by Pepe Escobar for Sputnik International
Cold War 2.0 has reached unprecedented hysterical levels. From the Clinton (cash) machine – supported by a neocon/neoliberalcon think tank/media complex – to the British establishment and its corporate media mouthpieces, the Anglo-American, self-appointed “leaders of the free world” are racking up demonization of Russia and http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21709028-how-contain-vladimir-putins-deadly-dysfunctional-empire-threat-russia
“Putinism” to pure incandescence.
And yet a hot war is not about to break out – before or after the November 8 US presidential election. So many layers of fear and loathing in fact veil no more than a bluff.
Let’s start with the Russian naval task force in Syria, led by the officially designated “heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser” Admiral Kuznetsov, which will be stationed in the eastern Mediterranean at least until February 2017, supporting operations against all strands of Salafi-jihadism.
The Admiral Kuznetsov is fully equipped with anti-ship, air defense, artillery and anti-submarine warfare systems – and can defend itself against a vast array of threats, unlike NATO vessels.
Predictably, NATO is spinning with alarm that “all of the Northern Fleet”, along with the Baltic Fleet, is on the way to the Mediterranean. Wrong; it’s only part of the Northern Fleet, and the Baltic Fleet ships are not going anywhere.
The heart of the matter is that when the capabilities of this Russian naval task force are matched with the S-300/S-400 missile systems already deployed in Syria, Russia is now de facto rivaling the firepower of the US Sixth Fleet.
To top it off, as this http://thesaker.is/making-sense-of-the-russian-naval-task-force-off-the-coast-of-syria/ comprehensive military analysis makes clear, Russia has “basically made their own no-fly zone over Syria”; and a US no-fly zone, viscerally promoted by Hillary Clinton, “is now impossible to achieve.”
That should be more than enough to put into perspective the impotence transmuted into outright anger exhibited by the Pentagon and its neocon/neoliberalcon vassals.
Add to it the outright war between the Pentagon and the CIA in the Syrian war theatre, where the Pentagon backs the YPG Kurds, who are not necessarily in favor of regime change in Damascus, while the CIA backs further weaponizing of “moderate”, as in al-Qaeda-linked and/or infiltrated, “rebels”.
Compounding the trademark Obama administration Three Stooges school of foreign policy, American threats have flown more liberally than Negan’s skull-crushing bloody baton in the new season of The Walking Dead.
Pentagon head Ash Carter, a certified neocon, has threatened “consequences”, as in “potential” strikes against Syrian Arab Army (SAA) forces to “punish the regime” after the Pentagon itself broke the Kerry-Lavrov ceasefire. President Obama took some time off weighing his options. And in the end, he backed off.
So it will be up for the virtually elected – by the whole US establishment – Hillary Clinton to make the fateful decision. She won’t be able to go for a no-fly zone – because Russia is already doing it. And If she decides to “punish the regime”, Moscow already telegraphed, via Russia’s Defense Ministry spokesman Major-General Igor Konashenkov, there will definitely be “consequences” for imposing a “shadow” hot war.
Sun Tzu doesn’t do first-strike
Washington, of course, reserves for itself a “first-strike” nuclear capability, which Hillary Clinton fully supports (Donald Trump does not, and for that he’s also demonized). If we allow the current hysteria to literally go nuclear, then we must consider the matter of the S-500 anti-missile system – which effectively seals Russia’s air space; Moscow won’t admit it on the record because that would unleash a relentless arms race.
A US intel source with close connections to the Masters of the Universe but at the same time opposed to Cold War 2.0 as “counter-productive”, adds the necessary nuance; “The United States has lost the arms race, indulging in trillions of dollars of worthless and endless wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, and now is no longer a global power as it cannot defend itself with its obsolete missiles, THAAD, Patriot and Aegis Land Based Ballistic Defense System, against Russian ICBMs, even as the Russians have sealed their airspace. The Russians may be as much as four generations ahead of the US.”
Moreover, in the deep recesses of shadow war planning, the Pentagon knows, and the Russian Defense Ministry also knows, that in the event some Dr. Strangelove launched a nuclear preemptive strike against Russia, the Russian population would be protected by their defensive missile systems – as well as nuclear bomb shelters in major cities. Warnings on Russian television have not been idle; the population would know where to go in the – terrifying – event of nuclear war breaking out.
Needless to add, the ghastly possibility of US nuclear first-strike turns all these WWII-style NATO war games in Eastern Europe into a pile of meaningless propaganda stunts.
So how did Moscow plan for it all? According to the US intel source, “they took out almost all the military budget from their stated federal budget, lulling the West into thinking that Russia could not afford a massive military buildup and there was nothing to fear from Russia as they were finished as a world power. The [stated] military budget was next to nothing, so there was nothing to worry about as far as the CIA was concerned. If Putin showed publicly his gigantic military buildup, the West could have taken immediate remedial actions as they did in 2014 by crashing the oil price.”
The bottom line then would reveal the Pentagon as totally unprepared for a hot war – even as it threatens and bluffs Russia now on a daily basis; “As Brzezinski has pointed out, if this is the case it means the US has ceased to be a global power. The US may continue to bluff, but those that ally with them will have nowhere to go if that bluff is called, as it is being now called in Syria.”
The US intel source is adamant that “one of the greatest military buildups in history has taken place right under the nose of the Russian Central Bank head Elvira Nabiullina and the Russian Ministry of Finance while the CIA awaits what they think will be the inevitable Russia collapse. The CIA will be waiting forever and eternity for Russia to collapse. This MGB maneuver is sheer genius. And demonstrates that the CIA, which is so drowned by data inputs that they cannot connect the dots on anything, must be completely reorganized. In addition, the entire procurement system of the United States military must also be reorganized as it cannot ever keep up if new weapon programs as the F-35 take twenty years to develop and then are found obsolete before they even enter service. The Russians have a five-year development program for each new weapons system and they are far ahead of us in every key area.”
If this analysis is correct, it goes against even the best and most precise Russian estimates, according to which military potential may be strong, asymmetrically, but still much inferior to US military might.
Well-informed Western analysts know that Moscow never brags about military buildups – and has mastered to a fault the element of surprise. Much more than calling a bluff, it’s Moscow’s Sun Tzu tactics that are really rattling loudmouth Washington.
Sun Tzu never played poker. There’s too much money on the table to bluff. The US has everything to lose and everything to gain. Russia is counting on sane actors in the US but there are none. From what I’ve seen the empire does not bluff.
“The Empire” does not bluff because of hubris they think they are invincible and omnipotent.. even after Afganistan, Irak, Syria.. and the people(if you can call them that) running the Empire are completely delusional and only a step away from insanity(inbreeding much?).
“The Empire” does not have any other option than to go full frontal and like a man-bull chase after every “red flag” it sees.. well that’s that strategy, wave so many red flags to make the bull collapse from exhaustion trying to chase them down.
Thank You. Amerikas neo-conns are still living the 90s and Russia has moved on. It’s a sad day in Amerika. I live here wish I and others could change Amerikas game plan from madness to ?
Maybe sending a coal burning aircraft carrier is a clever plan to lull the Americans to sleep, or the vast black smoke clouds are intended to hide the task force from satellites. :-)
More seriously, the S500, if actually operational anywhere at present, would at best provide some very limited defence against US ICBM’s for Moscow and St. Petersburg, not the whole vast expanse of the Russian Federation. Neither side could “prevail” in a nuclear war. Hopefully the Neocon psychopaths running Washington are intelligent enough to realize that. Certainly the Russians are trying hard to get the message across.
The daily photos of ICBM tests, TU-160’s, and nuclear submarines in RT, Sputnik, and TASS remind me of a small furry animal backed into a corner fluffing itself up to try and look as big and dangerous as possible in the hope the attacker will back of rather than risk being injured itself.
“Sun Tzu said: “Whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy, will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle will arrive exhausted.”
About fifty million Russians are going to survive (I count just those in urban centers). They have to get to the fallout shelters in orderly fashion. As the US has no such plans for the survival of its citizens, they and their leaders have nothing to do but sodomise each other and little children as they wait for doomsday.
But I am glad that people like you find preparation for war laughable.
It means that your life on the planet, as a furry animal, is about to be extinguished.
America has never faced an enemy as formidable as Russia.
Never, bar none!
Russia is not Grenada or Panama or Afghanistan or Iraq.
Americans long ago bought into the false narrative manufactured by Hollywood about the ‘Big Bad USA’.
I suppose it helps them to forget about the humiliation of Vietnam, where they were thoroughly beaten by the Vietnamese, despite the loads of War Crimes that they committed.
Iraq also qualifies as a defeat for them, likewise Afghanistan. And bear in mind that these countries were/are no where near the level of Russia as it relates to offensive and defensive capabilities. Not to mention loads and loads of Nuclear Weapons tactical and otherwise.
I’am sorry to have to be the one to break the news to them but this is not Hollywood, this is the real world where ballistic missiles come crashing down on a highway near you.
So please lay off those Top Gun movies and know that any war with Russia will most definately manifest itself on the shores of Continental USA.
This won’t be a war fought “over there” and at a distance. Russia will ensure that Americans experience War up close and personal.
At least that’s how I see it.
I don’t think the Anglo-American elite care whether or not they “win” wars. For them, regime change and subsequent instability allow them to plunder the resources of any given country at will. Bonus points are given if the weakened country is removed from Russian and/or Chinese influence.
Cute metaphor, Terry, but apt?
There has been so much futzing around about the deployment schedule for the S-500s that if it was the U.S. we could be forgiven for suspecting that they were still stuck trying to pass their testing protocols scheduled for 2011. However, it is not the United States, it is Russia, who is so unsportsmanlike as to consider its military preparedness a secret. I even suspect they might entertain the thought of employing an element of deception!
It’s not as though we’re talking about locating and counting missiles in silos. We’re talking about missiles mounted on trucks, eminently disguisable, quite possibly already deployed.
It has certainly looked recently as though the U.S. is bluffing about their readiness and capability, and Russia is modestly hiding hers under a bush. It even seems that they dumb down their exports to disguise the capabilities of the versions they retain for the home team–remember the gasps of amazement at the range of the Kalibrs?
The US has not won a major war since WW!. They didn’t even enter WWII until the Soviets had already defeated the Germans and were running back to Germany. The Korean War was a draw at best and the fact is if China really wanted to win it they could have. Vietnam was a total defeat in every sense of the word.Iraq and Afghanistan are total disasters and the US and the west has been there since 2003. The US mercenaries proved they were no match for the Russian speaking separatist and in Syria the US and its proxies are getting their asses kicked.
The US military might is an illusion and is based on trillions of military expenditures with not only high priced weapons that are inferior but also on the concept that these weapon systems must be continually maintained. This is intentional on part of the military industrial complex to keep the profits coming in after the initial sell. In fact the Pentagon spends more on maintenance than they do on actual expenditures. US aircraft carriers and surface ships have no defense against both of Russia’s and China’s missile systems.
To say the US hasn’t won a war since WW1 is ridiculously simplistic and leads to serious failure to understand the empire.
The most important misreading of history is “Who won the Vietnam War ?” better known in Vietnam as “the American War.” Washington had two goals in that war. The big goal was to dissuade other countries from taking the path of military liberation which the Vietnamese chose. Washington achieved that goal with the tremendous destruction of Vietnam. More tons of bombs were dropped on Vietnam than on both Germany and Japan during WW2. At least 3 million Vietnamese people died, out of a population in 1975 of 50 million people. Wars of National Liberation went out of style because no sane leaders wanted to pay such a high price. The small goal was to turn Vietnam into an American colony, which never happened, but you have to recognize that was the secondary and much smaller goal.
