Attacks on headquarters and “what did we do?”
April 22, 2022
Translated by Leo V.
Modern warfare is very difficult to wage. Especially a long war. On the one hand, the population of any country is easily excited and demands severe punishment for the insidious enemy, smashing his capital to rubble in response to the theft of a chicken from our territory. On the other hand, people like war only as long as the losses associated with it do not personally concern them.
After the very first difficulties, cries of “the German queen”, “treason in the palace”, “incompetent leadership” began. And after a couple of months, deputies and generals shouting about treason, under the hooting of armed gopoti (feminine men), they force the abdication of their own monarch, not considering it a betrayal.
The task of any leading government is to maintain a balance between victories at the front and peace in the rear. The ideal is achieved if these two sides of life do not intersect at all: the army is fighting somewhere, the media reports every day about the captured settlements, destroyed enemies and equipment, advancement for tens of kilometers and other “flags on the turrets”, and behind that lives a familiar life, weakly distinguishing on the screen the frames of the past war from the frames of the current war.
A modern contract army allows such a war to be waged. The American Army, its NATO allies and PMCs suffered cumulative losses in Afghanistan comparable to the losses of the Soviet Army in the Afghan war. But if for Soviet society 13 thousand dead in 10 years became a terrible tragedy that shook the foundations of the USSR, then the West simply did not notice its losses. Although earlier, during the colonial wars of the 50-70s of the last century (up to the Vietnam War), they really noticed.
The fact is that both the West, up to and including Vietnam, and the USSR in Afghanistan, had a draft army. That is, each family of a conscript, until he served, felt the threat of sending their son (or grandson) to the front and subsequent death or serious injury. The human psyche is so arranged that we perceive an eventual threat more acutely than a real one. When a real danger comes, you can fight it and the brain concentrates on the fight, forgetting about fear. If the danger is postponed for the future (“hovering in the air”), the brain concentrates on this danger, the person feels helpless in the face of the threat, since it is impossible to fight what has not yet come, the psyche begins to decompose.
The fighting that is waged by a contract army (or a mixed one in which only volunteer contract soldiers go to hot spots) is not perceived by every family as a threat. Only contractors who voluntarily chose such work associated with risk can die. Working in the police is also associated with risk, as well as the work of rescuers and many other professions. Society long ago, centuries ago, got used to the presence of constantly risky professional groups and did not react to it too sharply. In the same way, medieval Italians were absolutely not interested in the fate of the condottieri (soldiers signing the “condotta” – this is how the Italians of that time called a military contract. The results of the battles were of interest only insofar as they could bring profit or cause damage to their city, and therefore to its entire community.
In terms of the psychological stability of society to war and losses, a contract army has serious advantages over a draft one. But it also has its shortcomings. The contract army does not have such a large trained reserve. This is a group of professionals that can only be replenished by the same professionals whose previous contract has expired, but they do not mind signing a new one. The conscripts of such an army (if it is a mixed conscription army, as it is now in Russia) are needed mainly to protect the rear at home, maintain order in the barracks and military camps, but most importantly, to get acquainted in practice with the terms of the future contract – the bulk of contract soldiers (at least in peacetime) are conscripts or recently served, who have decided, have chosen a military specialty for themselves and who have decided to continue their service by contact.
The limited reserve makes each individual soldier a valuable resource, which, in turn, determines army tactics that involve the maximum preservation of personnel. The captain of the condottieri or the commander of the European mercenary army of the XVII-XVIII centuries, only then does it mean something if he is able to attract the maximum number of soldiers under his banner, and they will go to him, if he fights successfully, his people eat well, earn a lot, and rarely die.
Therefore, European tactics until the advent of mass armies of the XIX century (in which the soldier became expendable) consisted entirely of maneuvers and small fights. The commanders tried to defeat each other, eliminating the risk of a general battle. Modern generals, commanders of contract armies, quickly come to the conclusion, which has been fairly forgotten over two centuries of domination of mass armies on the battlefields – a well-prepared and trained professional soldier is an independent value, he must be protected more than technology. The workers will make new equipment or repair the old one, but military professionals is something that “women don’t give birth to.” A professional must be brought up, recruited for military service, motivated, trained and prepared. It takes years and it becomes truly golden.
Times have changed and in order to save personnel, they are now using not a maneuver, but the consistent destruction of the enemy by artillery, aircraft and missile weapons. Ideally, infantry and armored vehicles set in motion and occupy cities and villages when the enemy has already completely or partially lost combat capability. They do not break through battle formations, but finish off an enemy that has already been brought to this condition. Bloodless or almost bloodless blitzkriegs, like the Crimea in 2014, are rare and, as a rule, due to a combination of circumstances, among which the surprise of the strike is the final task, the main thing is the demoralizing lack of reliance on the local population by the defending side, as well as the complete military-technical superiority of the advancing side, which moreover, has the massive support of the local population.
So, a modern contract army in its classic form fights for a long time and economically. But this does not impress the population, which is hungry for beautiful victories on TV (especially since family members do not die at the front, but watch the same TV). Even more, it does not suit politicians. A long war does not make it possible to accurately calculate the political risks. Everything that is outside of six months or a year is subject to sudden critical changes and is not calculated.
Faced with the need to wage a protracted campaign, politicians (at least part of the political elite) prefer the conclusion of a compromise peace, without achieving the decisive goals declared in advance, to uncalculated risks. This is how it was with the Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq. We recently encountered a similar attempt during the Russian special operation.
However, our main enemies (the US and the EU), having used sanctions weapons against Russia in the hope of an economic blitzkrieg, they found that a quick economic victory is impossible – the Russian economy survived, and in the medium term (2-4 years) their sanctions will destroy their own economy. As a result, there were statements about the need to defeat Russia on the battlefield.
But for Ukraine, this is not enough. Ukraine can drag out the conflict for six months, a maximum of a year, but its resource base does not allow it to last longer. That is, the time during which Ukraine can hold out, the West would need to spend on expanding the theater of operations and bringing in new members of the anti-Russian coalition, ready to field armies. This is not a trivial task, but, given enough time, it can be solved.
