Ukrainian territory (minus the chunks that belong to Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, etc) belongs to Russia for known historical reasons. Those who consider themselves Ukrainians because they speak a dialect and are Catholics can live as a minority in the RF as peacefully and as protected as any other minority. They can translate Gogol and Sevchenko from Russian into the Ukrainian dialect —if they haven’t yet don’t so— and have their culture… Not all communities have their own states, or should, despite the sad example of Moldova.
My impression (not “unsolicited advice to Kremlin”) is that most Ukrainians do not want to ‘depart’ to Europe, but they want Europe —in the nasty representation of the EU and even NATO— to come to them. This delusion, mixed with undying hatred for Russia, nurtured for a long time and amply fed by brain washing, makes it vitally necessary that in whatever configuration Ukraine will continue it must be not only ‘denazified’ and demilitarized but closely controlled.
Mr Orlov also thinks that “the message that the EU and NATO are essentially white supremacist organizations sinks in around the world, more and more countries will shift from neutral to supportive without Russia having to lift a finger to convince them.”
That strikes me as very naive and uninformed about the West. The elites controlling EU and NATO are not “white supremacists” at all. They are as “white” as Coudenhove-Kalergi was in spirit, ethnically not white in their majority, cosmopolitan, self-imagined demigods with no loyalty to any place and any nation or even race. Like the “formerly Russian” oligarchs living abroad, led by Abramovic, who asked Forbes magazine to stop referring to them as “Russian oligarchs” because the word ‘Russian’ fills them with disgust. The same elite labels all dissent of the white working class as “white supremacism.”
Countries will not start being supportive of Russia because they would perceive Russia as fighting against “white supremacism.” If “countries” are the people living in them they have no say anyhow: their corrupt governments are guided by the carrot and stick of international finance and threats of “ regime change. Even if people had a say, it would not be the bugaboo of “white supremacism” that would convince them. They feel much more threatened by the anti-white, anti-Christian, anti-working class tendency of the elites ruling them.
I do not always agree with PCR. Even when his questions were completely legitimate (like the one that made Mr Orlov explode with ire) I would say to myself: there is no way for me to know why Russia does this or that or does not do this or that; all I can do is trust that Pres. Putin knows best.
I still hope that is the case but I don’t feel like throwing stones at the ones who ask questions if I sense that the person is, as PCR I am sure is, a friend of Russia. His heart is in the right place, no matter how wrong his view is on one issue or another. He doesn’t want Russia to solve the problems of the US. It is a lot more serious: he wants Russia to solve the problems of the whole world.
He felt that Russia—specifically under Pres Putin– was humanity’s only and last hope and his panic that this salvation may not come to pass explains his tone.
In hope Mr Orlov “moment” of anger passes soon.
Extraordinary deep psychological cutting analysis of Dmitry Orlov, who I have followed for many years, and never particularly had a problem with. His intelligence and analysis of an extremely wide range of topics, and his ability to write really well, with subtle humour, is only matched by his enormous self confidence, and extreme arrogance. I actually don’t mind that. It’s a trait common in many musicians, who actually believe they are “God’s Gift”, when performing in front of an audience, regardless of its size.
Many years ago, he instantly dismissed me, and banned me as an idiot, from his blog, when I tried to present the detailed scientific evidence to him, that oil was not a fossil fuel. If anyone, should be able to understand the physics of it, it should be him, judging by his training and background, but this conflicted with his then, and ongoing doomster Malthusian agenda, closely related to what was then an initially very convincing website dieoff, which I think closed down shortly after its main contributor Jay Hanson died.
This website is still going, and far more interesting, if you have any understanding of physics.
“The articles on this site have been put here to accommodate the many requests for reprints and further information, received during the past few years following the publication in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S.A. of an article formally enunciating the modern Russian-Ukrainian theory of deep, abiotic petroleum origins and demonstrating the high-pressure genesis of petroleum. Therefore, although the articles on these pages have been contributed by more than a dozen authors, the majority have been written or coauthored by Dr. J. F. Kenney, of both the Russian Academy of Sciences and Gas Resources Corporation. It deserves to be recognized that all of the contributors to these articles that deal with petroleum science and petroleum operations are all highly competent oil and gas men and women. All have extensive experience in discovering and producing petroleum.
In the pages containing articles connected with petroleum economics, there are several papers by Professor Michael C. Lynch of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology which address directly the myth of “oil exhaustion.”