In WW2, perhaps the Soviets could have eventually defeated the Nazis all by themselves, but the US used the European war to modernize its war machine, and Washington got the better half of Europe, as negotiated at Yalta. Was Stalin was in a giveaway mood, or did that partition of Europe reflect the military truths ?
Korea ? If you’ve read Sun Tzu, you should know that war and statecraft is not about taking victory dances, but about convincing other states to not attack, because that’s the cheapest solution. In that sense the US achieved a partial victory in Korea. The cost of escalating the Korean War was far too high for China in the early 1950’s. After 1953, the US won the peace by helping South Korea to rapidly industrialize and North Korea could not compete, primarily because of unfavorable geography. Other factors were the nature of North Korea’s leadership and the success (from Washington’s perspective) effort to isolate North Korea.
To understand the US role in the many wars including Afghanistan and Iraq, but really from Libya to Pakistan, it’s stupid – yes, I have to use this strong word, stupid – to claim the US lost. You have to understand what the US was trying to achieve. In this part of the world, the US has zero interest in establishing successful nations, unlike what it did with South Korea. Washington’s goal for all Muslim nations is to cause chaos and simply destroy them. That goal doesn’t benefit the US as a nation and it doesn’t really benefit the empire. But you must realize that Washington’s goal is set by Israel, and it’s Zionist leaders who totally control certain parts of the Empire. Israel wants the utter destruction of every country that could be a rival and it uses American power to do the destruction. Israel is a parasite, a pseudo-Jewish worm, and this worm is destroying the empire from the inside out. At the top of Israel’s enemies list are the Islamic nations, but make no mistake, that list also includes all the Christian and multi-confessional nations. The paranoid Zios will settle for nothing less than the defeat of all rivals; condominium is not their agenda. Unfortunately, it takes many decades for the parasite to kill the host, and in the Darwinian world, usually the host doesn’t die from the parasite as such, but dies because the parasite has weakened the host so much that it can’t survive the usual external challenges. I was going to say Israel is like a tapeworm, but that’s wrong. Tapeworms live in the intestines and only steal food. Israel gets a free lunch from America of billions of dollars a years, but the empire could afford that parasitism. Israel’s major destruction is that it’s a brain parasite. All the Washington think tanks are aligned with Israel and against both he US as a nation and the larger world. That’s where the parasite becomes fatal.
Let me offer one extraordinary proof that the US only wants chaos. Around February 2002, there was a “donors conference” to provide aid to Afghanistan. All the pledge money only added up to about US$50 per Afghan citizen. By contrast, the actual funding (not mere pledges) of aid packages for Bosnia and some African nation (Ethiopia or Rwanda, I forget which) was $250 per capita. By 2002, Afghanistan had suffered not one but two devastating wars over 20 years. It need far more aid than the other countries, and only got pledges for 20% of what had actually been provided. If the US wanted to really put Afghanistan on the path to reconstruction, it could have easily reached into its deep pockets and spend $500 per capita. Afghanistan had under 24 million people in 2002, so that would have been $12 billion. That’s nothing compared to the Pentagon’s budget. Setting Afghanistan on the path to recovery would have been counted as a victory for the Americans, so an observer from another galaxy would have to ask which the money wasn’t spent. The answer is that Israel didn’t want it to happen. All this nonsense about “the corrupt Afghani officials would have stolen it” is poor thinking. If the US had been serious, it would have rooted out Afghani corruption whenever it showed its ugly head. Corrupt officials were allowed to flourish because that fit perfectly with Israel’s goals. Afghani officials knew the American occupation would end in disaster, and the rational response was to stuff their pockets with dollars for as long as they could.
In short, the real world has many layers, and you have to go deeper to understand much of anything.
I do not agree in everything you wrote. Whatever you said of Vietnam, it is (for the US) and ulcer, an wound that will never heal. It is still like an open wound which the US has done whatever to downplay, including attacking Iraq and threatening about everybody. The US was (as I remember) even close to use nuclear weapons on Vietnam in order not to loose. Vietnam has made the US to feel vulnerable and “defeatable” for all future, specially once their superior military technology does not give them clearly the upper hand. So your guess how the US will “manage” with real powers like China and/or Russia. Otherwise I agree with you, the US primary goal to seed chaos to “help” Israel, Saud, whatever. This can you read in Pepe Escobars “The Empire of chaos”
very nice analysis, Cosimo.
Well said. You prove a point by arguing the opposite! Very clever.
The US won the Vietnam war by discouraging other liberation movements from engaging in armed struggle, did they? “Wars of National Liberation went out of style because no sane leaders wanted to pay such a high price,” did they?
I guess FRELIMO, the MPLA, ZANU and ZAPU, SWAPO and, of course, the Sandinistas didn’t get the memo.
He was joking with that jibberish….I hope. War of liberation my ass, Vietnam was defending their country from the foreign invaders who divided the country and installed a puppet government, one after another. Remember, Vietnam had already defeated its colonizers, the French in 1954 and we jumped in to halt the national elections to be held in 1956, and did everything possible to undermine the country from deciding who should lead them. We were terrorizing the country for years before it became public full scale war in the early 60s. Johnson had 500,000 troops there. Iraq had 400,000 plus 100,000 mercenaries and still got beat by 10-20,000 irregulars with no advanced weapons, no aircraft, no navy, nothing but the will to drive out the invader who had no motivation for being there.
The only “war” that worked was “liberating a dozen medical students in Granada from a few dozen Cuban construction workers building a hospital. Unfortunately the student told the invading army to go home, they wanted to stay and finish their studies.
So if Pep’s analyses here is correct, (and I pray that it is), then we’ve finally turned the corner of ‘the fork in the road’, and away from a uni-polar US dominated world, to a bi or multi polar one, thanks to Putin’s Russia.
Now all we need to do is to somehow get Trump elected as American’s next president, to pull it back from the brink of all it’s foreign policy exploits and military adventures, and start to rebuild itself, so as to finally reach some semblance of peace and sanity and so that some international law and order prevails in the world of the twenty first century.
May that miracle yet happen with Gods speed and His blessings. Else we could all still be in for a very rough ride as the US Empire self destructs, taking the entire wold down with it in a thermonuclear exchange and resultant holocaust.
There needs to be a watershed event before the empire can start to dismantle.
What will it be? Will we see it in Syria?
Or will it happen elsewhere?
That watershed event can be an economic event. But hopefully it will be a Christian revival in the USA.
I’m struggling with so much commentary hoping for Trump. Having experienced Trump for years living in NYC, and now hoping that he might be potus, is crazy, given my understanding. Granted, Clinton occupies wall street in similar fashion. I wouldn’t want her either. I don’t want either one, they’re both terrible.
Christians–especially the Evangelicals and Christian Zionists–are already in the upper echelons of the American Empire’s deep state.
These are the people who lust for the End Times because they believe they alone will be saved–regardless if there is a nuclear Apocalypse.
If you want a “revival” of these Christian fascists, then America will become even more bloodthirsty and insane than they already are.
Sir, the real Christians are not facists, zion or otherwise. I have met them. It’s the false ‘Christians’ (and there are many in the Churches and political sphere) who are the Facist’Zionists. Yet by God’s grace they can still repent of their sins and turn to Jesus Christ.
“Real” Christians in America are about as rare as unicorn farts.
Good luck starting a revival in the USA with them.
There is nothing impossible with God, including reviving a spiritually dead church! We Christians just keep on praying.
” Warnings on Russia’s television has not been idle; the populations would know where to go
in the – terrifying- event of a nuclear war breaking out”.
While we, in the West, not knowing where to go, would be burnt to a crisp because the Western governments care nothing for We the People. Only the elite would know the way to the bunkers. And of course, the roaches will keep them company.
@“Sun Tzu said: “Whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy, will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle will arrive exhausted.”
It is clear that Russians have always been the first in their field! They did not have to learn from Sun Tzu. They learned from their own experience. The ‘West’ never learned. They don’t read Russian history. They can’t believe that the Russians were always prepared to repel invasions. They cannot raise above the level of the poker games. That’s why they repeated the same mistakes over and over again. Russians learned from every failure.
I delight in re-reading Dominic Lieven’s masterpiece “Russia Against Napoleon: The True Story of the Campaigns of War and Peace”. It should be mandatory reading for all those who (mis)interpret Russian history from a Western perspective. Dominic Lieven is a scion of that Russian-Germano-Baltic aristocracy which produced one of the most fantastic proponents of “Eurasianism”, the ‘Mad Baron’ Roman Feodorovich von Ungern-Sternberg. Actually, Dominic was born in Singapore and presently lives mostly in Japan!
Irrespective of that, Lieven underscores exactly the fact that Russia was prepared to ‘receive’ the Napoleonian Eurohost and to utterly defeat it! The Napoleonian adventure ended in the adoption of the Russian word ‘bystro’ for the Parisian popular restaurants! We would better understand why Stalin was in actual fact prepared to resist the Nazi onslaught and why Germany ended up like she did in 1918.
Beware of hubris. The Russians were not first in the field against the Mongols. Initially they were defeated by the Swedes. They were not first in the field in the early Napoleonic wars (e.g. Austerlitz 1805). Napoleon launched his invasion of Russia out of hubris in June 1812 (in breach of SunTzu’s principles not to fight out of anger) – which was too late. The Russians were not the first in the field in the WW1. If Hitler started Operation Barbarossa in Mar/April 1941 (as advised by his generals) instead of late June 1941 (like Napoleon), Russia would likely had been history.They were not first in the field in the battle over Zhenbao island on the Ussuri River in 1969. They lost the first Cold War resulting in the collapse of the USSR. The way the USSR conducted the cold war breached nearly all the principles of SunTzu (e.g. launch protracted war in Afghanistan in 1980). The Chinese Prez presented George Bush with copies of SunTzu in 2006 after the US got involved in Iraq and Afghanistan. But it seems the US is too hubristic to want to learn. The historical mistakes that Russia made should have doomed Russia to the dust-bin of history. That Russia is still around today is by the pure grace of God…as are the cases of all the nations that are still around today.
My dear friend,
I have said that the Russians ARE the first in ‘THEIR’ field. Charles XII finished as he finished. Peter won eventually. And that is valid even in relation to the Mongols, no matter that the repulse of the Mongols lasted so long. Genghis Khan is history. Mongolia is nearly an appendage of Russia.
The Russians were the first in the field in WWI. Germany lost the war as a consequence of its hubris, the misdirected invasion of Russia. It lost the WWII as well for the same reasons.
Russia lost indeed when she was not the first in the field (Austerlitz). But not when she was defending her own ground. You are right (although perhaps not fully aware due to your Calvinistic persuasion) that Russia is under the Protection of the Mother of God.
The bottom line is this: Pride comes before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall (Proverbs 16:18). This applies no matter how well protected individual/nation is by the Mother of God.
Mongolia is nearly an appendage of Russia? I thought it was a Chinese protectorate.
The Baltic-German nobility owned most of the land in Estonia. Are there any attempts by the German elites to regain lost property in the former Russian empire? Do they really believe their Anglo-American “friends” will actually help them do so?
Why not? The Khazars got help with their fictional claims on the Middle East 2000 years after they were allegedly driven from there. Land theft, on a biomass scale, is a crime of opportunity. The ‘history’ can always be back-written.
Mongolia is more of appendage of Russia than China, at least in cold war. You ought to know they even changed their character to Mongolian Cyrillic, which is “a Cyrillic alphabet and is thus similar to, for example, the Bulgarian alphabet, and identical to the Russian alphabet except for the two additional characters Өө ⟨ö⟩ and Үү ⟨ü⟩.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongolian_Cyrillic_alphabet.