Accordingly, Russia needs to either reduce the activity of the West in order to wait for the collapse of its economy, after which it will not be able to wage an active hybrid war against Moscow. Or minimize the duration of hostilities in Ukraine in order to deprive the West of a pretext and opportunity to expand the conflict.
The latter is possible either with the help of a compromise peace, which not only will not be accepted by Russian society, but the West will not allow Ukraine to conclude it. Either with the help of intensification of hostilities, which is in conflict with the basic tactics of a contract army, but is achievable with a large number of former contract soldiers who have served, but still romanticizing the war (including those with experience in PMCs) of a medium (35-45 years) age.
At the same time, one must understand that they will present higher requirements for security and monetary maintenance. But the most important thing is that this is far from an inexhaustible source of endless reserves, as in the usual mobilization of a draft army. It is possible to attract several tens of thousands, and perhaps even a couple of hundred thousand people at a time. But that’s where the main line ends. That is, all the problems of current operations will have to be solved based on the finiteness and limitations of the available forces and the absence of a ready and trained reserve to continue high-intensity operations outside the autumn of this year.
So, we again return to the contradiction, which consists in the need for strict economy of available resources on the one hand, and the acceleration of the breakdown of Ukrainian resistance on the other. Part of our society, instinctively feeling the presence of this contradiction, offers a radical way out in the form of the promised “attacks on headquarters”, and demands to hit directly on Washington and London.
This option could be considered as a working one, but society is not morally ready for the possible costs. The same people who demand a massive nuclear strike on the United States, as soon as they hear the term “nuclear war” and “retaliation strike”, in the best Ukrainian traditions, they start shouting “what is that for?!” and “how dare you even think of a nuclear war!”
Such reaction confirms that, despite all the problems of recent years, we are still one people. But this also means that the possibility of a sharp increase in rates, and the option of destroying convoys with weapons for the Kiev regime in the territories of Western countries has been exhausted for us at this stage. The people, accustomed to seeing the war on TV, are not ready for the possible consequences of such decisions outside their window.
Consequently, the value of a prompt, effective and successful operation against the Ukrainian group in the Donbass is greatly increased. In fact, a general battle is now beginning there, on which depends not the fate of the “special operation” with all its “stages”, but the fate of Russia’s war with the West for its existence.
The conclusion is impossible to refute:
“Consequently, the value of a prompt, effective and successful operation against the Ukrainian group in the Donbass is greatly increased. In fact, a general battle is now beginning there, on which depends not the fate of the “special operation” with all its “stages”, but the fate of Russia’s war with the West for its existence.”
and this report from MoonofAlabama seems to point to the West contributing to bring about the completion of the RF’s SMO by hastening the destruction of Ukraine’s military:
A brilliant analysis of the constraints on a contract army. The US has used contract armies in all its wars since the political disaster of Vietnam, but never against a modern, well-equipped enemy army capable of giving as good as it receives, so these constraints have been felt less. The emphasis on the need to preserve soldiers’ lives when numbers are limited explains the adoption of the cautious, methodical tactics we now see in the Donbass. It also suggests there will be no general mobilization and return to conscription as the MSM expects Putin to announce on Victory Day. But the time constraints for the whole campaign described at the end of the article suggests there will be a new emphasis on destroying convoys of weapons (as Shoigu announced today) to speed up the collapse of the enemy.
I do not understand why it is only now that the Russians wish “to speed up the destruction of convoys of weapons” . What were they doing before that …shooting long- stemmed red roses at the weapons shipments?
Russia needs to stop fighting this war with one- arm tied behind its back. It needs to kill quickly and win and then win the pice by good acts. Being good now only emboldens the enemy which causes more hardship on everyone.
It is like cancer; we need to nuke it with chemo immediately even if it makes the patient temporarily sick. Sparing the patient side-effects of chemo only makes it harder on all; the family (with false expectations), the doctor(giving them less options and ability to cure and taking away time from other needy patients) and the patient(giving them false hope and objectively less chance of survival).
Russia ,stop being the good guy …
“Russia needs to stop fighting this war with one- arm tied behind its back.”
It is remarkably restrained and I don’t think Nuland and Blinken get the message. It would be something to see if China passed a legalistic Lend Troops Act, like the Orwellian Lend Lease Act and 30 “volunteer” Chinese divisions ended up on the banks of the Dnieper River.
Russia was breaking the back of the West’s economy; it was a very important step. The yen melted to half its value, the dollar, the pound and the euro also devalued, inflation set in in the West. Putin, with the invaluable support of the West, showed all Russians who Westerners are. Many people say that Russia lost the information war; I disagree. External public opinion does not win battles, but a cohesive and united country, as Russia has become, wins wars.
“Russia needs to stop fighting this war with one- arm tied behind its back.”
This same nonsense claimed by American “patriots” when finding pretext why US lost the war in Vietnam. It was actually military defeat. Not caused by hippies and Jane Fonda.
Russia has rather limited military power. And US is hardly any better. This fact really makes me wonder why ruling classes of both US and Russia are still thinking there is solution by using military power. In fact both countries have far more powerful methods. Like e.g US having so called “soft power” (useful idiots believing in American Dream and “Freedom” – – – – > US dollar hegemony) and Russia having huge power of strategic critical resources, more than just oil and gas.
If Russia is somehow winning it’s not because their “brilliant military” (in fact its limits are now globally revealed) and Mr Kinzhal (it’s not silver bullet) but decisions like gas-ruble payment and its better than Soviet system economic diversification and self-sufficiency (especially far better agriculture). At the same time Europe (and Japan) has very weak self-sufficiency and quite heavy debts.
One explanation might be that after the failed blitz attack on Kiev the purpose now is (still?) to draw in more of US & NATO support, supplies, intelligence and interference. The goal not being simple conquest but to shift the global balance. Then the opponent has to “come” first, make all their moves. Then on the global stage, strategic effects can be gained and actions justified to enough allies.
It would explain also the hesitance to deploy the Russian air force more efficiently and ruthlesly. The protacted ground war has a few benefits. One is to make sure the war doesn’t turn into some kind of partisan, sabotage kind of endless war of resistance. This is what Ukraine prepaired for to do but I don’t think it’s allowed to become beyond the first stages.