Dmitry Orlov, wouldn’t even look at it.
That didn’t stop me liking him and admiring his talent and intellect, and I wish him and his family – now moved back from the USA to Russia, so far as I know. Probably the best decision he has made.
“PCR’s opinion that ‘If Russia had hit Ukraine with a devastating conventional all-inclusive attack, the war would have ended before it started,’”
I read him say that it could have lasted 48 hours – but he then said like immediately? PCR’s military strategy is too optimistic and not thorough enough in comparison with mine. I would have discarded PCR’s strategy. Had Russia gone all in, the Ukrainians would not have wanted to stand in open places to be wiped out in a day or two. It would have provoked them into a full guerrilla type war reaction, which would have made the war last longer…
After graduation from college in early 1960s at the height of the Cold War, PCR received a Fellowship to tour and study in the Soviet Union, wherein his perception of Russia was greatly changed and he came to hold the Russian people in the highest regard! That tour of study would also change the course of his life and how he viewed economies!
Thank you, ariadna, for your superbly written and sensible comment on Mr. Orlov’s “diatribe” against Dr. Roberts. IMO, if they were awarding Nobel Prizes for comments, you’d deserve one.
It is sad that Mr. Orlov uses his considerable writing skills to diss and insult a well-respected American who has been a friend of Russia for a long time. Any look at MSM would show that Russia needs all the friends she can get. Dismissing Dr. Roberts because of his opinions and because he is “too old” or “senile” is beyond pathetic, …and very arrogant.
And extra bonus points, Ariadna, for mentioning the evil “Count” Koudenhove-Kalergi. His insane plan for much of Europe is coming along very nicely, as we can see in case of the French elections, German politics, EU, etc., etc. Even the formerly United States have signed on to the Coudenhove-Kalergy Plan, and so did Canada.
The evil “Count’s” ideas seem to age better than those of the formerly venerable Sigmund Freud and other luminaries.🤯
Excellent comment Ariadna.
“There is no easily discernible difference between Russians and Ukrainians: same culture, language, religion and history. As a state, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic is a failed state; as a territory, it is part of Russia.”
Ahh no. I lived in the heart of the Ukrainian diaspora in Toronto for 30 years. My current domestic arrangement is with a 50/50 Russian/Ukrainian who disavows her Ukrainian heritage because of the current regime’s Bandera overtones. Her grandfather was the Administrative Director of the Sumy oblast and they had to flee east on foot when the Nazis came through. He didn’t make it.
Ukrainians and Russians have a shared geography and history for obvious reasons, but they are as different as British and Scots (my combined DNA), mostly for the very same reasons. The British have dominated the Scots almost all of the time and are resented for it. Ditto for the Ukrainian attitude to Russians, which will now not change for at least another 5 generations.
Western Ukraine has little Russian influence. Splitting the country is still the only sensible solution. It is unfortunate that larger geopolitical interests have prevented that from happening peacefully.
Apparently, Orlov had in mind inhabitants of Ukraine who consider themselves Russian or are at least Russian speaking (as first and preferred language). Where does Toronto diaspora mostly come from?
Geez. It looks like the soft answer does not enter into anyone’s consciousness.
It is high time that somebody brings PCR to the dock for his irresponsible statements. And this is what Orlov did.
War PCR way would cause genocide. That is why Russia is not doing it.
I am amazed that same people still try and question how the Russians are fighting this SMO.
Listen to Scott Ritter – you don’t have to listen to the whole thing and I have not listened to the whole thing. But these first few sentences from Ritter would probably convince you that you know nothing yet about this SMO, and neither does PCR. So, it is high time he holds his peace because he is irresponsible in his very tiring demands to Putin and Russia. Its been too long and Zone B is sick of it. And we don’t care a damn to look ‘strong’ in front of the US smegma. (Dear God, I did not know I knew that word! Let alone apply it!)
“So, it is high time he holds his peace because he is irresponsible in his very tiring demands to Putin and Russia”
Everyone who does so is irresponsible moderated by purpose, but the reaction of Mr. Putin and other practitioners is not tiredness, since they as practitioners understand that the main utility of blogs is in increasing noise/signal ratios, encouraged further by paying/subsidising the pleasure of doing so, whilst creating a datastream of what is deemed to be the plausible belief of the day.