IMHO, the Soviet colonized it the same way France did to VietNam, or British did to Indian sub continent. Remove them from their culture root of the language.
I think what you said about Russia’s unpreparedness in her history only discredits you for ignorance, especially sending “Russia to the dustbin of history” (twice!) if Barbarossa was on time. BTW you forgot to mention the Japanese war of aggression 1904 (the Russian fleet had to sail down the Atlantic, round Africa, cross the Indian and then what was left of it run into the waiting Japanese fleet off Japan).
And Russia was not ready either when the Brits, Frogs and Yankers attacked her in 1918. Luckily for many countries who took advantage of her when she was weak, Russia is not vindictive and has not paid back for her defeats.
Had Hitler or Napoleon invaded at earlier times, they would have to go through the trusted Russian deep and scorched earth defence tactics. Napoleon got to Moscow but the Tsar was not there to receive him. What a disappointment for the Emperor! And Stalin would never allow Hitler to have a victory parade on Red Square.
Russia had her defeats and that made her stronger. Her new defence doctrine is to destroy anyone who comes near her borders with ill intent.
Russia could have been consigned to the dustbin of history on at least 3 occasions if not for the grace of God. By the time the Mongols came, they became a bit more civilised and would rather tax those they defeated. Otherwise they would have reduced Muscovy to a hill of skulls as they did earlier with other larger, more powerful nations. Napoleon’s invasion was off on the wrong footing right at the start. He reached Moscow by September 1812. He should have just occupied Moscow and reorganise his supply lines, especially for winter clothing instead of looking around. There was enough time before the winter set in. Kutuzov dared not opt for a decisive fight. But Hitler’s invasion was cooly planned. However, his hubris got the better of him. If he had started in March 1941 instead of late June 22nd 1941 (like Napoleon – June 24th 1812), he would have reached Moscow in June (beginning of summer) instead of October (autumn) then Russia today would be found mainly in German history books. And it was the West which ganged up to save Russia’s far east from Japan after the Japanese victory in the war of 1904-5. Even today, I can see several credible dynamic scenarios that could still consign Russia to the dustbin of history. And that goes for all the other major nations! So beware of hubris, as in this case, not willing to learn from others and attributing all success to oneself. This was precisely China’s mistake (not willing to learn) during the height of the Qing dynasty even as she was left behind by the industrial revolution.
He reached Moscow by September 1812. He should have just occupied Moscow and reorganise his supply lines, especially for winter clothing instead of looking around.
While the French were in Moscow, their supply lines were cut by the Russians. That’s because Napoleon’s closest supply depot, at Smolensk, was 250 miles away from Moscow. Russian Cossacks, regular army cavalry, and partisans choked the Smolensk-Moscow road. French road patrols — including elite Imperial Guard units — were being wiped routinely. Napoleon had no hope of receiving reinforcements or supplies as long he remained in Moscow.
Note also that, because of losses suffered in the Battle of Borodino, the French army was incapable of fighting another major battle while occupying Moscow. Napoleon had lost an enormous number of horses at Borodino, so his cavalry was mostly dismounted. That meant he lacked reconnaissance patrols to keep him aware of the Russians’ movements around Moscow (very dangerous for the French). Without cavalry, the French foraging parties couldn’t gather food from the greater Moscow area, which meant their army would starve during the winter. Finally, lack of horses meant that the French artillery was crippled as well.
When Napoleon realized that the Russian army was still battle ready in spite of Borodino (the Russians were maneuvering in a threatening way south of Moscow), he decided to winter in Smolensk. But that meant making a one month retreat over 250 miles without food, enduring Russian attacks at the same time.
In the end, Napoleon’s army was largely destroyed in a series of running battles, and by Cossack harassment, during the retreat to Smolensk. The Grande Army’s starvation made the Russians’ job that much easier to achieve, but even with food, the French would still have lacked the ability to fight the Russians off, for reasons I describe above.
Read Riehn’s book for insight into this campaign. It’s superb.
As I have written, Napoleon invasion was off on a wrong footing at the start. He started too late. He launched the invasion out of pique (a serious mistake). He did not concentrate on his supply lines because like Hitler later, he was confident of defeating Russia before winter set in. He did not follow SunTzu (as he did earlier) due to his hubris. He went into Russia without winter clothing and supplies for a long campaign which turned into a war of attrition (again a breach of Sun Tzu), so confident was he of a quick Russian defeat and submission. The scorch-earth tactics should have alerted him to secure his supplies first as he could not forage off the land. Hitler repeated the same mistake. If Napoleon was cognisnance of Russia’s scorch-earth tactics, he could have fortified himself at Moscow or at Smolensk and wait out the winter. Kutuzov would then have to wait or deplete his army trying to dislodge Napoleon. Also in those days, Russia has a larger and growing population to supply military manpower. Not now. So avoid hubris.
I quote you: “Her new defence doctrine is to destroy anyone who comes near her borders with ill intent”. Russia may or may not be capable of doing this i.e. destroy ‘anyone’ who comes near her border with ill intent. However, Russia is very vulnerable to protracted guerilla warfare. Russia do not know how to fight a guerilla war as proven in Afghanistan. The main thing that saved Russia in Syria from a long drawn out ruinous guerilla war was sheer serendipity due to Erdogan’s defection. Dodgy Erdogan may yet decide to cook Putin’s goose in Syria though. I still remember the hubris of the USSR just before it was swept into the dustbin of history when Brehznev described the Russian occupation of Afghanistan as ‘irreversible’. So avoid such hubris as in ‘destroying anyone’. The Chinese has a saying: “There is always a taller mountain”.
Every country on this planet could have been consigned to the dustbin of history in the past were it not for some fortunate event at some time. Luck counts.
With regards to the guerrilla warfare argument – they say that guerrilla warfare doesn’t work against an Arab army, because an Arab army has no qualms about killing women and children. So the guerrillas simply disappear because there is no-one to hide behind.
Russia was stupid in Afghanistan, had they but followed Genghis Khan’s techniques there would have been no Mujahidin left in Afghanistan, nor any eyes left to mourn the departed Mujahidin either. Russia came right in Chechnya. When there were guerrilla’s in a city, they bombed the city to smithereens. Collateral damage is inevitable during war. Luckily the Chechnya n’s didn’t want to vanish for all perpetuity in the pursuit of American objectives.
Russia troops aren’t really dying in Syria, Syrian troops on both the Government and Rebel side are, plus the mercenaries from outside. Increasing numbers of Rebel troops are beginning to realize that dying for American, Saudi Arabian or Israeli objectives is just not worth it. If Russia wants to, Aleppo could be taken in a week, if the human shields are ignored that is. An amount of X can be sacrificed so that 100X can live in peace afterwards.
And yes, Erdogan’s troops will no longer sacrifice themselves for Nato objectives, and Nato troops won’t want to go to Syria, or Ukraine for that matter. The best that America can do is an aerial response, if America wants to have any influence in the Middle East again that is. If Erdogan betrays Russia again then Turkey’s goose will really be cooked, so to speak.
Sir, if the USSR were to do as the arab army allegedly could have done, it would have suffered an even worse defeat. That have been tried before. But you can’t kill them all. And for every unjust victim, there can be multiple replacement willing to sacrifice all to defeat the oppressor. Guerilla war is about protracted war. It’s about hide, seek and strike. It’s well described by Sun Tzu who inspired Mao’s people’s war. The ‘people sea’ is only one way to hide. And Russia has yet to pay the piper in Chechnya, especially if Russia loses by being bogged down in Syria.
It had been tried before i.e. killing all the people in order to defeat the guerillas. The first emperor of China, Qin Shi Huang, was advised that in was not possible to kill off all his enemies. Nevertheless he tried. And he was a killer. The Qin dynasty did not last more than 5 years after his death in 211 BC. And the Mongols changed their tactics from genocide to ruling and taxing those they subjugated (they learnt this from the Chinese). Otherwise they would not have lasted so long beyond the death of Ghenghis Khan. And the Mongols were not invincible either. After suffering a defeat in the Hindu Gush (Afghanistan) Ghenghis Khan avoided Afghanistan like the plague.
Simon, you are right. Chinese learned from history long ago, that is why China does not go out invade. As much as one think they are right, so are their opponents, and they are just considered as patriotic and moral in their own people.
Old Russian Tzars can hold the land they occupied by way of exposing, exile, mass killing. The results is a nation always arm to teeth, and not able to reach prosperity.
Hubris. I like this word hubris. Does the veneration of all things ancient Chinese not amount to hubris also?
Corrections: Does the veneration of the infallibility of all things ancient Chinese not amount to hubris also?
Sir, no real Chinese think that “all ancient Chinese things” are infallible. In fact human infallibility is alien to Chinese thought, except when they were overcome by their own hubris like Mao. Even Mao said “let a hundred school of thought contend”. Confucius was criticised severely. Chinese learn from their long history. No nation can afford not to learn from its history if it is to avoid repeating its mistake. One of the few ancient Chinese scripts that has not yet been proved to be wrong is Sun Tzu’s “Art Of War”. Those military smart alecs who went aginst his principles always suffered defeat. E.g. defeat of the French and the Americans by General Vo Nguyen Giap who was a Sun Tzu scholar; also Mao’s defeat of Genereralisimo Chiang Kai Sek in the Chinese civil war.
Simon, during the 1980s I followed the Soviet campaign in Afghanistan very closely. I’ve read a lot about the subject since then as well. As best as I can tell, the Soviets suffered no real military defeat in Afghanistan.
For the duration of the war, the Soviet army was firmly entrenched and suffered no reversals in battle. The Soviets enjoyed a vast advantage over the mujihadeen in firepower, and their offensives were generally successful, if only in an indecisive way. Casualties were not excessive considering the nature of the operation.
Certainly the Soviets were harassed by the guerrillas throughout the war, true. The mujihadeen also enjoyed much success in ambushing Soviet supply columns on the roads. But these developments were more of an annoyance for the Soviets, and little more.
The talk about a Soviet military “defeat” in Afghanistan is mostly hyperbole and rhetoric. They withdrew from the country because of Gorbachev’s changes in foreign policy, and not because of any combat reversals. In this sense, I suppose, the war could technically be called a “defeat,” but that outcome had little to do with the mujihadeen. If not for Gorbachev’s desire to realign the USSR’s relationship with the world, the Soviet military could have remained in Afghanistan indefinitely.
Keep in mind that — contrary to popular belief — the Soviet army wasn’t in Afghanistan to militarily defeat the mujihadeen. That wasn’t the Soviet goal. Defeating the mujihadeen, and stamping out the rebellion, would have required anywhere from 300,000 to 500,000 Soviet troops. Moscow only sent 105,000 soldiers to Afghanistan because the goal was rather limited. That goal was merely to occupy and hold the 15% of the country that contained the urban population, and to defend the new regime in Kabul. Nothing more.
The war was an embarrassment for the Soviets because they entered Afghanistan not expecting to get entrapped in a lengthy guerrilla war. Moscow expected its army to play defense for a couple of years while the new Afghan government negotiated peace with the mujihadeen by brokering power sharing deals. When the Soviets realized that such a political solution was impossible, they knew they were stuck having to keep their army in Afghanistan, protecting the Kabul regime indefinitely. But in the end, the Soviets suffered no actual military defeat. When the old guard died out in the Kremlin, the new generation of Soviet leaders — all of whom were against the Afghanistan intervention in the first place — happily ended the war without achieving victory.