Hello Brother Ma,
Question: Why is Russia only using 12% of it´s military power in Ukraine now?
Answer: Because there is something else on the horizon and they are waiting until it gets within range and at their advantage.
Russia is not playing. What they are really doing is actually incredibly brutal. Nobody is going to like it when it hits or as they say …… when the other shoe drops.
My take, I wish well to you and yours Brother Ma.
Usa is not the enemy.
Ukraine is not the Enemy.
Leaving religion out of it, there is a cabal of people who holds themselves above the laws of men. That see humans as prey.
They have infiltrated and subverted nations and organizations and corrupted the minds of billions of people.
We have to keep our eye on this. If Ukraine and nato and usa fell tomorrow. The Great Enemy will remain and will continue to wage their war upon humanity.
I truly hope that Putin and Russia stand against this enemies unwitting minions. But there is also the possibility that we are being played.
Brothers killing Brothers ultimately suits them not us.
And imho that ultimate Enemy is Satan and his synagogue working through incompetent corrupt vile leaders like Biden and zelensky and many others.
What you said is true since Kane and Abel.
Satan is a defeated enemy who is still powerful and wants to take as many down with him and his millions of demons, as possible.
And only God has the power to finally defeat that enemy and his host of demons and human slaves. Those aligned with the Good, the True, and the Beautiful should not expect victory on the physical battlefield through the might of our own weapons. Yet, that doesn’t mean we should not take a stand on the battlefield.
The victory is God’s and God’s alone. So if Putin starts giving into the dark human cravings for wholesale destruction and raining fire and brimstone on the innocent and guilty alike, he is aligning his cause, and using the methods of, Satan.
The moral high road has costs – in this world. That is a promise of God. Yet the rewards are infinitely richer than the costs.
Always take the high road. Always resist the temptation of the devil to take the easy way out.
This article mentions several times the important effect that “TV wars” have on the expectations of people back home. How about the effect of info disseminated on the internet?
One example that puzzles me: RT is insistently described in the West as the RF’s propaganda arm. Yet, curiously, this is how RT summarizes the reason why Russia “attacked its neighboring state”:
“Russia attacked its neighboring state in late February, following Ukraine’s failure to implement the terms of the Minsk agreements, first signed in 2014, and Moscow’s eventual recognition of the Donbass republics of Donetsk and Lugansk.”
Why, who needs CNN if RT does such a` good job? So, I guess, nothing at all happened between 2014 and February of this year except that Ukraine was dragging its feet over implementing some agreement and Russia just lost its patience and attacked its neighbor?
Who is RT’s targeted audience, I wonder? Patients recovering from disabling head injuries, perhaps.
I got booted from RT for criticizing their ending that says, Russia attacked their neighbor. I Posted that Russia attacked Nazis in Ukraine and RT Booted me. Oh well, that gives me more time to read your comments here :)
I agree, RT ending each article with the same BS 2 paragraphs. There is ample proof that Nato/EU/Ukraine planned a genocide in Donnas in Late February. Fry de fakrs!
RT has turned into a liberal pro-western mouthpiece since the SMO began. They never acknowledge that the war was there for 8 years.
Interesting observations about how infinite supply of bodies changed the face of war. There might be more analysis to draw from that.
But the conclusion in the end seems a bit extreme? If there were an unambiguous victory or a good negotiated peace with Ukraine, the “war with the west” would still continue on the economic level, where as the author notes it will be a few years. If it continues in a slow attritional grind, with Kiev willing to spend years sacrificing half a million citizens and mercenaries, and much of its national infrastructure, and refusing to negotiate? This has happened. Painful but the same. In either case, Russia and perhaps some allies (eg Belarus) also make physical and economic sacrifices in order to make a clear point to stop NATO expansion.
In a year I think the world will be facing new and different crises. Not that it means the current ones get resolved. Donbas will be taken.
Untill the West does get a ”lesson” on his own soil, military and/or civilians, they will never stop as there is zero
Only a few thousands maximum dozens of thousands killed wiil largely do the job, they will stop immediately.
As killing russians or ukrainians looks funny for them, but their local audience (populace) will not accept many
deaths(body bags) even less destruction.
No need for nuke, just for exemple taking out their missiles aimed at Russia in Romania and Poland, no western european will die for poles or romanians believe me, nobody cares here about them (or any eastern europe populace who are just good for black market construction slavery, cleaning their home or toilets).
It will not change anything in terms of sanctions except more own goals for them(cutting gas and oil for exemple etc).
Nothing is left to sanction Russia. Nato is never going to occupy Ukraine and the EU will never accept UKR, they are not that crazy(just P R, bs).Just a psyop.
Western sheeps are watching the war as a video game(with only very little images in fact).
Two other weapons left for Russia if necessary: embargo on the EU of everything Russian(even if a bit costly for a while but it is war anyway and bigger and more reliable customers will replace eurocrats).
The EU can not survive 6 months without gas and oil. It will collapse their economy with almost zero solution but to capitulate and Qatar, the US can not do much to help. Even Qatar easy for Russia, just a phone call ”you have beautiful stadiums for the fifa world cup in nov/dec guys, it would be very sad to see them destroyed by a few missiles + Doha beautifull airport, very good LNG and natgas infra…” Though you do nothing to help EU.
Iran and Venezuela were supposed to replace RU oil, did not see anything till now. Algeria can not help, Norway is at maximum capacity..Saudis will not take the risk, bananas republic like Angola or Nigeria can only provide little oil at most no gas at all.
They must eat their shit. Regime changes will follow.
Nato and EU are cowards in real life in fact, in ‘P R’ they are very good but else…
And if still not enough, declare war on UK for exemple, during financial markets are open, it will do better than 10 sarmat.Markets will lose 50% or more in a few hours if not minutes, meaning dozen of trillions will evaporate.
They only care about their greed, confort money..in a few minutes they will realize they may REALLY lose everything suddenly not a video game anymore.
No need for nukes to destroy these cowards but the thread must be 100 % credible on RU side(it is easy, sure Patrushev has a plan ready he is a clever man).
Some folks here would be calling you Armchair General war is on, however, most of what you say is on the money.