In this they emulate “the jaw dropping power of US propaganda” and act as amplifiers of such “power” whether by default or design, and hence the re-enforcement of the opponents immersion in linear perception, which they believe are reality, since they are being emulated.
Mr. Ritter has been and remains to some degree a practitioner, and hence generally remains within practitioner’s methods in respect of content validation and acceptable level of veracity, framing, register to a lesser degree given the broadcast is in the public domain, and research, whilst embracing almost at all times the caution of doubt.
MrBumble, I would appreciate if you don’t even respond to me. In my view, you talk word salad. It may be sensical to you, but in my view it is circles within circles and emulations within emulations. In other words, complete BS – but mileage may vary for others. Just for me, don’t respond to me.
Thank you Amarynth, Bravo! I know that Mother Russia will not do a genocide war on Ukraine since they are our brothers and sisters who have been unfortunately ensnared by satanists in their government and by foreign governments
PCR lost it a long time ago. His Chicken Little act is getting worn out.With him the sky is always falling if you don’t follow his suggestions. I only read him occasionally for laughs.
Mr. Orlov, I have followed your writing for years, but today you are being foolish. You are allowing your own bias to cloud your vision. Mr. Roberts has more experience in, and knowledge of, the halls of power in Washington than just about anyone in alternative media. While your experience is what again?
You may know more about Ukraine or Russia than Mr. Roberts will ever know, but his comment is not about how Russians view Ukrainians, it is about how US leadership will react to Russian actions. On this topic he does possess expertise. He is spot on in his comments.
The Russian response may be attempting to limit casualties, but it does little to deter US leadership from their present course. In fact, as Roberts says, it is encouraging the US in the he belief that they can tie Russia down with a protracted proxy war.
I agree with Roberts. In fact I would go further and say that the Russians should have recognized that this conflict is with anglozionist power. They should have obliterated the US Aegis Ashore sites in Poland and Romania at the outset and let it be known that article 5 will not stop Russian weapons. This would have presented a choice between total war and peace.
Such action would have eliminated any possibility of a proxy war. A war in which Russians kill Russians and NATO cheers them on while selling weapons. It would have defeated the war plan of the west immediately. It is true that had the Russians violated article 5, NATO may have chosen war…but they already chosen war. The only question is what kind of war. Is it to be a proxy war in which the death and devastation is primarily limited to Russia/Ukraine? Or is it to be a war where all participants share the pain?
Russia has allowed NATO to set the ground rules for a proxy war… This is a tragic error IMHO.
I agree. Mr. Orlov overreacts on PCR opinion piece. There are quite number of us (armchair analysts/generals) who wish Russia well but were/are of the opinion that Russia should conclude its operation asap. That can only be if Russia deploy its deadly military power in quantity and quality. Yes, likelihood of increased civilian casualties will happen but war will be quicker and brutal. This, in PCR thinking, would deter Uncle Sam and his Minions from provocations which may lead to a more deadly war and millions dead. It does not mean PCR is right, but his opinion was/is shared by quite a number of people including some Russians. That does not mean we wish genocide or mass deaths of Ukrainians and Russians; far from it.
At the end of it all, we also understand that Putin and his General Staff have their plans and reasons for what they are doing. After all, they have more information than mere internet bloggers. Besides they MUST have factored US/Nato schemes as well. But on our end, the sooner the SMO ends in Russian complete victory the better chances of avoiding a war of annihilation.
Orlov gives quite good reasons on why SMO should proceed in its slo-mo fashion. They are all valid and sensible. Maybe they are the exact ones Putin has. Putin himself has on several occasions publicly said ‘preserving civilian lives is paramount.’
You make excellent points but may I point out that advocacy of firmer and timelier Russian action is not necessarily a choice between “All or none”. It is perhaps not necessary for “Russia (to) deploy its deadly military power in quantity and quality”. All that is necessary is for strong and demonstrative actions in time. For example, China shot down a US war plane way back around 2002 when it was much weaker than it is now just to deliver the message that China can and will act. The message was heard and understood in Washington and such provocations ceased. World opinion did not condemn China for an act of violence because it was not an act of violence but a sensible, strong, and necessary act of self-defense and seen to be such by world opinion. Contrast that with the British naval destroyer intruding into Russian waters last year. Sometimes, alas, it is necessary to kill the chicken to scare the monkey, such is our irrational world of international politics. The choices are rarely black and white but shades of grey, and the successful player will pick just the right shade of grey – not too dark, not too white.