I agree with a lot of that. My “take” on it was ,as you think,Gorbachev wanting out of the war was why they withdrew. But I also think it was the costs of the war that mattered. Not the human cost. But the financial costs. The USSR was in a crisis by the end of that period. And the costs of the war made it even worse. They did hope that their allied Afghan government would be able to take over the fighting . But those troops weren’t like the SAA. And there was no Assad there to lead the government.The Soviets in the 1920’s were able to crush (completely) a version of the rebels in Afghanistan in their parts of Central Asia (Turkestan). But it was very difficult,and very bloody to do.The 1980’s Soviet weren’t “willing” to adopt the same methods to crush the Afghan rebels. And without doing that ,and without a reliable Afghan ally.They were just as useless as the current NATO troops in Afghanistan are.
I may be wrong, but as I recall, the Afghan War didn’t cost the USSR all that much in expenditures. I believe the economic cost of being in that war was just a small percentage of the overall Soviet military budget.
The real drain on the Soviet economy was the immense expenditures involved in maintain a superpower sized military. The defense budget — necessary in order to compete with the West and China simultaneously — was crushing for Moscow by the 1980s. Gorbachev badly wanted to reallocate financial resources so he could reform and reorganize the Soviet economy, but to do this, he needed to come to terms with the US, indeed with the West and China. That’s where Afghanistan became an issue.
My understanding was that the Reagan-led US was hostile to the idea of coming to terms with Moscow as long as the Soviets were militarily involved worldwide with bases, proxy wars, and client states. Making peace with the West and China meant rolling these involvements back. Given that all these projects were a drain on the Soviet budget anyway, Gorbachev (perhaps naively) was all too willing to downscale these foreign Soviet involvements, thinking that Cold War peace would allow him to scale down the USSR’s defense budget and reinvigorate his economy.
Everyone in the Kremlin knew that Afghanistan wasn’t actually “winnable” unless the Soviets flooded the country with 300,000 to 500,000 troops, which wasn’t an acceptable option for a variety of reasons. The other option — which certainly Brezhnev & Co would have done — was to keep the Soviet army in Afghanistan for decades. But this second option was unattractive because it amounted to destroying the Afghan people (that’s what Gorbachev really meant by his “bleeding wound” statement), which was morally unacceptable. And, of course, keeping the army in an ugly, brutal, endless war was getting in the way of making peace with Russia and China.
So — and again I may not be entirely correct on this count — that explains the link, for the Soviets, between economic costs and remaining in Afghanistan.
BTW, when the Soviets committed to retreating from Afghanistan in 1988-89, Shevardnaze strongly advised Gorbachev to keep 15,000 troops in Kabul permanently. That was affordable, and it was enough Soviet soldiers to ensure that Najibullah’s regime couldn’t be threatened by the mujihadeen. But Gorbachev rejected this idea simply because he wanted to impress the West with his conciliatory attitude. That’s was Gorbachev’s mindset. In retrospect, it was naive.
My point was that any extra cost was a burden. But I agree that Gorbachev’s trusting the West was a very naive mistake. I disagree that the war couldn’t have been won. But it would have taken a harshness that the Soviets weren’t any longer willing to do. It would have meant remaking the entire society as was done in Soviet Central Asia.And they didn’t want to go to that policy anymore by the end of the 1980’s.Russia was willing to do that in Chechnya in the 2000’s,and they won that war.Hopefully they will see that Syria can only be won the same way. But I’m not sure on that.
Too soon to say that Russia has ‘won’ in Chechnya.
GW, no one could have ‘defeated’ the USSR militarily just as no one could now ‘defeat’ Russia militarily now that Russia is armed to the teeth with advanced weaponry like the USSR was. But the USSR suffered a strategic economic and psychological defeat in Afghanistan which was compounded by its strategic and psychological defeat in Vietnam. The decade long wars in both Afghanistan and Vietnam sucked the economic life-blood out of the USSR and fatally demoralised the top leadership. Even if it was a Zionist plot and Gorbachov was a closet Zionist, Russia will need to consider why the plot succeeded in the first place. Russia today may yet come apart. For example, Russia has a shrinking population (it could have been reversed) of 143 million defending over 6.6 million square miles. Linear thinking will tell us where Russia is heading. So avoid hubris, consider facts, have a bit of humility and pray hard for Almighty God’s mercy.
Even if Afghanistan (did not cost much according to your reckoning) and Vietnam are the straws that broke the proverbial camel’s back, the camel’s back (USSR’s economy) was still broken and the camel collapsed.
But the USSR suffered a strategic economic and psychological defeat in Afghanistan…
This is not true.
Most Russians and Soviets did not even consider Afghanistan a war. Further, they never considered Afghanistan to be a defeat. Anyone who has done even semi-serious reading on the subject understands this.
Again, just to be clear, the Russians and Soviets had no reason to put Afghanistan — in terms of the magnitude of military involvement — on the same level as the Russo-Japanese War, WW1, WW2, or Finland. Therefore, short of anything decisive happening in Afghanistan pro or con, the war simply was not perceived by the Russians as being a “war.” It was regarded as being more of a long term occupation of a foreign country.
For these reasons, the Russians felt no sense of psychological defeat or loss of national self-confidence associated with the Afghanistan withdrawal. My understandings here are based on having done lots of reading on the issue.
You need to be very careful about the sources of your information. Sure, if you limit your studies to whatever’s written in mainstream media, then it’s easy to get the idea that the Soviets were defeated by the mujihadeen. But those articles are written by ignorant journalists who are given to hyperbole.
Other sources of information on the subject, you’ll notice, are books written by ideologues associated with right-wing think tanks and university professors who are associated with those same institutions. These types irresponsibly call Afghanistan a “total military defeat” and the cause of the USSR’s collapse for reasons of rhetoric. But you can’t take their words at face value.
FYI, here’s an example of one of the most superficial and erroneous articles on the Internet about the Soviet Afghanistan War. It’s written by a couple of business school instructors. They don’t even have PhD’s in a field relevant to the subject of the Afghanistan War. Their claims about Soviets losses, and the domestic effects of the war, are wild and overgeneralized. Lots of naive, uninformed people take it seriously however.
You still don’t get it. To defeat a nation, one do not need to defeat it mililtarily. Military means is only one of many ways to ‘skin the cat’. You just need to press at the most vulnerable point. Deng said that the lesson he imparted to Vietnam in his punitive war of 1979 was also a lesson for the USSR. My own eyes saw the result of that lesson when the USSR collapsed – hordes of beautiful Russian girls/women forcing themselves into prostitution in the Far East to make ends meet. This had happened before to China after the cultural revolution and Deng’s opening up. I could only pray for these girls/women, that Russia will recover fast so that they can go home to a good job. To know when one is defeated is a good thing. But not knowing that one is defeated (like Napoleon and Hitler) until too late is…,. And to be in denial is also not good. Putin showed he has learnt the lessons, although his year-long foray into Syria showed otherwise. The neocons, from Pepe’s article above, at least indicated that they realised that they are already defeated and may yet cut their losses.
The USSR suffered at least 5000 dead in Afghanistan, not counting wounded….and numerous successful and bloody ambush of supply columns. What about the neutralisation of Soviet airpower by the Stingers? You call those just an ‘annoyance’?
USSR can remain in Afghanistan indefinitely? What have you been smoking if you don’t mind me asking? In the meantime, the Soviet’s economy (USSR and Russia’s most vulnerable point) was shaking and crumbling.
And “the Soviet army wasn’t in Afghanistan to militarily defeat the mujihadeen”? If so the USSR had planned to lose in Afghanistan – which is ridiculous. But I don’t think the USSR entered Afghanistan to play games.
In a guerilla war, if you did not win, you have lost. Please SunTzu and Mao on guerilla warfare.
And if you still harbour thoughts of invincibility as in Russia is able to destroy ‘anyone’, then please know that God Almighty is able to raise up ‘anything’ not to mention ‘anyone’ from within or without Russia which/who con consign Russia to history. Come to think of it, just a zoonotic virus can probably do the job more efficiently than thermonuclear bombs and the ensuing nuclear winter. Those pathogens in fact exist now. It is just that God in His mercy did not let them mutate to be able to jump to humans/Russians and spread through the air like flu. Sometimes it is not wise to inadvertently challenge the Almighty out of hubris.
The historical mistakes that Russia made should have doomed Russia to the dust-bin of history.
You are incorrect. Russia is a great power because, historically, it has used its territory to achieve military defense in depth. Invaders could not penetrate Russia’s territorial depth without suffering massive losses in attrition. Also, Russia’s enormous geographical scope enables it to project power — geopolitically and militarily — across the entire Northern Hemisphere.
These facts about Russia, combined with its centuries long history of being able to compete successfully with the West in terms of military competence, all but ensured that Russia would remain a great and influential power over the long term.
Sir, you are describing exactly what the USSR was before being swept into the dustbin of history (unmourned). Russia today can be seen as a smaller version of the USSR minus the communist ideology. There are many religions and multiple ethnic groups within the Russian Federation asserting centrifugal forces on it. This was the reason why China limited its territorial expansion only to those areas where it saw as its natural sphere of civilisation and rightful historical ownership. That was why it was willing to let Vietnam go free despite the fact that the Vietnamese has Chinese roots. The same goes for Korea and the Japanese. China has integrated those peoples and territories that asserted centripedal forces and helped maintain the coherence and integrity of the civilisational state. Russia has yet to do so and may yet come apart. This is also what the neocons want. So avoid hubris.
There are many religions and multiple ethnic groups within the Russian Federation asserting centrifugal forces on it
Aside from the northern Caucasus and the Kazan region, the RF is, for the most part, ethnically and religiously homogeneous. Altogether, the RF is 84% ethnic Russian. The 16% that’s non-Russian is broken up into over a dozen fairly small groups. Keep in mind also that the RF is comprised of overwhelmingly of territory that’s always been Russian (about 97% of its land mass). That includes most of Siberia, which was almost entirely uninhabited before the Russians claimed it.
Thus, today’s RF is demographically much different from the USSR, the population of which was only 66% Russian.
GW, the Moslem Northern Caucasus and the Caucasus as a whole is central to the territorial coherence of Russia. If the Moslem part of the Russian Federation breaks away (and the last I read, the Moslem population is increasing), it will be hard to maintain Russian territorial integrity with a shrinking population of 143 million for over 6 million square miles. The Northern Caucasus is like a knife sticking into the center of Russia’s territory. Russia cannot use Orthodoxy to maintain national unity since the various patriarchates are independent. Therefore if the Northern Caucasus breaks away, the territories east of the Caucasus may likely opt for independence. And as I have posted – like many in the past, you can’t kill them all.
the Moslem Northern Caucasus and the Caucasus as a whole is central to the territorial coherence of Russia… The Northern Caucasus is like a knife sticking into the center of Russia’s territory.
Based on this information, I don’t believe you’ve ever studied maps of Russia.
The North Caucasus is a relatively small region that abuts southern Russia. Geographically, the region morphs into the south Russian steppes, which makes it a security concern. But still, it is comparatively small, and it doesn’t stretch into Russia’s heartland by any means.
Russia is in the north Caucasus because, absent Russia’s presence, the region would be a tremendous security vacuum. Also, Russia’s most dangerous enemies — such as the West — would like to use the region as a base from which to threaten the RF. Russia’s not in the north Caucasus because, as you say, the area is an integral part of a territorial jigsaw puzzle.
Where do you get your information? Again, I urge you to be very careful about believing simplistic messages conveyed by Western mainstream media. That’s especially with respect to the subject of Russia.
Yeah, but the North Caucasus is but the handle of the knife. The sharp point of the knife runs north up the Urals from the blade that forms the soft underbelly of Southern Russia. I did not want to unduly alarm all the hubristic readers here. But to make my point more cogent, it is really a knife pointing at the throat/neck of Russia. The neocons want to lay hold of that handle in order to press or slash north. It’s a brilliant move, akin to Alexander the Great’s manoevre at the battle of Gaugabela against Persia. How long do you think Russia’s economy will last in a protracted guerilla war in the Caucasus, Urals and along Russia’s southern borders? So beware of hubris. And no, I am as sceptical of the western MSM as you are.