The go-slow, minimise Russia(RF)/LDPR losses, minimum civilian loss, use of long distance precision weapons on strategic targets, win hearts & minds, new documents issued for the new republics, continue to exterminate the Nazis and hope that the regular Ukrainian forces will lay down their arms to become a soldier in the New Ukraine . . . . . . makes sense . . . . . . and if this is the perceived route to the SMO’s success then who the hell am I, Johnny Foreigner to argue.
Still I challenge anyone to convince me that reducing the Kiev DoD and the Lvov US-NATO main command centre/post to rubble would affect the success of the SMO. It was only after Russia took a hit on its soil that they threatened to do so. Point is, it’s always reactionary measures that Russia makes and not proactive, responding to ABC provocation.
If I was Russian/DLPR I’d be on the front line in Donbass in a heartbeat.
If I was Ukrainian, I’d have spent these last 8 years as a double agent, sabotage, gathering as much helpful info as possible. The calibre of Ukrainian POW’s tells me I’d at least make commander.
Gee but I’m comfortably sitting in Londinium and would understand fully perishing under a volley of Mr Kinzhal & Friends.
I state the above with zero bravado, that right at this moment in time I’m exhausted, worn out by the lies & deceit of They Who Must Be Obeyed and the Zombies I share this island with; at least these filthy psychopaths here will be flushed/incinerated with me. This existence is like slow torture, with a flick of a switch preventing me from accessing my regular safe houses/sites.
Personally Poland should be seeing loss of life (not civilians but army bases ) as they’re contributing to Donbass/Russian loss of life and wish to up their game. WTF?
Lastly, at the very minimum, if Russia is still selling oil to those American Oil Companies apparently ( I can’t support it with evidence, but try getting a straight answer/truth in the murky business of black-gold ), I’d consider it a Disgrace.
Here in Londinium, all the talk is of recession, in fact, that’s putting some gloss on it, it should be depression. Inflation highest for 40 years. Petrol 35% up, food 25% up, Zombies crying out for help to pay their energy bills. Poverty and soup kitchens on a huge upward trajectory.
Now if this is happening here then the EU must be in equally dire straits if not much worse. HALT the Gas and End The War, no need to fire another bullet.
I’ve always been an optimist, happy go lucky, travelling the world . . . . and now my biggest challenge is getting out of bed. I wonder if I’m suffering some breakdown, clinical depression.
How did Boris Johnson make it to Kiev, something that size couldn’t possibly get through a no-fly zone undetected?
Andrei’s convalescing, NightVision likewise (maybe), not having a clue as to any of the above will see us all sink; will eventually take its toll on every one of us.
In the back of my mind also Russia’s doing deals, deals with folks who despise them, which we, who genuinely care about their Personal Security, are not privy too. Screw that, if this is the case tell us so we can switch off and not give a damn like the rest of the sheep.
It’s not nice feeling like the head pilchard in a tin.
Travis Bickle: Someday a real rain will come and wash all this scum off the streets.
Don’t worry my fellow Londoner, it’s coming, one way or another, it’s coming.
It wears on us all. My neighbour actually said that “Russians are not human” the other day. (Also delivered in a breathless rapid monologue: that god is punishing those animals with short lives, and so they only live about 41 years on average, and everyone knows that is true, because you can find it on wikipedia!) This is the level of the insanity induced by lockdowns and fear porn and endless propaganda. I did not answer much. I just said that I have known and enjoyed working with some very bright Russians of advanced age. I was curtly informed that such soulless creatures can indeed also be very smart and inventive, but this is still not a human and has no human rights. Sigh. For my failure to actively agree I am now persona non grata and news of my ideological impurity is spreading. I may as well just revert to “FU Nazi!” from now on and be done with trying to reason with these BBC watching morons. Thankfully there are also sane people in the UK, but the numbers are few and far between.
Agree that a mild but clear lesson (involving precision missiles) very close to the Brits’ borders – or even within the UK borders – might stop the slaughter in Ukraine. Let them have the same stress that was imposed by the US/NATO decisions on the Russians and Ukrainians.
The publication of a detailed map of the deep underground bunkers for the “owners” of the western world and the destruction of a few dozens of the bunkers, as a warning, can be even a better measure.
Till you punch the punk in the mouth, he’s not going to stop playing. The punk is UK. Get’em when they’re napping
The European nations threw millions of their young men into the meat grinder, twice. An attack on their soil will simply enflame them and provide the pretext to do it again.
Economic attrition (ironically inflicted by these countries on themselves with brainless sanctions) will be far cheaper in lives and more effective in breaking their ability to intervene militarily.
I don’t think an attack on Romania or Poland would worry the real West; that would scare the globalists of course. But to really terrify the West, you have to attack Germany or at least a country that is to the west or on the site of the old Iron Curtain. There’s a reason that iron curtain was there. This is the psychological border. Anything east of that border is irrelevant to western audiences.
Kadyrov has 30,000 elite troops and has only put a few thousand into the war effort. He could easily put out a call for an international “brigade” to come join his men to clean up the Banderites and Nazis. This would easily be a formation of 100,000 men, fighters with plenty of combat experience.
Manpower for the Russians has no limits.
They need to preserve aircraft, radars, air defense systems.
They also might need some more missiles in reserve. The West is trying to calculate what is held in store.
Russia has more than enough to fight this standoff missile war. But it also has to have ready enough to deal with a NATO expansion of the war. So, missiles and drones are really as important as manpower.
“Russia has more than enough to fight this standoff missile war. But it also has to have ready enough to deal with a NATO expansion of the war. So, missiles and drones are really as important as manpower.”
Precisely. If NATO sets foot in Ukraine they have to be greeted with a devastating volley of missiles on day one two and three.
I have been trying to find out how Russia (and China) are dealing with the problem of high quality micro chip supply. standard West speak is that they have a huge problem and are going to run out of missiles in March, err no, in April err no, in May?
My own view is that a cautious man like Putin would not have started this fight if he could not see how he would finish it. Therefore Russia (and China) has spent the last eight years working out how to deal with this problem. I remind myself that in 1944/45 despite massive blockade and bombing Germany kept on pouring out aircraft and weapons. So it is probable that Putin is not bluffing and has adequate reserves of missiles and plans to have many more.
I hope I am right.