Dr. PCR has been calling for picking a better shade of grey, by no stretch issuing calls for war and genocide. He has also been calling for Russia to be clearer and more forceful in its messaging to the West. When someone points a gun at your head you don’t say “C’mon friend, my partner, please don’t do that”. If you do continue with such silly politeness you will only be increasing the chances of the trigger being pulled.
World peace and stability, at least in our times, makes it the duty of all major states to draw reasonable and fair red lines, to announce them loud and clear so that most of the world’s people understand them, and then to enforce compliance swiftly and forcefully. Of course, in a better world the major states will also ensure that the rightful interests and sovereignty of smaller countries are equally recognized and respected. I find Dr. P C Roberts position to be mostly in line with these moral and realpolitik principles.
Brilliant take down. But what if the Ben Rhodes of the neocon cabal have convinced themselves that a bit of low-yield nuke false flaggery would be a good thing now? Do they believe they can win in a localized tactical nuke attack?
Calm down everyone. Prof. Mearsheimer (sp?) has correctly noted that what mattered on 2.22.22 was Putin’s / Russia’s perception of an existential threat, and that the West’s view was irrelevant, as far as the need to invade Ukraine was concerned. Similarly, PCR is pointing out that the Russia should not lose sight of how the West perceives the relative strength of the US and Russia (like NATO lost sight of how its provocations would be viewed by Russia). I don’t agree that a “shock and awe” campaign was needed in Ukraine, but I get his point that it might be the only thing the West understands. I don’t think PCR was advocating genocide by any stretch, but the point made by this article is also well taken.
The amount of disinformation in western corporate(MSM) media, as outright propaganda really, is stunning my delicate senses. I can no longer watch the “news” on TV without losing my mind. I subscribe to Dmitry’s blog, now with rubles, because I don’t trust monopolies that wantonly corrupt the narrative with ridiculous propaganda, as paymasters. It’s here at The Saker, RT, Dimitry, and a few other odd indie sources I use to know about Ukraine. Thanx for all the good work. Peace, The Ol’ Hippy
A good article and I understand the point being made very well; that said, I am sympathetic to PCR having followed his articles for years. I don’t think he wished for a “genocide” at all, he just didn’t think it through completely.
Many of us who understand the larger picture, the obscenity of not just the attack on the Donbass for 8 years but the MSM total news blackout on that (and now many people we respected for decades, musicians in particular like Pink Floyd et.al. jumping on the “poor Ukraine!” bandwagon)… we understand the larger history and we WERE disappointed that the Russian army and the Donbass republics were not able to end this more quickly.
And this is what PCR was feeling I am quite sure–disappointment and the fact that NATOstan with it’s controlled media, was encouraged by this. The last thing any of us want to see is these people feeling encouraged to continue the war they started.
But it is clear the Russians under Putin are pursuing their own plan, one that preserves lives and attains the same end. Thanks for the fine article Dimitry.
“confused old man who has missed the opportunity to hang up and fade away” :))))))))))))))
Noam Chomsky comes to mind…
Who is Brendan btw?
There are certain universal values for which humankind must strive so that the human family survives. These values include the dignity of every person, which includes social and economic justice, world peace, which includes end to wars, and the protection of the environment, which means international agreements to reverse the global environmental degradation.
Wider understanding of how international relations affect universal values will help humankind survive. Since national interests and national values conflict with universal values, historical understanding of international relation may provide a bridge where universal values and national values are one and the same for all nations.
To bridge the gap between national self-interest and universal values, nations must sacrifice some aspects of self-determination so that through international relations universal values are achieved. Understanding the role of international organizations, such as the League of Nations, United Nations, International Monetary Fund, World Bank, NATO, Warsaw Pact, and many other such organizations is necessary for achieving the objective where universal values are respected.
These organizations were created in self-interest and have become the real threat to democracy. They manipulate the resolutions for personal benefits, as NATO did with Yugoslavia and now, similarly, is doing with Ukraine. As someone said, nations don’t have friends, they have interest, and that is the problem. America’s national interests to assert its power required five billion expenditures to destabilize Ukraine and threaten Russia.
There are endless examples which demonstrate that American wars can keep several million casualties on the other side of the ocean, and then they put over on us that this was done for humanitarian reasons, when in fact it was an act of philanthropy. Anyone questioning this narrative is silences and marginalized, jailed or exiled as airheads read on national media how we are in favor of freedom of speech, but don’t understand that freedom of speech means you are in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.