I’m not sure what you are talking about here.The Volga Tatars are loyal to Russia.They have always been(for at least a hundred years) the most modern and integrated of the Muslim peoples in Russia.They have the reputation of being the friendliest of all the Muslim minorities to Russians. Intermarriage is common.And Islam is surface deep among them.We aren’t talking of Central Asians or Caucasian Muslim peoples who are more traditional in their Islamic culture.As to further East.Over 90% of Siberians are ethnic Slavs.
Uncle Bob 1. Yeah, but they can be, like any other ethnics of other stripes and religions who have been taken for granted, radicalised. That was why the Saudi’s ‘Bandar Bush’ was able to threaten Putin with terrorism right to his face. The key to the cohesion of the RF is economic develoment. This is because economics and geography trump over blood ties and cultural similiarities..even religious ties and similarities as far as perceptions of various ethnic groups about themselves are concerned. There are enough historical and recent examples of this. For historical examples look at US and Great Britain, the US civil war. For recent examples, look at the break up of Yugoslavia and the Serbia’s desire to join the EU and not the EEU. I am glad to see Putin taking steps to build up the economy of the RF. But can Putin extricate Russia from Syria? Putin can win the Syrian fight. But can Putin win the peace? And if he can’t win the peace (like the USSR in Afghanistan) then he has lost.
I do not agree on syria. Syria to Russia now is like north Korea to china in Korea war. If Syria lost, Isis will get through Iraq and to Russia and Iran in no time. it will be much harder to fight them in Russia.
Yes, it’s much harder to fight ‘them’ in Russia. Not only is Syria like North Korea to China, Syria is being turned, or was being turned before Erdogan’s about-turn, into a ‘Vietnam’ or ‘Afghanistan’ for Russia i.e. another military quagmire. Putin went into Syria without an exit strategy and went in for too long. Hopefully China can help him win the peace with her billions in investments, in rebuilding western Syria and especially the port of Latakia. And you are right about ISIS. ISIS was actually designed for Russia. If ISIS got hold of the handle of the scimitar in the North Caucasus, it can ignite a guerilla war along Southern Russia and knife northwards along the Urals (perfect guerilla warfare country with easy supply lines from across the southern Russian border) to cut the throat of the Russian Federation. If that happens, the Russian Federation as a concept will likely be living on borrowed time. So much for hubris about killing ‘anyone’. Sure you can kill, but can you kill them all?
Simon, We are in agreement here. Except I do not think China can do much in Syria yet. Syria is too far away, it is no time to get too involved. If ISIS were about to take over Iran or Pakistan, then I can see China get very involved.
I has state it before at beginning of Russia/Turkey spat. Putin was being foolish demonize Ergodan. Russian should have bending backwards to staying in good side of Turkey, not make it a new enemy. Russia can not win in Syria with Turkey actively fighting against it. Luckily for Putin, Obama was even more stupid.
If ISIS get into Russia, than Russian Federation will be likely on borrowed time. No doubt about it. I’d say same about India. But I will not respond any flame to this sentence.
In old times, Russia did kill them all, or 90% of them, and it still have to spend excessive amount of treasury and man power on defense, and worry about its neighbors while sleep at night.
At this information age, killing everyone and getting away with it is not going to happen.
“Putin demonized Erdogan and Turkey”? What’s yer poison thar Pardner?
That is some powerful stuff you are smoking, drinking, snorting, or shooting.
You may have been among the unborn (or more likely among the living dead) when the CIA unleashed the full power of psychopathic Wahabbism in Chechnya. Do you not know how that ended? And do you think that all the rat-holes the CIA used have not been plugged and booby-trapped?
Whatever you take to make you that stupid… I want some.
The world is not black and white. One can lose in many ways, and does not limit to only your version of right or wrong.
Putin over reacted, and break off a very good relationship between two countries, and people. Like it or not, had Obama and Nato being smart, Turkey would have stayed in Nato camp, Russia could have seen it self stuck into another Afghanistan. I know Afghanistan loved Russians and Russian did not lose the war there, or what ever you say what happened over there to suit your ego.
Syria war is not over yet, don’t be too cocky. People who disagree with you is not stupid nor your enemy, your enemy is ISIS, and your own righteous view of your self.
The first round in Chechnya was a disaster for the Russians. The trainloads of cargo 200 was full. Putin won the second round. The third round? The Chechens may have learnt from the second round.
In the old days, they (Muslim insurgents) do not know Sun Tzu or guerilla warfare. So it was easier to exterminate them without too much cost. Now is different.
Ok Simon, I’m going to agree with you, you can’t kill them all. But you can kill enough of them to make the difference.
Most of the Muslims in Syria support Assad, that is definite, else he wouldn’t still be there now. So all that needs to be done is to take care of that minority of Muslims in Syria who don’t support Assad. After that its just the outsiders the US, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Israel have sent in that need attention. For instance, you catch one Islamist, you then follow the ancient Chinese strategy of taking care of that guy’s entire family line. After a while of this (it takes years), you have remaining only the loyal populace, who will make more loyal populace.
I’ve said this before, Putin should declare himself Khan. Then as Khan of all the Russia’s (Ivan the Terrible was Tsar of all the Russia’s), all the Muslims in Russian associated lands will obey him emphatically. Russian Muslims have always had more loyalty to the Khan that to any Caliphate, the concept of Khan was with them even before they became Muslims. So Russian Muslims can have their Khan and Nato Muslims can have their Caliphate, and we all know from history who was the meaner motherf#$%^# of the two. Putin does not even have to become Muslim to be a Khan because Genghis Khan, the Khan of all Khans, was not a Muslim.
That way all the Russia’s, no matter their religion or ethnicity, will be united in their land. So no more problems from Muslims in Russia, they obey Putin Khan or Ramzan Kadyrov is going to have chat with them, he is very persuasive. All the Muslims in Russian associated lands know they must obey the Khan, it has been become the dominant trait in their dna after centuries of the disobedient having their throats slit.
President is just too Western a concept, Khan is better.
Corrections: Putin does not have to declare himself Khan, it is not necessary, Putin doesn’t have to do anything.
All that is required is that a few prominent Russian Muslims, most especially Ramzan, publically declare that “Putin is our leader therefor Putin is our Khan”. Then the concept, the meme, will catch on like wildfire. Most Russian Muslims respect and admire Putin anyway, thus its just a tiny step more for them to think of him as Khan. Then the Saudi Arabian Wahhabist effete Arabs won’t stand a chance in Russia, because tradition dictates that if the Khan says X then no self -respecting Russian Muslim can do anything but X. And the beauty of it is that its all informal and non government gazetted , yet binding.
Yeah, but can you kill enough of them in time? If I were the neocons, I would try to prolong the war in Syria by 1) bribing Erdogan to use his enclave in Syria or southern Turkey itself to supply manpower (ISIS is still recruiting) and arms to the ‘moderate rebels’ – the Al-Nusra al Sham; dodgy Erdogan can be turned by the still mighty USD because Erdogan needs plenty of money to secure his power; 2) since Putin has already double-crossed the Syrian Kurds by his accomodation of Erdogan in Syria, I would also turn the Kurds against Putin. Whatever it is, I would prolong and intensify the war against Putin in Syria for at least another 5 years.
And if remains to be seen whether in the age of the internet, the Muslims in Russia will still react like medieval serfs to Putin declaring himself as ‘Khan’. I doubt it.
“Aside from the northern Caucasus and the Kazan region, the RF is, for the most part, ethnically and religiously homogeneous.”
We all know how Russia achieved it, and why so many countries, and people want to see it come apart.
No, I don’t want to see Russia disintegrate. I love the Russians and the RF. Just concerned with the hubris exhibited. Too much suffering when a state disintegrate. The USA, to my mind is now committing the same mistakes as the USSR. It it continue down the neocon’s road, I would not bet that it woud not disintegrate, beginning economically, socially and politically. The fact to my mind is that all nations/states are created by God. He can raise up one and put down or put out another, according to His will.
We all know how Russia achieved it, and why so many countries, and people want to see it come apart.
I hate to be snarky, but your remark shows that you failed to understand the data I cited. Look again and read each word. Think about the stats I gave you.
Ok, GW. So after Russian conquered a place such as Crimea and Siberia, the natives were magicly disappeared. Ukraine is happy about Crimea “reunit” with mother Russia, and russians are not looking at their backs and can not sleep well at night for fearing Chinese some day want Siberia back to motherland.
We know. Russia had to suppress the endemic slave trade of the Caucasian tribes.
So they remove 90% of population. Logical!
They helped them to remove themselves to the Ottoman Empire. Mostly to Syria.
Tsars were the best thing ever happened to Russian. Bolshevik and the west overthrew them, not the Russian people.
Bolshevik revolution was fault of Jews, and Soviet were controlled by Jews, not a continuing way of Russian expansionism with a twist.
It all make sense that natives removed themselves after Tsars/Stalin’s Cossack and red army march in.
Talk about Hubris with Russian character…..
I delight in re-reading Dominic Lieven’s masterpiece “Russia Against Napoleon: The True Story of the Campaigns of War and Peace”.
Lieven’s book is superb…among the very best accounts of Russia’s victory over Napoleon in the 1812-15 period. The author correctly argues that Russia’s military prowess — as opposed to Napoleon’s mistakes — was the true reason that Russia won the 1812 campaign. In short, the Russian army forced the French to fight a series of bloody, stalemated encounters, with the Russian side emerging the victor in a war of attrition.
Another excellent account of the 1812 war is Richard K. Riehn’s 1812: Napoleon’s 1812 Campaign. Riehn’s account of the war tends to reinforce what Lieven says.
Incidentally, I recently visited the battlefield of Borodino. I spent a long time viewing the field from atop the Raevsky Redoubt. Judging by the slope of the terrain in front of me, it was easy to imagine why the French suffered a horrific 35,000 casualties during their attack. While reflecting on this I remember being quite impressed that the Russians had the competence to station their artillery in such as way — and to use the guns effectively — to gun down so many Western troops at once. I left Borodino feeling convinced that, in truth, the Russians really won the battle. Napoleon never recovered from the loss of military strength he suffered that day (one third of his army and most of his horses). He lost the war and his empire at Borodino, really.
If the West fights Russia in a major war today, assuming the world isn’t blown up, Russia will emerge as the victor much in a way that’s analogous to their victory over Napoleon at Borodino That is, Russia will be the survivor in a war of attrition, using its firepower and defense in depth to finish off the technically superior Westerners.
@ Richard K. Riehn’s 1812: Napoleon’s 1812 Campaign
Thank you for drawing my attention to this book.
Speaking of Borodino. Our friend Chow invoked God’s grace that saved Russia. I have noticed that ( due to his religious upbringing) he was reluctant to acknowledge precisely how the grace of God became manifest at Borodino. It was the procession of the Wonderworking Icon of the Mother of God of Smolensk before the battle that encouraged and inspired the soldiers.
The Intercession of the Mother of God through her icons was manifest on several occasions, including WWII.
Friends, in the case of Napoleon’s pyrrhic victory at Borodino, as in other cases, God acted to defeat a would-be world dictator. This includes Napoleon’s follow-up mistakes. God did the same with Hitler. There were several instances that Hitler could have snatched victory from the jaws of defeat, even after Kurst. But Hitler was his own worst enemy, especially his hubris. It was God who enabled Russia to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat multiple times. There are other historic insances when God set limits on would-be world conquerors according to His will . For example, limits were set even on the ‘invincible’ Mongol’s conquest – defeats in Afghnistan, Syria and Egypt. The rapid demise of the USSR should be a historic lesson for the whole world and not only Russia as to the consequence of overreach due to hubris.