Nobody puts bleeding-edge prima-donna chips in places subject to heat, cold, vibration, inertial, radiation, etc, etc, etc stresses (except maybe civilian automobile and passenger jet manufacturers). Russia and China, and others, make _at_home_ semiconductor chips capable for space-stations, self-guided supply rockets, warplanes, G5 communications, realtime AI, amazing Olympics floor-shows, and missiles. Kinzhal exists now. Less refined chips serve better.
You want bleeding-edge chips when you want to model Kinzhal aerodynamics, to mine Bitcoin, to forecast tomorrow’s weather, or to play Witcher.
China is inconvenienced by usa forbidding them to buy a Dutch machine, and forbidding them to buy chips made with that machine’s assistance. Although I am sure that, if a Wahabi camel-herder can buy
sophisticated anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles, then resourceful countries like Russia and China can buy a few thousand chips… doubtless along with the rope, from some righteous capitalist.
I have read Chinese media claiming they are developing alternate technology. I have read Chinese media claiming they are developing alternate physics. I have read Chinese media claiming they are engineering alternate means to get the same results as the Dutch machines. They mostly say 3 to 5 years, beginning a year or so ago.
I have not read any Russian media claiming anything similar. But President Putin tends to keep his lips unmoving. You may recall, he announced plans to develop Kinzhal about the same time as american satellites were watching finished Kinzhals being delivered to field forces.
Once something has been invented, somebody else can reinvent it. And, somebody smarter than both can invent something better which serves the same purpose, faster, cheaper, more accurate.
You mentioned missiles. Sounds like military to me. When has any military (not encumbered by patriotic industrial corporations, corrupt politicians, egotistical generals) let ephemera like patents and sanctions stand in their way?
You nailed it in your first paragraph. Robust chips are used, not highest end for weapons. They are not needed, they add nothing to performance. Russia has a semi-conductor industry, as does China. They can’t compete with the West’s highest performers, but they aren’t in that race. They serve for heavy duty warfare, perfectly.
Nothing to worry about. Russia is built to defeat Ukraine, NATO, all comers.
They have not tapped even 15% of their capability.
They are like Muhammad Ali dancing and jabbing, tiring out his opponent, then firing the knockdown punches.
The tempo of the war has increased on the Russia end by a factor of 5x. The Ukies are on the static receiving end of massive artillery, rocket, mortar and missile attacks.
It’s not about kilometers per day. It’s about thousands of explosions upon the Ukies who cannot move and maneuver. They are desperately using teroborna volunteers (amateurs and criminals given guns) and shanghaied conscripts.
If your basic order of battle requires guns pointed at the backs of your frontline troops, you are in very bad shape. Ukraine is in desperate shape as the Russians ratchet up the tempo. It is going to get worse each day, regardless of the psy-ops bullshit rolled out in the West. (Baghdad Bob Lives!)
General Dvornikov who led the Russian forces in 2015-2016 in Syria is orchestrating the up-tempo operations.
He destroyed AQ, the rebels and ISIS in Syria and liberated the big cities for Assad. He will shred the Ukraine military.
I liked your take a lot. I made me laugh out loud but, you are on the money.
I liked your take. Thank you.
Think I read Kadyrov has a training camp estab. 2015or an international brigade….is currently releasing 200 finished every week. Lots going through.
If Russia has made a mistake in this it is in not getting more words and actions from CSTO members.
With recent admissions of US officials regarding Ruskova and Russian generals, CSTO should be threatening to get involved.
NATO/US/West speak and act United against Russia.
Why is CSTO silent in return?
CSTO should be assisting Russia in every way NATO is assisting Ukraine. Why in the hell is that not happening?
NATO may be a lot of things, but it’s not a paper tiger. CSTO is.
I think we are in a paralell situation to the domination of Europe by Napoleon. He had such a reputation and such momentum that nations, apparently happily, acted against their own interests and followed him wherever he ordered them to go. It was only after Russia broke the myth that the whole process went into reverse.
Joe Biden is not Napoleon but the US does have huge arm twisting power and political momentum. Some of that has been diminished in Afghanistan. Russia now needs to further break the myth of US invincability.
He refers a lot to military issues. I just have a comment on the quote below and then about the terms “contract soldiers” and “professional soldiers.”
“Consequently, the value of a prompt, effective and successful operation against the Ukrainian group in the Donbass is greatly increased. In fact, a general battle is now beginning there, on which depends not the fate of the “special operation” with all its “stages”, but the fate of Russia’s war with the West for its existence.”
It’s unwise to sort of give an ultimatum to your own government based on your own caviling or previous considerations. Western media reports that there is an increase of Russian soldiers close to the border with Ukraine. Obviously, Russia is trying to get total control of the Donbass and they are bound to give this goal their best effort. They don’t need pressures or ultimatums from their citizens, right? Rather than banning some words, they should ban analysts from giving their military analysis inside Russia when this analysis contradicts or is supposed to be better than the actual decisions of their army. How can their analysis, almost certainly wrong, and irrelevant, be of any help for his fellows? It’s no way to address the government there (known from across the world) if that’s what he wants to do.
He is using psychology much like Paul Craig Roberts, where his own pressure means this in other words, “If we don’t finish quickly, there could be a nuclear war with them.” Same flawed psychology, also suspect of wishful thinking or being made just for the argument’s sake. He says that “Russia needs” to “minimize the duration of hostilities in Ukraine in order to deprive the West of a pretext and opportunity to expand the conflict” (very similar to PCR). His other alternative to “reduce the activity of the West” is more radical! He says “part of his society…demands to hit directly on Washington and London.” That’s the part to ignore…The substance of what he discusses is what an advisor to his president or the army should give – that’s where it belongs. He appoints himself and gives it to the people. Let’s consider this other quote:
“…and the option of destroying convoys with weapons for the Kiev regime in the territories of Western countries has been exhausted for us at this stage. The people, accustomed to seeing the war on TV, are not ready for the possible consequences of such decisions outside their window.”
Let’s just say this quote illustrates the points above. He goes farther. He ends up contradicting directly. His government has just said that it reserves itself the right to attack weapons deliveries. So, would he be a sixth columnist as this term is used, and in this quote? Sure (sometimes he is a fifth columnist too).