International relations between nations take many forms, including multilateral, bilateral, unilateral, and regional agreements. The United Nation is an example of bilateral relations, but unfortunately its decisions are unilateral, dominated by American corporations who buy and sell regulation like Norway awards Nobel Peace Prizes.
Understanding of the structure and purpose of this organization can provide its members with the ability to achieve desired universal values only when every nation is held to the same principles and standards.
Achieving desired universal values through multilateral international relations can only succeed through understanding of how national interests and priorities of nation states are best served by subscribing to universal values. Understanding of domestic issues of each nation and how these issues come into conflict with universal values provides delegations with the ability to be flexible in how they approach international relations. This is also true when dealing with bilateral, unilateral as well as regional relations.
In any forum, be this forum a conference on disarmament, trade negotiations, or a summit meeting, understanding of issues can lead to flexibility so that international relations can achieve the common objectives.
When international agreements are discussed, historical knowledge is useful so that every delegation’s needs might be understood and accepted by all participating states. Historical knowledge and its understanding allows delegates to accept the middle ground and, in the process, protect their national interests, which are the goal of international relations.
Some historians record history as events created by Great Men, while other historians write history as a record of the “common folk”. Hegel saw history as a constant challenge of one set of ideas by another until a consensus is reached, and that consensus is challenged again by a new thesis. Karl Marx, Hegel’s student, saw history as economic determinism or a conflict between classes in society.
Therefore, understanding of what is history, particularly understanding the usefulness of historical knowledge of international relations, will help nations understand and avoid past mistakes so that national self-interest does not lead to war and exploitation of one nation by another. Historical failure to understand post WWI legitimate German grievances caused the Nazi aggression and WWII.
Understanding of the horrors suffered by the Soviet people, the Serbs, and the Germans themselves in WWII was not considered as a legitimate consideration for their security. Similarly, the understanding why the United States refuses to sign many international agreements may force other nations into collective action against American intransigence. On the other hand, it might transmit a new message to the American people, who might elect a government that will act for the common interest of all humankind.
International relations are not separate from social, political, economic, religious, and military needs of nations. Consequently, since international relations are tied to national self-interest of the participants, understanding of history of international relations may lead to consensus where universal values become more important for survival of humankind.
PCR & Dimitri O are both correct, but they’re arguing different points.
PCR argues that the slower careful nature of Russia’s SMO is allowing Western media propaganda to create narrative of “Desperate Russia losing & driven to use WMD” followed by massive NATO implemented false flag to kill thousands & blame Russia.
Another article on The Saker follows this from Orlov – the Russian MOD announcement warning of NATO using a WMD false flag. It confirms PCR’s fears.
DO is correct that ethically & in terms of long term integration of liberated regions of Ukraine with Russia – that the careful slow SMO strategy is morally correct & strategically sensible.
They’re different arguments.
The desperate Nazis in NATO & US State Dept & London etc as well as Lviv & Kiev – might well unleash a nuclear or chemical 9/11 scale or greater atrocity.
Russia can probably only do what it can – warn of this & hope China, India, Brazil lead other nations to speak up this time for truth.
I had the same feeling after reading that article from Roberts. Whlle I enjoyed some of his writings in the past but this time, it clearly shows the mind of an real Western person, aggressive and somehow, colonialistic.
Look, I fully support Russia on this issue and have since Maidan. That said, I’m really put off by the race card shit. Mass immigration of people with completely different cultures is a tool used by the psychopaths to destroy the target peoples. Everyone knows that. Opposing that isn’t “racist”, it’s self preservation and common sense. Please don’t stoop to using the tactics of the Satanists because it doesn’t work, in reverse. It only drags YOU down.
I commented at Uprooted Palestinians blog: ‘ Noted. Memo: I agree with “…dismantle NATO.” ‘
Very convincing article… perhaps too convincing. You write: (…) These (Ukrainians) are now departing Ukrainian territory, mostly to Poland, and that, from the Russian point of view, is a wonderful thing. Then you write: (…) but they (fifth column) still exerted some amount of influence in culture and education, and their departure has been most welcome. You claim these convenient developments as some kind of victory for Russia. Excellent! Nevertheless, fantastic as these side effects may work out for Russia, I still think, that Paul Craig Roberts is not entirely wrong to point out a certain ‘softness’ of Russia. For example, if as a territory, (Ukraine) it is part of Russia (your words), why is it then that Vladimir Putin did not feel necessary to recognize Donetsk and Luhansk already in 2014 as independent Republics, or integrated them into the Russian Empire? More than 14’000 lives could have been saved had he done this in 2014. Thank you for a convincing reply.