And the long patient grace shown to Russia is so that Russians can repent and turn to Jesus Chrsit for salavtion, not for chest-thumping hubris. If God so willed, Russia will become history and rapidly. Same goes for all other nations.
Putin’s defence build-up was pure SunTzu as in “let your plans be as dark and impenetrable as the night..”.
Rejecting TPP Deal Would Hinder US to Advance Objectives in Asia Pacific
“Rejecting the Trans Pacific Partnership free trade agreement would be a gigantic self-inflicted wound for the United States as it would slow growth and prevent fully advancing US interests in the Asia Pacific region, US Secretary of State John Kerry said.”
Pétain’s got nuttin on the kerry c-suck when it comes to being a quisling fotr a hostile foreign power. The critter makes a great poster boi for the damage zionazi create in host countries.
America is preparing an attack on Russia and think it will be fought in Europe They are sadly mistaken as Putin has said “If someone threatens our territories, it means that we will have to aim our armed forces accordingly at the territories from where the threat is coming. How else could it be?” Putin cautioned in a press announcement on June 16, 2015. “It is NATO that approaching our borders, it’s not like we are moving anywhere.”
Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/nato-troops-european-soil-russian-war/#tqQtsPsZWDpZax37.99
Pepe’s conclusion is wrong in my opinion.
Daily we are bombarded by our media that Assad is bad, it is a civil war and Assad and Russia are bombing civilians. The one thing both our Left & Right “Media” agrees on is that we need to get more involved in Syria. Enough Americans believe this trash. THey have tied people’s dislike for Obama to that he was “too weak” to go into Syria and prevent evil Putin’s advances in the world.
There is no bluff coming from the United States and it does not matter if Trump or Hillary is elected, U.S. will be going into Syria harder. I would ask Pepe what he is looking at when he says US is bluffing? Since when has not being prepared stopped us? We were not prepared for Iraq and we went. WWII we were not prepared and German troops scoffed at how lousy our soldiers where when we entered. Some would say our own government was involved in bringing down the towers in New York to achieve their agenda for war with Iraq. If that is true, they planned it in advance, took out their own citizens as “collateral damage” in order to achieve the goal and still went in while not fully militarily prepared to do so. Think on that since the same rhetoric said back then to justify Iraq is being preached daily in our news for Syria.
US behind in technology? We will have to wait and see about that. Maybe current fielded weapons systems but, like Russia, US holds their top weapons systems back to until there is sufficient justification to field them and make them known. If we go hot with Russia, expect space to be a battlefield like never before seen. Anyone who does not factor this should begin researching how that will play out. Also, expect laser weapons systems to be fielded both for defensive and offensive purposes.
American mindset as I mentioned elsewhere does not recognize large scale nuclear war as a credible deterrent. They think maybe a nuke here and there from a rogue nation but not full scale nuclear war. Besides, they think somehow our government has that covered or they would not choose war with a nuclear power. That is why we don’t do emergency drills or go around building a bunch of bunkers. If we took the threat seriously we would do as Russia does.
Also, as I mentioned elsewhere, secretly I think many Americans want to go to war with Russia. US has been destroying inferior militaries and flip-flop wearers for a long time. Secretly (maybe out of a tinge of guilt) I think they want to see a confrontation with a worthy adversary. Many might say I am wrong but America has become a very unhealthy, psychotic nation. A lot of discontent brewing and many ignorant people don’t know where to turn their anger and frustration to. A perfect time for our government to start a large scale war to distract from the problems at home. And it has to be large scale because we are used to this low intensity foreign war stuff and it does not even get our attention anymore.
US has Allies, Russia has partners. When the shooting starts which one would you prefer to have? Shoot American planes down, you a fair game to every Ally US has and we have many. Russia has partners and how many of them can Russia count on to help when the shooting starts?
Pentagon and CIA in a big fight over this? No, the war will be big enough for the both of them to keep their jobs and do their thing for a long time to come. The only disagreement you have is Pentagon is not fond of arming Al Quieda and others while the CIA loves the “covert” options. Pentagon is more for overt and that is not good news.
Do not make the mistake that the US is not all-in on this either on the opposite side as the Russians. Deep State is 100% all-in. This is Poker not Chess, US is the chicken that will stand on top of the table and knock every damn piece off the carefully prepared board and not give a damn. Look at our elections. Since early elections started, there are daily stories of “glitches” in voting machines. This election is openly rigged, not even carefully so, to push Hillary in at all costs. She has openly stated No-Fly zone and boots on the ground. Win back control over Aleppo and it still will not matter. Aleppo is major victory for Syria, Russia and Iran but it does not win the war, it is but a point on a map. Heartless words to people who have been through hell and back and see hope again. I am sorry to say that but I want to to see the American military and government’s mentality.
With all that being said, I have admiration and respect for Putin like no other leader I have seen in my lifetime. Despite everything I have said above, Putin and Russia stand in the face of the Empire of Chaos and have drawn their line. I pray for the Russian people, their nation and the good that is left in my own country. I see this war as avoidable but inevitable. I literally see a fight to the death between good and evil coming because for too long, good men stood by and did nothing. Russia is going into this with eyes wide open and America is sleepwalking into it.
Please take this as you will. Other Americans here can speak to what they see and experience as we all have different perspectives.
I see things a lot like you do on this. I just hope Russia understands that too. And doesn’t believe the rosy views that some writers publish.That would be a horrible error to make.
I seriously doubt if the Kremlin takes their cue from Pepe.
He’s an effective and motivational writer for the multi-polar world-view and gives a lot of people from many countries hope, ourage where it is sorely needed and enthusiasm, and I am sure the Kremlin doesn’t object to what he is doing. I don’t object to it either! And more Americans should escape being mind controlled morons and get their act together (not be mind controlled zombies of the elites walking them into disaster) and Pepe might be of help to get them started thinking a little. I’ll give him that.
But the Kremlin , or even a majority of Russians operating on “The Hope Plan” as influenced by Pepe??? Is he translated much into Russian???
I doubt it. But better safe than sorry, and so Active Patriot’s comment is a very useful wet mackerel for slapping sense into people who are tempted to merely go with “The Hope Plan”. Such a plan would better be called “The Dope Plan”. Americans are under deep, deep mind control top to bottom, and that irrationality is extremely dangerous to themselves and to the world.
And … this is why the Saker or other righteous members of this blog should leave USA immeadiately..
If you want to have some kind of a chance of living and fighting the good fight against NWO…
Just saying, I am out of that miserable place, I would rather die somewhere else.. Maybe on a battle field ?
Because life in Russia is already as miserable as it will be in US during the nuclear winter…
Care to provide any real proof for that Russophobic statement. No? I didn’t think so.
@ Active Patriot
“US has Allies, Russia has partners. When the shooting starts which one would you prefer to have? Shoot American planes down, you a fair game to every Ally US has and we have many.”
What makes you so sure US allies would be of any help if things get hot?
By allies you mean Nato – the other ones would be irrelevant in a big conflict with Russia. Nato will have no obligation to get involved if its members are not attacked, and even if such attack (real or false flag) takes place, the ‘obligation’ is not a mandatory declaration of war. Realistically, do you think that any European country (perhaps with the exception of the UK) would risk incineration only because the US says “Assad must go”? Ridiculous!
Let’s look at a concrete example. When Turkey shot down the Russian SU24 it was permissible under international for Russia to take adequate reprisals to defend itself (e.g. the destruction of the airbase whence the attacking plane came from). Had the Russians done that, there would have been a chorus of vilification similar to the Crimean reunification with Russia. But do you think any country in Europe would lift a finger to help Turkey and declare war on Russia?
As to open conflict with the US over Syria, Nato cannot be invoked anyway and I would venture that no European country would even allow the US to use its territory to persecute a war against Russia.
In my view, although I don’t expect much rationality from the US regime, they are not that dumb to initiate a localized war that would bring Nato to its delayed demise, turn the Middle East into a Russian sphere of influence and signalled to the world the end of the hardly begun New American Century.
The reinforcing of Russian naval assets should be seen, as it has been pointed out elsewhere, as a manoeuvre to put an end to the Anglozionist madness of even thinking of “no-fly zones” let alone boots on the ground. Once the strategic pieces are all in place, it will be the time for Russia to call the shots and draw red lines along the Syrian borders.
” although I don’t expect much rationality from the US regime, they are not that dumb”
Saner leaders have taken the US to many wars, perhaps for lesser reasons. Contrary to what many people believe, Kennedy started the Vietnam war, yet the new narrative shows him as the last decent president who was about to put an end to that war and was killed for that!
And do you know why he started the war in earnest? Because the USA “had to defend its credibility as a world power”, his own words.
In the war in Syria the US credibility as the exceptional indispensable world power is also on the line, more so than in Vietnam . A very perverted position to take, I admit, but if the nice president did it when the US was a “decent” nation, what can one expect from the Zionists-cum-neocons in charge now?
I see three major problems with Americans: effectively stupid; crazy; childishness. All of these, aside from bad schools, strange culture, and perverted religion, is made much worse by the omnipresent mass media and attachments to technological toys, which pushes people towards dissociation with reality, social structures, and social values.
In short, Americans tend to be like cognitively impaired kids trapped in magical thinking. Do not expect them to act like rational grownups with knowledge and experience which maturity was supposed to bring, or honesty even with themselves — they have grown, but sideways and not up. Many of them are so childish I can’t even stomach trying to seriously talk with.
I think I see much of the same sort of thing in the EU now, and the West in general: astounding immaturity.
You wrote: “In short, Americans tend to be like cognitively impaired kids trapped in magical thinking.”
Are you saying Americans are trapped in “magical thinking” because they watch all the Hollywood movies and all the American TV programs where 00% of the time, everything turns out okay in the last 5 minutes ? Well, you are the one who is deluded – obviously – because it’s well known that in fact Americans never watch movies or TV, except once a year and then only for five minutes. Where do you get your ideas about Americans ? Obviously, you don’t watch much Hollywood. (sarc/on)
» Pepe’s conclusion is wrong in my opinion. «
And what precedes it is also wrong.
» Some would say our own government was involved in bringing down the towers in New York to achieve their agenda for war with Iraq. If that is true, they planned it in advance, took out their own citizens as “collateral damage” … «
The government ( = oligarchs, plutocrats) took down the towers but they were empty and there was no collateral damage. There was no “attack”, it was all a big show, meticulously planned, scripted and executed, to create history and fool the world.
» US behind in technology? «
Some say so (e.g. Thierry Meyssan, or Pepe Escobar here), but they don’t strike me as technologically knowledgeable authors. Maybe there are efficiency and reliability problems here and there, but the same holds true for, say, Russia and Germany. To conclude that the US is “behind” in technology is pure nonsense in my view.
» US holds their top weapons systems back to until there is sufficient justification to field them and make them known. «
Don’t think so either. A system needs fielding (practice, experience, fixing, improving, on and on and on) to become a top system, and only then is it going to be produced in large numbers.
» expect space to be a battlefield like never before seen … laser weapons … «
Don’t hold your breath. Space capabilities are vastly inferior to what we are led to believe. For instance, there are no humans in space. The ISS is a hoax. There is no human space travel. Never has been. The Apollo Moon Hoax is just the tip of the liesberg.