Now to my second intention/point: It’s wrong – the world over – to use the terms “contract soldiers” and “professional soldiers.” They should be called “volunteers.” Later the language and the logic of any national army itself enters into contradictions with the meaning of these two terms. (No wonder the countries went bananas with Covid, eh? Talk about proneness to confusion.) It’s done all over the world; that’s what their called, “professionals.” Call a mercenary a “professional.”
A professional soldier is one who stays with the military year in, and year out, regardless of whether there is a war, for the purpose of being as well-trained as possible in the event of a war. In general, however, professional soldiers hope that they never need to put their skills to use. They want conflicts solved diplomatically.
In contrast, mercenaries often come into a war with little prior training — sometimes none at all, (not eve basic training), and in contrast, mercenaries look at war as an opportunity to get paid. Whereas the professional soldier abhors war, and when it comes, wants it to be settled as quickly as possible, the mercenary hopes for war, and when war comes, wants it to drag on as long as possible.
Confusing a professional soldier with a mercenary is a major category error.
You missed my point, excuse me. I don’t blame you; my point is not shared as far as I know (we could march for it). Let me cite a church just as an example of name problems in relation to functional or logical problems: One church may be in its eyes the only church (God’s representative). Then the church has “scholars”! That’s odd. Then the scholar tells you, “This is my career.” That’s even more odd. We can’t imagine one of the 12 apostles saying this is my “career.” Jesus in the N.T. didn’t have a “career.” He didn’t send people to the world in the context of a career. Does a priest have a “career”? I know some will say yes. Seriously, it is not a career. Okay, let’s talk national armies now. I hope you got my point already. I said “call a mercenary a ‘professional'” in the sense that he does it strictly for the money. He need not love the country at all. Some if not most mercenaries like war. Their relationship to their activity is similar to that of the professional to his career. We choose a profession that we like for money (to get paid).
Obviously… everybody disagrees with my point and that’s why they call their soldiers “professional.” Not common to state “contract army”, good term for this cold stuff. I would call my soldier “soldier” not “professional.” “Volunteer” is what he would literally be. I mentioned logical contradiction problems beyond just the term itself (I’m only writing an opinion; I would need to be in an army to look for it if it’s really there, but I would certainly look): As with the churchman who has a “career,” the just-as-unique mission of the “soldier” will come into contradictions with the connotations of “professional.” I would never call my soldier that, especially if I am going to be talking about “sacrifice” for the motherland all the time. That’s what I meant.
“In fact, a general battle is now beginning there, on which depends not the fate of the “special operation” with all its “stages”, but the fate of Russia’s war with the West for its existence.” Like Vietcongs Taliban were fighting in their homeland poorly armed for their existence. You cannot privatize a warrior who grew up being prepared in his convictions in a war of freedom or death, land or death, life or death, life or extinction. Not even in a dream Nato/USA can won a war against Russia. They’re in despair: lie for lie, bullet for ballot, ballot for dollar and dollar for ballot.
“The people, accustomed to seeing the war on TV, are not ready for the possible consequences of such decisions outside their window.” For White West/White America + White Europe war only in movies and video games.
For White America the only domestic war they’re accustomed with is against the Black Man.
For White Europe like Prince William said “Britons were more used to seeing conflict in Africa and Asia, the current war in Europe is alien.”
Yes Prince William gave the game away didn’t he? Alright for us to kick sh*t out of the wogs but its a bit off for the snow wogs to do it to us.
Today we are seeing the end of the idea behind famous couplet by Hilaire Belloc: — “Whatever happens we have got the Maxim gun and they have not.” Only they have now.
I think it was the Gatling gun, but you are right.
“The people, accustomed to seeing the war on TV, are not ready for the possible consequences of such decisions outside their window.”
This was said in reference to the Russian people.
Well whoever said it has his head up his ass, and knows nothing about Russian people.
Listen to Andrei Martyanov on his video recently.
He never knew his grandfathers, both killed in WWII. His paternal grandfather died in Donbass.
His wife never knew her grandfathers, killed in WWII.
The Russian experience with war is visceral, personal, and nearly universal throughout society.
Americans lack that psychological understanding.
And Russians know when there is an existential threat at their front door. Thus, 80%+ support for Putin.
Likely, it is in the 90’s, but so be it for Western polling in Russia.
Rostislav Ishchenko said it, and he compared Russian to Ukrainians saying they (Russians) act in the “best Ukrainian traditions”:
<> I only noticed it now, or would have included it in my first comment.
Ukraine’s male population and Europe’s economies and weapons being wiped out seems to be a feature, not a bug. Africa’s and South America’s populations starving to death, same. America would then be the last man left standing, just the same as after WWII, and could buy all of Europe; chunks of Africa, and South America, for pennies on the dollar. So America is fighting like a fox to lose, grinding over many years, and next up will be glorious battle of all of NATO minus US against Russia. To lose (both sides, they think) again. See “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man”. It’s not just Russia; the prize is the world, and continued dollar dominance.
Interesting and illuminating piece : thanks.
Ukraine is at 90k+ losses since 2014 and probably losing nearly hundreds to 1 thousand soldiers a day since phase 2 began. Probably close to half of former UAF army is dead, wounded, deserted or captured. Ukr. Command sending elderly and children in third mobilization. Wonder how long they can throw manpower as true Russian casualties are much lower.
This was written a long time ago, 1776, by one of the first modern economists to decipher the development of industrial capitalism, Adam Smith
It describes the video game and cheerleader mentality which absorbs the public the press and the politicians engaged in the current fantasy war, not quite on both sides I would say, but certainly on USUKEU – propoganda serves to blind the passive homefront
« In great empires the people who live in the capital, and in the provinces remote from the scene of action, feel, many of them scarce any inconveniency from the war; but enjoy, at their ease, the amusement of reading in the newspapers the exploits of their own fleets and armies. To them this amusement compensates the small difference between the taxes which they pay on account of the war, and those which they had been accustomed to pay in time of peace. They are commonly dissatisfied with the return of peace, which puts an end to their amusement, and to a thousand visionary hopes of conquest and national glory, from a longer continuance of the war. »
If Adam Smith could see this at the very start of industrial capitalism should now we be able to see more, or less ?