Sadly I think Orlov missed the point and PCR is in many ways right.
Noone said anything about genocide, what he is talking about is why hasnt Russia bombed the government of Ukraine , its TV(and Propaganda stations) its supply lines (its pass the 50 day mark and only now the russian airforce started seriously bombing the railways)and so on.
PCR has alrdy in many ways been proven right. check the videos of captured Ukrainian soldiers many believe they are winning the war. And why wouldnt they, their president is walking around Kiev with foreign guests , their TV station are constantly broadcasting their “successes” and so on.
There are basicly a bunch of limitations thet the political leadership put on the military that have slowed the operation (stopping the operation for peace talks was I believe the high of stupidity). All of which have in the long run caused more death and destruction cause they didnt disorganize the ukrainian state when they had the chance.
I cant find it now but I believe it was the global times that posted some chinese experts opinion on lessons to be learned in case China has to do this with Taiwan. One of them is to have a replacement government ready cause negotiating with american puppets is the hight of stupidity. Almost everyone in Russia is asking this exact question, why are we negotiating with them? To demorilize the troops? To demorilize the prorussia population of Ukraine?(so they will think that what happened in Bucha and other towns that russia left will happen to them) If it just for the international audience then there is no need for such “flashy” talks. Just quetly meet and then comeout and say we tried but they refuse and so on.
I know patience/a cool head is needed for these things and PCR can come of as a “hothead” sometimes but he is right. America is spinning this as Russia is weak and many ppl including in the US leadership believe this. Countries like Finland and Sweden are joining NATO cause they dont fear a weak Russia so no need to even pretend to be neutral. So hello to misslies on Russias border but now in Finland.
I believe that unfortunatly things will get A LOT bloodier from here on (more war, terrorist act in Russia by crazy ukronazies and so on) and part of the reason is that at every turn Russias political leadership has act weak and/or completely ignored the “infowar” aspect of the war.
I live in Russia so this will all effect me and honestly the prospect that we might lose the war seems very real to me unfortunatly. Not cause our military cant handle it but because our political leadership is way to soft/hesitant for wartime.
Psychology is good but I don’t think PCR’s psychological insights on Western peoples are anything we should follow as the last word or as obviously right. We know our fellows too; we can and do have different psychological insights. If we take the ones he calls “dumbshits” as he describes them, they are irrational creatures on whose impressions you don’t want to base anything big on.
What he advocates is not even clear (you have to imagine) because he mixes things in what he advocates. One thing is to add more troops and weapons. A separate thing is civilian deaths as collateral damage. He endorses increasing both to end the war sooner. He palliates for this with the hypothetical that doing this would reduce civilian deaths in the end – but that’s just a hypothetical! I mentioned here my opinion that maybe the PCR strategy would have provoked a guerrilla type reaction that makes the war last even longer. PCR opened himself up for the word “genocide” to be used as a description. For example, if there’s a ten-story building with “enemies” in one of them, you’ll get rid of those enemies faster if the whole building is blown up right away. It’s not justifiable for soldiers to do that. Since he says the war could have ended in 48 hours and criticizes Russia for its efforts to spare civilians, he implies no concern for civilians.
Two more points that are related:
1) You know, it’s not really like we can second guess or judge military strategies from this distance. We cannot! We are in no position to say to a General that the number of troops should have been doubled or something like that. On such military matters, we newspaper readers are “Monday morning quarterbacks” at best.
2) The Russian army explained why it had troops around Kyiv and other cities. They said it was to fool their enemy and keep most of the Ukrainian troops in those cities from going to the Donbass. They said this had been done successfully. We saw Russian soldiers around those cities captured and tortured on video. As “the feint”, I may think that they were in bigger danger of capture, or more exposed than other soldiers, and that they are all heroes if so. Just thoughts in one’s head. I cannot say that more troops should have been there as part of the “feint” to avoid…Needless to say, someone who doesn’t even accept the reason provided for why they were there, may then substitute his own goal for theirs and then of course talk to his heart’s content about how this other mission should have been conducted instead.