That doesn’t mean that existing space technology is not a phantastic accomplishment. It certainly is. It’s just been made into something much larger – for propaganda purposes, you could even say, for techno-religion puprposes. And now we’re stuck with it because we cannot admit lies of this magnitude.
» American mindset as I mentioned elsewhere does not recognize large scale nuclear war as a credible deterrent. «
And the “American mindset” is correct here. Most common people don’t care about the “danger of nuclear war”, even in Germany which, during the “Cold War”, was slated to become the “nuclear battleground”. I was scared as a child, and even later when Russian infoprop (that I absorbed on RIA Novosti) started resurrecting the nuclear bogeyman, but last year I found out that I had been fooled about “nukes”. So the risk of “nuclear war” is exactly zero.
Don’t misinterpret this as “anti-Russian”. I just don’t like scary hoaxes, and this one has been re-employed by Russia in the “New Cold War”, in an attempt, I think, to foster protest movements in European countries against Uncle Sam’s drive for militarization. Not a success, in my view.
The established powers have a joint interest in upholding this myth. Again, lies of this magnitude cannot be admitted. It’s time for the non-established powers to call their bluff. Think about what it means that Iran’s ayatollah has called nuclear weapons “unislamic” … with a smile on his face.
» … fair game to every Ally US has and we have many … «
Outside the Anglosphere, the US only has vassals, and none of them has the muscle and the will to challenge Russia on his own initiative in order to please his overlord. Uncle Sam has to maneuver and push his pawns into action. Some might bark hysterically like nervous lapdogs, but when push comes to shove, the result will be as in 2008.
Yesterday, on my daily walk, I noticed a formation of two biplanes flying high above the beach, probably antiques or replicas of antiques. And somehow I got an image in my mind of hundreds of AN-2 Russian biplanes possibly full of paratroopers invading the coasts of the US, and landing on beaches and farm fields to seize strategic targets, the US having become so weak that these ancient biplanes were a formidable weapon.
In his recent book, ‘My Journey at the Nuclear Brink’ William J Perry, Secretary of Defence for the US, 1994/1997, was of the view that,
”When I think of the persistent history of the forlorn idea of the defence against a nuclear attack, I am tempted to think that the notion especially typifies Einstein’s grim and painfully realistic observation that ‘the unleashed power of the atom has changed everything except our modes of thinking.’ It has certainly been normal in history to think that fashioning of defences against evolving military threats. But nuclear weapons, unleashed in a large scale attack, bring a sure destruction, one so massive as to rule out any successful defence. Defence in conflict, a traditional mode of thinking, is no longer plausible. In a nuclear war, the long standing norm of reliance on defence has become a self-deception, a most human and understandable one, and one that is rooted in an aversion to the new reality.”
In short, the decision to go for a full on nuclear exchange is basically a suicide pact. And I am quite sure that Ashton Carter knows it, Hilary Clinton knows it, the Joint Chiefs of Staff know it, Kerry knows it, Obama knows it, and Putin knows that they know it. It is a bluff; the Americans have painted themselves into a corner and don’t know how to get out of it. It was JFK who said ”Never put your adversary into such a position that they have to choose either humiliating retreat or nuclear war. Unfortunately, the present US administration has done just that to itself.
All things considered, it’s hard to predict what’s going to happen. This hysterical level of anti-Russian propaganda, on the one hand, is unprecedented, and often correlates with predictive programming as a means of warming up a population for war with the demonized country. Remember how crazy anti-Iraqi the Western media had become the months prior to the 2nd invasion of Iraq under Dubya. It is disturbing how full of sheer hatred and loathing the Anglozionist elites are against Russia for at least five years now, no matter how resolutely Russia stands its own and stands up for its own interests and its allies, as it rightly should.
There is no relenting to the demonic hatred of Russia in the Western media, which of course does not manifest hatred of Russia in the West by the average Joe – the majority of Westerners are neither for or against Russia, just minding their daily business. It is the West’s small Zionist elite and their media megaphone that stubbornly, like a rabid, mad dog, won’t leave Russia alone until they achieve their vampiric dream of sucking Russia dry, breaking it apart and taking over its immense natural resources. Among the rabid haters of Russia to a point of insanity, I see 1) the exiled oligarchs playing a major role in arousing the international support of their Zionist brethren around the world and 2) the Israel-firsters, who view Russia’s traditional support for Syria and Iran as an unavoidable obstacle to their idée fixe of an Eretz Israel running from the Nile to the Euphrates.
The rabid greed and sense of entitlement of the exiled oligarchs (‘Russian is mine, all of Russia is mine, mine, mine!), combined with the alternative universe of now generations of brainwashed Israel-firsters, in whose paranoid minds the whole world secretly hates them (as if we were all closet Nazis), brings to mind the sick doctrine of the Samson option. From a goy’s perspective, it is difficult to understand the absolute hatred the Zionist-controlled media keeps spewing against Russia. Such demonic hatred is what scares me and what I think should scare the rest of us because it is clearly irrational.
This is why I’m not quite convinced that we should just relax and not worry that the crazies in the basement won’t do something stupid – with terrible repercussions. IF the Zionists view the fight over Syria (and Ukraine) as a life or death struggle for the survival of Israel, “either we topple Assad or Israel will soon be destroyed,” as I suspect CIA Deputy Director David S. Cohen does, then the prospect of nuclear poker sadly is not so far-fetched. The demonic hatred of Russia in the media is a sign of insanity, is a reflection of the insanity of our Zionist elites. Their egregious insouciance about bankrupting the United States government through unbridled defense spending, with not the slightest sign of worrying about who’s going to ever pay back our record-breaking debt, is another sign of insanity. Another factor for not dismissing a nuclear exchange scenario appears to be some sort of sexual fascination among some elements in our military (goyim like Gen. Mark Milley) with a putatively winnable WWIII: it is fascination with the unknown, the urge to reach the finish line of full-spectrum dominance, so close, so close, if only Russia wasn’t in the way.
Now, I don’t mean to be a scaremongerer, who knows what will happen. Maybe cooler minds will prevail. But it is only a possibility. As long as the NATO gorilla thumps its chest, as long as Western politicians and presstitutes keep hurling the vilest, most hateful insults at Russia, I won’t sleep soundly at night.
Yes, the Zionist entity is the hot potato, there’s the root behind US warmongering, but they don’t see it and others ditto. 70 years of unleashed propaganda has now her fruits, the harvest is near.
Q.S. — thank you for this — a most impressive analysis.
@ Quintus Sertorius
You sound as good an observer as your namesake of classical times. Any connection? He made the Republic tremble!
Paper analysis, nothing more. You have to actually have the fight to see the outcome.
Desperate people do desperate things. You have widespread desperation in US, today.
Every major economy (with the possible exception of India) is now beyond sustainability as per their own rules and metrics.
Something has to give. A cold boot reset of some sort. This could happen locally, theater per theater of globally (World conflict).
America is exceptional, by all accounts. Exceptional does not imply more ethical, greater or any type of superiority versus the rest of the world. The combination of resources, brain power, diversity, military and cultural influence makes it exceptional. Russia knows it (they keep calling America “our partner”) and has been very careful in delineating their own interest and red lines.
Americans are divided, confused and angry. But you will not find a majority of people in US angry at Russia or any other foreign power. They are mostly blaming themselves.
America needs a regime change. Badly.
They do not need anybody else to help or facilitate this change. The only ingredients all the friends of America can bring to bake the cake is “information”. Other points of view, other narratives, more historical and sociological perspective will enlighten the Western World citizens and they will act accordingly.
Other nations should stand their ground, respectfully but firmly, and invest heavily in information distribution without delay. The sense of urgency comes from the unstoppable development of the robotization of the battlefield. A.I. + Drones is an unstoppable path to doomsday.
Most people around the world know the US is exceptional… for the wrong reasons. Where shall I start? Chronologically from the genocide of the native population or from the most abominable crime in world history at Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Indeed it is so exceptional that in 2002 it walked out of the ABM Treaty with Russia. Why? That treaty was to ensure that MAD would not take place ever because the first to strike would receive retaliation. But in 2002 Russia was on its knees, the triumphant neocons were having wet dreams of full spectrum dominance and they were so confident of subduing Russia to the point that MAD was unthinkable due to superior Yank technology. But the Russians got the message: “The exceptionals want to be in a position to strike first”.
Taking into account their historic record (when they had “normal” people in charge) of dropping atomic bombs to kill hundreds of thousands of civilians and their plans to do the same on 12 Russian cities immediately after WWII, the Russian leadership had good reasons to believe and fear the same fate. After all, why abandon the ABM Treaty?
Indeed the US is exceptional – for its inhumanity.
Things are now definately heating up in Venezuela, where the CIA has been trying to oust the country’s democratically elected Maduro government for quite sometime now.
One of the objectives is to significantly reduce or remove all traces of Chinese, Russian, Iranian and Cuban influence in the county and ensure that a pro US puppet government is installed.
Russia is engaged, but understandably preoccupied with Ukraine and Syria, but has made a shout out in support of the government:
The government enjoys the support of the Army and has the backing of the majority of Venezuelans so the Regime Change that Uncle Sam has been attempting has not been successful, to date.
While this has stymied Washington’s Regime Change efforts it has not stopped them from trying.
Now bolstered by their recent successful removal of Dilma Russof in Brazil, they are seemingly opting for a new angle:
The so called “Opposition” consists of a handful of wealthy, english speaking elites, who control parts of the economy and the media.
The chief culprit and rabble rouser is a billionaire and pro US/Israel “Zionist” named Henrique Capriles Radonski, who wants to privitize the country’s resources and force feed neo liberal austerity measures to the population,while rolling back the significant social progress of the country, initiated by Hugo Chavez.
Argentina had been neutralize.
Cuba has been cajoled.
Brazil has been sabotaged.
Venezuela is being regime changed.
Bolivia and Nicaragua are next.
The Empire never sleeps.There is no rest for the wicked.
Britain is so so proud to be on the frontline soon
interesting map, show Russia marching through ukraine……………….
“Russia’s military escalation on Europe’s border has triggered the West’s biggest show of force in the region since the Cold War as Nato continues to square up to Vladimir Putin….The moves are designed to stop Moscow taking over or undermining its former Eastern European satellites as it has with Crimea and Ukraine.Lev Gudkov, head of the Russian polling group Levada-Center, said most of his countrymen ‘believe that the Third World War has begun”
gung ho chaps!
The daily mail is a bloody shit, poisonous, warmongering, lying, sick MSM outlet, as in sewerage outlet.
Yes it is. But it and the other like minded MSM.Is also a harbinger of the future. Throughout history a country’s media has been used to ramp up the populace for war.Demonize the “enemy” enough,and the people will be ready to “square up with him”.That is how it all works. So ,more than political leaders words.Watch the media,and see the reaction of people around you to the propaganda.That will tell you what the future holds.Since WWI countries have fine tuned their demonizing propaganda to a high art form.From the posters in WWI showing “the Hun” in Belgium,with apes in German uniform,raping virgins,and carrying “babies stuck on bayonets” .Which was used to get Britons worked up to “kick the Kaiser where it hurt”.After the war it was revealed that was all propaganda,not fact. But millions died before that was exposed.To the “Iraqis throwing babies out of incubators in maternity wards in Kuwait.Also propaganda to “gin up war fever”,but very effective,it worked.We now know that was a lie,but too late. To today’s “Russian war criminals” bombing schools,hospitals,and civilian homes.. Striking “aid convoys and shooting down passenger planes in Donbass. All lie’s but good for Russia-hate propaganda.Making Putin out to be a “beast” ,the “new Hitler”. Readying the Western populations for the “final showdown with that monster,and his thugs”.That is the danger for us all to propaganda stories all over the MSM. Not that they are hard to “prove wrong”,but that millions in a country “believe” them,”we don’t need no stinkin facts.The media shows us how evil Putin is”.Sometimes I think because during the Soviet days many people didn’t believe the media.Russians mistakenly assume propaganda doesn’t work in the West either.They are badly mistaken there.For every one person like we here. There are ten others that believe that propaganda.