Thanks for the article. Also it seems contract army of every country differ from each other greatly. The main difference would be the quality of the contract army’s moral status and in my opinion it’s what makes the Russian contract army a whole lot more professional and therefore more effective than let’s say the American one which totally lacks moral qualities, except some low0grade freedom/democracy nonsense. Contracted personnel of Azov, US are similar to paid-thugs/criminals with tattoos than actual fighters, as can be seen in the Azovstal by holding civilian hostages and wanting to exchange them for food and medicine. These guys lack very important ethical factor needed to win any wars. In fact no wars can be won without superior moral principles.
Hate to be off-topic, but I am going through Nightvision Update Withdrawal.
Destroying all of Ukraine would certainly end the war quickly, but would leave behind another “Libya” situation in which the country would be hopelessly involved in civil wars with different factions fighting to gain dominance. The US would like that as it’s right out of their own playbook. If the US can’t have and control Ukraine, then their second choice would be total destruction. So, total destruction would be a benefit to the US, but not to Russia. And that’s not to mention the new terrorists that would be created and used by the US against Russia.
Russia is trying to move slowly and then establish law and order in its wake to prevent the disaster to follow.
Additionally, it’s better to let the US and EU send weapons and then destroy them on the ground before use rather than prevent their coming. It doesn’t cost any Russian lives to destroy them immediately after they arrive, only a missile or two. If they are prevented from arriving, they will most certainly be deployed and used later, possibly at great cost to Russian lives.
In my mind, the greatest danger is that the US is trying to spread the war into Russia and, apparently, is providing targeting information to Ukraine…and is now bragging about it! That, to me, is an invitation for Russia to respond in kind…not bragging…but rather to begin targeting the US and EU.
Hard not to agree with the basics and the message of what Ishchenko says.
However… conscription is necessary, and is at worse a necessary evil.
Conscription is in fact the only way to “embed” (as they say today) the nation into the armed forces so that the military will not degenerate into a social cast gone rogue or an instruments of lobbies gone rogue (like the Anglos today, who are in fact those who did away with conscription before others).
Conscription embodies the collective experience of the citizen soldier, teaches young men the need for collective cohesion regardless of individual/personal sympathy.
Conscription teaches young men to identify from a very young age the difference between the fellow with leadership qualities and the mere opportunist.
Conscription teaches young men patience with each other, you have no option to patching up even after a fist fight and patience towards the odd idiots up in the chain of command.
The first Rome took out Hannibal with a conscript army; the third Rome took out Hitler with a conscript army, the finest combatants of my generations were conscripts: those Cuban and South African conscripts who fought it out in Angola… They were motivated for better or worse: the internationalist generosity of those “barbudos” and the tragic patriotism of those Boers. The light and darkness of the finest men of my generation were these conscripts.
On Afganistan…. Russians should chase that ghost away for good. I am convinced that what went wrong there was the fault of the professional officers, not the conscript soldiers. I say this because the Cubans were very critical of that generation of Soviet officers. As the legendary Jorge Risquet, Fidel Castro’s plenipotentiary man for African affairs regretted: the Soviets could not fight in Africa because they did not understand Africa. I think that what is true for Angola was true for Afganistan and that, that generation of Soviet officers in charge of the Armed Forces in the 1980s did not understand Asia either… or the West (whatever that means… it means the Anglosphere and the Anglo’s vassals). Why did that generation of officers stand idle as a generation of political prostitutes turned a superpower into a comprador brothel?
I also think there is an eerie link of cause and effect between the end of conscription in Europe and the weakening of labor union power and of social cohesion.
Plus, let me finish this rant of a 58 year-old man, conscripted 39 years ago with a visceral feeling: men are so bitchy these days…. I think that one too is an eerie effect of the end of conscription.
Ad maiora, Roberto
What I learned as a conscript in 1982 (they insisted i serve against my will) stationed in Germany:
A big chunk of the “professional” military leadership was corrupt, incompetent and drunk.
Also if you want to speak truth you better have a fast horse.
They set up the other conscripts to attack me violently. First getting them drunk and then stoking them to attack me. That did not work out well, i will defend myself, kill if needed. They got a warning: first coming into the door “gets it” and he “got it” a shovel in the face with all my strength and ready for the next. Court marshal followed and the captain got jail time and a warning, stop drinking and next time you are fired. They tried to make live hell for me but in the end they had let me go before the end of the period. Full pay for the whole period and don’t come back. Never got a notification for repeat exercises either.
That was the army and NATO for me.
What the writer doesn’t mention is the Ukrainian death toll. Several OSINT sources and telegram channels indicate that Ukraine is losing hundreds of troops. This isn’t sustainable for a country whose population has migrated in millions over the years.
At one point Ukraine will run out of manpower. I gues that’s what Russia also aims to do by minimizing their casualties while taking out enemies by artillery and standoff weapons.
However, I agree with some commentators above in the need to attack NATO assets currently inside Ukraine. The US, UK will continue to escalate and support Ukraine as long as their military assets won’t be targeted by Russia.
The order was given because the ‘west’ has pushed the Ukrainian president to not make peace with Russia. The consequence will be the assured destruction of the Ukrainian military. And, the Ukrainian males.
People in the “West” can imagine a Jew being the president of Ukraine, but cannot understand why a Jew shouldn’t be the president of Ukraine. For that, one has to understand the history of that area called present Ukraine and for example the history of Poland. A Jew is a Jew, but never would be an Ukrainian as an Ukrainian by birth would be. Well, if you want to understand a bit, you might ask why a Jew cannot be the president of USA .
It is implied but not stated.
The whole notion of a “contract army” makes it an enabler for perpetual war. When costs of war are low, also the threshold to it is low.
In other words, Russia NEEDS a contract army. But not because such a force is -generally- “better”. But because such a force is *necessary* to fight the endless war(s) the West wants/indends to subdue Russia with.
At the other hand, Russia also NEEDS a conscript army. Again. Not because such a force is -generally- “better”. But because such a force is the only way you can defend a country against a peer enemy’s “total war” style attack.
The contract section of a country’s military is primarily a tool of offense – in the military terms.