Those that still justify words like these:
“The Kremlin Has Missed the Opportunity to End the Provocations of Russia that Are Bringing the World to Nuclear War”
In other words, it is ‘The Kremlin’ that is at fault here.
If people have trouble understanding that Dmitry’s header was equally as provocative, and directly tit for tat, I’m letting you know that now. It was designed to be equally provocative and tit for tat – maybe somebody wakes up here.
You can defend the man, he is older for sure, and perhaps he is just writing to write, or perhaps he really feels that Russian actions are bringing the world closer to nuclear war because Russia is not killing masses of Ukrainians to ‘look strong’. How perfectly childish to even think that.
And for the Russians or anyone else to lose their humanity because PCR wants to see the same insane western ‘strength’ reflected back is not a world that I like. All that is happening now, even massively confusing, is in an attempt to recover humanity. It is not Russians that by their actions are bringing the world closer to nuclear war.
If he wants to see the same – bereft from all morals and profoundly sick and insane – actions reflected back to the US, I don’t think this will benefit anyone.
The Russians are not going to go chest-beating – because the chest-beating is childish, infinitely stupid and even insane.
The Russian false flag warning yesterday has nothing to do with what PCR wrote here. We’ve had false flag warnings throughout. The Saker’s analysis clearly noted that time after time. No matter what Russia did, their work on indivisible security, their last-ditch effort to force NATO to recognize security guarantees, must show you that this trajectory that we are in now, sanctions, the attempts to cancel Russia, the continual more low-level threats against China and so on .. would have happened. The west wants to own Russia and literally ‘strip-mine’ it for its wealth. Russia will not be owned and will not allow itself to be raped again.
Sadly I see it to some degree in certain comments on English RT and on YouTube, with voices wishing for Russia to commit certain atrocities (particularly ones Russia is accused of) in order to show who’s boss, to “prove a point”, etc..
I’m certain that false flags fall under the jurisdiction of ‘bearing false witness’, which one of the Ten Commandments warns against.
Just because the USA gets away with committing atrocities does not give Russia the green light to do the same – it would be no less wrong wrong no matter who’s doing it. Morality is not a one-way street.
I don’t know what you or anyone else for that matter thinks of Nietzsche, but I remember he once said this: “He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster…” Make of that what you will.
“As I said would be the case, the failure of Russia to impress the West with an overwhelming exercise of military force in Ukraine means another step has been taken toward nuclear Armageddon.
The rush to nuclear war is not primarily Russia’s fault. It is the West that is being provocative, not Russia. The West turned a cold shoulder to Russia’s security concerns. The West armed and trained the Ukrainian army and Nazi militia and pointed them at the Donbass Russians. The West placed US missiles in Romania and Poland and now in Slovakia. It is Washington that is pursuing hegemony, not the Kremlin.
The Kremlin’s responsibility is in the weakness of its responses to provocations. First ignoring them for years, making only pointless diplomatic protests. Then when finally forced to intervene in Ukraine, doing so in as limited a way as possible and in a time-consuming way that gives Washington control of the explanation and opportunities to widen the conflict beyond the boundary of the Kremlin’s limited operation.
The Saker and Andrei Martyanov stress the superiority of Russian military tactics and weapon systems, but these important capabilities do not provide the margin of victory when the Kremlin is forever reacting minimally to the initiatives of Washington. The Kremlin’s inability to be proactive and unwillingness to clear Washington’s fifth column out of Russia’s ruling circles will be the hallmarks of Russian defeat” Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
“The evil in Washington is so great it has to be isolated” Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
“War is hell, Russia want war but they don’t want the hell” Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
Dmitry Orlov blasted Dr. Paul Craig Roberts and Pepe Escobar because he doesn’t agree with their analysis of the war but Dr. Roberts has a point. He doesn’t agree with Putin’s war strategy which has cost Russia to lose a lot of it’s soldiers and give the wicked West time to regroup.
“Dmitry Orlov blasted Dr. Paul Craig Roberts and Pepe Escobar because he doesn’t agree with their analysis of the war”
I missed the one on Pepe Escobar. Can you provide a link? Also, I can’t imagine Pepe Escobar making the same point as PCR. I think you needed to be more specific there. By putting them together like that, you are saying that both hold a similar view (or objection). At least please specify why he “blasted” Pepe Escobar.
Super kudos to this writer! I read and archive dozens of articles daily, and this review points out why esteemed bean counter PCR is out of his lane on the subject of Russia’s SMO.