You say that for every person who wakes up and gets their information from the independent part of the internet, 10 others follow the MSM. Fortunately, that’s no longer true. This partly depends on the age of the audience, but also the trend has greatly accelerated in the last 5 years. Basically, no one under 30 pays any attention to the MSM. Check this out.
There is another factor which is well worth noting. A minority of people with strongly-held opinions and who can back up their opinions with facts and logic, are more influential than you might imagine.
Marketing understands and uses this fact. For example, if you want to sell snowboards or off-road bicycles, you first have to sell your product to the hard-core enthusiasts. Typically these customers are poorer, simply because they are the people who live to ride, not to make lots of money. But when more wealthy people want to buy a snowboard or off-road bike, they will consult with their poorer cousins who are in the know. The same principle tends to apply in many areas, including politics, believe it or not.
The game is changing. High level managers like Biden and the Clintons, not to mention the entire Washington political class are no longer entitled to the spoils of world order as a foregone conclusion. Current events are like blind men in the room with an Elephant Paul Craig Roberts at the tail and Pepe at the trunk. I do think that the desperation of some of the players makes the situation dangerous.
I do not see a conflict between the US and Russia happen until what I call the New World Alliance (NWA) being formed. Which will challenge US global hegemony around the the globe. The chess pieces are rapidly being moved into position. I do not see a long protracted conventional conflict happening but a short quick decisive overwhelming first strike by the NWA. There are forces at play in the world moving us toward some great cataclysmic event and nothing can stop them!
The name Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) does have an alienating quality about it….
I wonder which word you are most ‘alienated’ by?
The mind boggles.
Shanghai, to put it to your “boggled mind”. An Asian sounding name may not appeal to the whole world. Take for example NATO…
Perhaps from the old sea slang word “shanghaied” meaning to be kidnapped or conscripted involuntarily to work on a ship or out to sea?
The Russians need to communicate to the American public (not the media) that any possible strike will be in the continental USA, not Asia, Europe or the Baltics
Have you guys read neocon Charles Lister’s latest WAPO article? It’s crazy.
Lister wants to do a 1904 Russo-Japanese War scene with Russia in Syria. He implies that the US and its allies should prepare to launch a sneak attack, if necessary, against Russia’s military bases in Syria. That’s just like Japan’s build-up to the February 1904 sneak attack on the Russians at Port Arthur.
It’s amazing that Lister thinks like this, given that we’re living in the nuke age. But see for yourself. Here’s his nutty article:
Lister also talks about keeping a permanent but sizeable contingent of American Special Forces in Syria. That’s to punish Russia’s military from time to time in the future if Moscow doesn’t comply with the West’s mandate in the region.
It’s amazing that Lister thinks this way. Even more remarkable is that he’s getting lots of endorsements from Washington’s foreign policy establishment.
The comments below the article appear to show some (colourful) disagreement with Lister.
The dude thinks he’s Admiral Togo.
I thought Russias recent 40 million people war drill was excellent. It says ‘we know what to do when it happens, we know where to run to and where to shelter, do you?’
Of course the answer is no, not in London, washington, nor Berlin, nor Paris …
What can we assume from that little message to the west?
We are not playing games, are you?
The most important point of this article is that according to one of Pepe’s inside sources, someone supposedly close the the “Masters of the Universe,” Russia has for years been seriously understating the amount it has spent on defense. While the US squandered its resources on pointless ME wars and hugely expensive but ineffective and vulnerable weapons systems, Russia has leapfrogged us by as much as four generations ahead. I don’t know how reliable this source is, but I will await further confirmation.
Not only has the spending been “understated” Russian procurement is not American procurement: http://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-cannot-account-for-6-5-trillion-dollars/5541244
Monetary units do not equal results, and the units themselves are apples and oranges; the systems are not equivalent.
Could it be that zero (now negative) interest rates and unlimited money makes stupid? Or at least valid calculation impossible? Have US planners been too busy milking the goose-that-laid-the-golden-egg to notice the mixed metaphors?
tx_progressive, you made the most important comment of all !
Pepe Escobar has just one anonymous source for his claim that the Ruskies have been building their military far more than anyone outside Russia knew, and that this has been going on for maybe ten years. If his claim was not such a big “feel good” special, and if the writer had been a lesser-known and less prestigious person than Pepe, then this claim would have been challenged and the comment section would have focused on whether there is any basis for the claim – or not. Instead, people miss the most critical question and go off on tangents.
Pepe has gotten a few things wrong in the past, like most everyone does. We have to ask ourselves if the person whom Escobar calls
a “US intel source with close connections to the Masters of the Universe but at the same time opposed to Cold War 2.0 as “counter-productive”
might not be doing anything more than trying to paint a false picture of a big Russian threat so the American spooks and military can get even bigger budgets. That “angle” seems far more probable than the notion that Russia has managed to fool everyone. I’m not knocking Russia’s capabilities. It’s clear that Russia has achieved some qualitative break-throughs, but they don’t (yet) have such weapons in sufficient quantities. Kaliber cruise missiles are an example.
So, like you, I have no alternative except to wait and see if any of this claim is true. I’d bet it’s not.
Well, there was the recent ant-Russian hit piece (don’t remember exactly where) about the children’s bouncy-house maker and how evil his S-300 and su-35 blow-up decoys were that he was trying to sell to the Russian military, where in the article it was disclosed that about 80% of his business is making those military decoys. Reminded me of the old cold-war propaganda, about how every Soviet factory and enterprise had a secret or not-so-secret department or area devoted to manufacturing equipment, parts, or supplies for the Soviet military.
I hope Escobar is right and Clinton & Co. have enough sense to balk at a war with Russia. Washington sure doesn’t show much sense in other contexts. Can they live with the humiliation of being thwarted in Syria?
The Russians don’t need a war to “defeat” the U.S.; our own politicians are doing a fine job of ruining this country with an exploitative health care system, an exploitative financial sector, runaway debt, propaganda saturation, a failed education system, an infrastructure deficit, global warming, and unnecessary wars. I think the Russians understand that.
Sooner or later there will be a revolt in this country. I think Trump is probably similar to the demagogues and oligarchs in Ukrainian politics. They make many promises but are on the take. I have enjoyed watching Trump break taboos in the presidential campaign but don’t want or trust him as president. Alas, Hillary Clinton may force me to vote for the S.O.B. if she convinces me she will start a nuclear war.
I think a meme is in order correcting the western media and military’s emphasizing the new Russian ICBM under the name of SATAN2 as if that is the second generation of their SATAN ICBM. The Russian name of the missiles is Sarmatian or Sarmat, Сармат, a Russian border region and ancient people that is intended to be protected by these weapons if NATO gets too froggy in the Iranian-Syrian-Iraqi theater. The ‘SATAN” designation is a NATO nom de guerre for these missiles not a Russian or Iranian one and is being used for attributed anti Russian propaganda in the west.. We need something to post immediately to refute this catapulting of the propaganda as soon as it rears its ugly head.
The quality of the comments in this thread (as typical here at the Saker) are one of the main reasons I come here. Many different perspectives and disagreement from time to time but everyone I see is both sincere and objective.
Above I gave my opinion on the mindset of America and why I think it is very dangerous to think the Deep State in control is bluffing. They are confident they can walk Americans into a broader war and I do absolutely think an attack on America will trigger our allies to retaliate. Even if America is the,aggressor in the first place.
What is the state or mind of our military now? I am curious since I am a former Marine from Gulf War/Somalia/Haiti. I was all in back then. I wouldn’t serve now and know the young me of those days would not serve now. US military culture did change. Back when I was in, torture was not acceptable nor was opening stating you were arming and training terrorists. I suspect the quality of those serving has gone downhill compared to when I was in. I think their tactics and training are better than what we employed when I was in but, I suspect the overall quality of the soldiers is not what it was.
I haven’t thought on this long enough to fully consider the effects it will have in the next major conflict. Initial thought is that the first substantial loss in a major engagement (I’m talking battalion size ) is going to much more devastating than it would have been in the past. Going into gulf war, we were expecting very substantial casualties and had CRC’s (combat replacement companies) everyone was assigned to already set up. We were very much mentality prepared for that. I used to listen to Metallica – For whom the bell tolls, every night over and over again and slept with it on.
That Economist article is prime example of a classic Anglo American pathology: the projection of their own warped nature onto their opponents.
The true “dysfunctional empire” that represents a threat to the world is the Anglo American Empire, which has waged multiple wars, bombings, or regime change operations throughout the planet from Afghanistan to Iraq to Pakistan to Somalia to Yemen to Libya to Ukraine to Syria to Brazil, etc.
The more countries that the Anglo Americans attack or destroy and the more blood they shed, then the more the Anglos desperately try to cast the finger of blame onto others.
There is truly something deeply sick about the Anglo American Axis nations–not only their regimes and ruling elites but also down to the average citizens on the street.
The Anglo Americans are hysterical because, like their Zionist cousins, they cannot stand to find out that they are not the “select” or God’s Chosen–and thus do not have a right to rule the world as they believe.
“There is truly something deeply sick about the Anglo American Axis nations — not only their regimes and ruling elites but also down to the average citizens on the street.”
Very true. And that “something” is spelt militant parasitism, further exacerbated by the West’s omnipresent, outright anti-civilizational, psychotic “popular” misculture. Westerners are suffering from irreversible corporate mindrot duly accompanied by an entirely parasitic mindset after gorging on world plunder for over half a millennium. As Nazi Germany showed, hardened reactionaries — from top to bottom — can only be cured by a resounding military rout right at home.
Would you agree with the proposition that ‘the Fourth Reich is the same as the Third Reich, only more so’?
The US Settler Reich was the template which Nazi Germany emulated. Given Weimar Germany’s social chaos and tensions bordering on civil war, the Nazis were particularly envious of the social cohesion of the US, based on White supremacy, “Manifest Destiny”, hysterical flag-waving, and ultra-militarism. Simple as that.
The snake eats its own tail? The US through banks and investment funds like those run by Prescott Bush also did the end run around the Versailles Treaty and helped Germany re-arm. The US then sat back and made more money. Entering the war only to occupy and never leave Western Europe. It is a shame that people are fed fiction instead of fact and history.
No wonder the favorite films of the German Nazis were ‘Musicals’ made by Khazar Hollywood.
So far the S-500 anti-missile system and the Satan 2 are not operational and nobody knows whether they will work as advertised. The anti-missile system is due in 2018 and the missile in 2020 so The US have a window in 2017 for launching a war with Russia and as you say :”Cold War 2.0 has reached unprecedented hysterical levels”.
Most people in the US think that they are able to zap Russia, may be at the expense of Europe but at a low cost for the US. I am not sure that Killary Clinton is sane and as Ron Paul is saying most think-tank in Washington are in favor of war.
Yet even if we are avoiding the war, we are not solving the issue in the Middle-East. Israel, Erdogan, KSA and Qatar are still there to maintain the chaos in the area.
Europe is still plagued with emigration, NATO and the EU organizations and the US with its fines on European Banks. and automobiles industry is not helping. Ukraine situation is not improving and could destabilize all Europe.
It is obvious that there are a lot of people originating from middle Europa which hate Russia. Their hate is not rationale but visceral and they are working hard for the destruction of Russia.
I notice that the look of this site and the comments section seems to have changed. Can someone update me? I kind of liked the old look . . .
Is this better?