The conscript section of a country’s military is primarily a tool of defense – again, in the military terms.
This is why countries with a low-risk of being in defense on their own soil, like UK or US, were all-professional long, long ago. While countries who needed to primarily deter and/or defend, did not go fully professional till this day.
IMO the current Russian model of a reduced conscription at 12 months or so /reducing the skill-gap this creates in the conscript lives/ commanded and led by a strong contract force is the best balance. The contract “side” is there to address all the “skirmish-style” engagements while the conscript force is there for the “big war”, should it ever come.
Militarily, Russia would ideally want to “rotate” their entire contract force about twice, meaning a war lasting a year or so. Up to that point the result will be a stronger, battle-hardened force. Beyond a year or so, the effect of the losses will take over as the dominant effect. That is why the West is shooting for a prolonged, several-years style conflict.
As per the header, the value of professionals is continuing the fighting up until the next fight starts, whatever that will be. It seems the relevant takeaway, is this question of what deterrent will be used to prevent the escalating crises that lead to a draft, ie., keep NATO on the back foot until the economic decline. The Saker believes that Russia is now getting ready for this exact scenario of total war, and will fight total warfare should it come to that, but that doesn’t mean it’s the preferred plan. So there must be plans, what Saker calls the pain dial, to hurt the West and foil attempts at instigating other theaters, by manifold deterrents. The truth of all this will hardly ever be known concretely, except by the actors themselves but we may guess that this war within a war is as active or even more so, than the one we are all focusing on; what Saker calls informational and economic warfare.
An interesting perspective. I do not see all of what was presented but, there is sense to it. However, thigns are moving way to fast for this point of ivew to survive intact, for much longer. Poland is on the verge of entering the fray and that will be extremely bloody, in my opinion. It could be an opportunity to demolish a major part of NATO on the cheap, while comfortably asking the rest of the NATO members ….. is anybody else interested in this? ………. without saying amuch of anything in addition to the carnage that could befall polish and embedded forces from the US and other places.
There always was too much freaky stuff out there to be concerned with a timetable. The AFU keeps mum on the details but, they do tell you what they intend. It is one of the things I like about them and Russian leadership; they do not BS. So, it looks to me that they did consider the possibilities well before the shooting started and are prepared for it.
Next autumn is going to be a very sober period for Western leadership, who thought they knew it all and could withstand anything. Also, I doubt the shoooting will have subsided. I think it will have moved on to other localities, as well as continuing in Ukraine. My Take.
Pardon me, I meant AFR not AFU.
As with anything else in this conflict, it’s a double edge sword. western politicians are barking loud because the political cost of their deranged stance is minimal:
1) Their donors are reaping huge benefits from this conflict
2) Public taxpayer money is being diverted at alarming rates and funneled into private interest.
3) Public opinion is controlled and influenced by government/big tech/media conglomerate convergence of interests tied to the upper Echelon.
4) Responsibility for the economical costs of these policies is still being deflected and re-directed against Russia and anyone that doesn’t ride the Western Crusade wagon.
5) The only people getting slaughtered are Ukrainians (about whom nobody gives a fuck to begin with) and Russians (which is exactly the point.)
This situation can be averted by upping the pressure on the politicians by establishing undeniable and un-censorable direct correlation between their decisions and disastrous consequences. The Economy will certainly do this in the long run but in the short term:
~ attack and destroy weapons convoys while still in possession of NATO forces. Upping the body count of the military forces delivering lethal weapons is a way to establish the concept that weapon deliveries are an act of war in itself and whoever does so is an enemy combatant and fair target (Russian MOD seems to be moving in that direction already.) While this could potentially kindle the risk for escalation, is a necessary step to curtail the full-on escalation that the West is embracing without facing direct consequences
~Expand the areas of conflict by re-directing seized weapons to other theatres of conflict. Syria and Iraq would be the logical starting point. The US is illegally occupying the east of the Syria and is “unwanted” in Iraq. A relentless barrage of high casualties attacks on its bases would ensure a flareup of opposition at home that would bring up issues of sustainability and legitimacy of the war effort there. The US is overstretched militarily and can’t focus on multiple areas of conflict at the same time. Plus the American People are a few body bags away from being fed up with perpetual war. Time to give the a few cargo loads.
~Exerting maxim economic pressure by restricting sales of vital resources to the West. Wheat, Fertilizers, Precious Metals, etc. The West went full retard on Russia, time to show these buffoons what they signed up for.
This will be painful for regular folks but it might benefit us in the long run if it led to the purge of the present calcified gangrene of Globalists and Oligarchs in Western Congresses.
~This doesn’t depend on Russia but China might want to seize Taiwan right now. While creating commotion and diversion in Ukraine, the US is already laying the groundwork for Taiwan. Soft coup in Pakistan, threats to Solomon Islands, Aussies antics, US representatives trips to Taiwan and sharp increase in weapons sales are the trademarks of Maidan 2014 all over again. Better nip these shenanigans in the bud and humiliate the US right away. that could ignite the collapse final chain reaction the entire world has been waiting for.
If any or all of these measure were implemented, I’m sure the blood chilling and apparently unbreakable western hive mind would implode rather spectacularly
When remembering the switch from contract/mercenary armies to mass armies this piece omits a very important detail: this didn’t “just happen”:
* It was triggered by the diffusion of firearms that could defeat previously dominant squadrons of armored cavalry.
* It accompanied the rise to power of the “third estate”, the industrialists, who could organize and supply and field large armies of firearm-using soldiers.
* The switch to industrial war also empowered the populace, as it turned them into active political subjects via their membership of the armed forces, and thus giving them a right to share the spoils.
All that made the switch to industrial wars fought by states from dynastic wars fought by gangs (otherwise known as “noble families”) with small numbers of enforcers (also known as “noble knights”) against other gangs for control of racket (also known as the “feudal system”) territories.
It also gave expression to nationalism, as the masses of soldiers needed to run an industrial war required a motivation to do so beyond pay and loot, and it also gave rise to the welfare state, invented by Bismarck to award pensions to older women so they would mind less losing their sons (women’s primary pension assets for a very long time) to industrial war, and consequently to a drastic fall in natality rates.