The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewThe Saker Archive
Make No Mistake, the Latest US Thuggery Is a Sign of Weakness, Not Strength
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
The Russian Consulate General in San Francisco located on 2790 Green Street in Pacific Heights.
The Russian Consulate General in San Francisco located on 2790 Green Street in Pacific Heights.

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

For a while already the Russian diplomats have been openly saying that their American counterparts are недоговороспособны or “non-agreement capable”. This all began under Obama, when Kerry flew to meet with Lavrov and declared ‘A’, then flew back to Washington, DC and declared ‘B’. Then there were the cases in Syria when the US agreed to a deal only to break that very same deal in less than 24 hours. That’s when the Russians openly began to say that their US colleagues are rank amateurs who lack even the basic professionalism to get anything done.

Now the US has slipped even lower: the Russians speak of US “hellish buffoonery” and “stupid thuggery”.

Wow!

For the normally hyper-diplomatic Russians, this kind of language is absolutely unheard of, this has never ever happened before. You could say that the Russians are naive, but they believe that their diplomats should always be, well, diplomatic, and that public expressions of disgust is just not something a diplomat does. Even more telling is rather than call the Americans “evil” or “devious”, they openly express their total contempt for them, calling them stupid, incompetent, uneducated and their actions unlawful (read Maria Zakharova’s statement to that effect on Facebook).

So let me explain what is happening here how the Russians interpreted the latest US thuggery concerning the Russian Consulate in San Francisco and the Russian diplomatic annexes in Washington and New York.

First, the Russians fully expected the Americans to retaliate after the Russian expulsion of US diplomatic personnel in Russia. That, by itself, is not the problem. The Russians understand that Trump is a cornered and weak President, that he has to show how “tough” he is. Sure, they smile, but they think that this is ‘fair game’. The Russians also know that, as a country, the USA cannot accept the biggest reduction in US diplomatic personnel in history without reacting. Again, they don’t necessarily like it, but they think that this is ‘fair game’.

You know what really triggered the Russians off? The fact that the Americans gave them only 2 days to vacate the premises they would seize and that they organized some kind of bizarre search operation. Let me immediately explain that this is not a case of ruffled feathers by the Russians, not at all. But here is how they would think about it:

“Why would they give us only 2 days? Do they really think that we cannot clear the premises from anything sensitive in 60 minutes if needed? Or are they actually trying to inconvenience our personnel? If so, do they really think that we are going to break out in hysterics? Do the Americans really think that they will find something? What? Papers proving that Trump is our agent? Maybe a hidden nuclear device? Or the computers we used to hack in every server in the USA?”

To a Russian, these questions can only have one answer: of course not. So what is going on here? And then there is the only possible explanation left:

“We beat them is Syria, we are beat them in the Ukraine, they lost Afghanistan, they lost Iraq, their Navy apparently does not know how to use a radar, their soldiers are terrified to fight somebody capable of resistance, they failed to impress not only China, but even the North Koreans who are openly laughing at them. Hezbollah laughs at them. Even Venezuela refuses to be scared! The Iranians openly threaten them with consequences if they back out of the deal they signed. Even Pakistan is openly expressing its disgust with the USA. Ditto for Turkey. Heck – the Americans are losing on all fronts and the very best they can do is try to feel good about illegally harassing our diplomatic personnel! Pathetic, lame, losers!”

And they are 100% correct.

The latest US thuggery against Russian diplomats is as stupid as it is senseless. I think that US diplomats of the era of James Baker must be absolutely mortified to see the kind of idiocy their successors are now engaging in.

ORDER IT NOW

This is also the end of Rex Tillerson. The poor man now has only two options left: resign (that would be the honorable thing to do) or stay and become another castrated eunuch unable to even deal with the likes of Nikki Haley, nevermind the North Koreans!

A “spokesperson” for the White House declared that Trump personally ordered the latest thuggery. Okay, that means one of two thing: either Trump is so weak that he cannot even fire a lying spokesperson or that he has now fallen so low as to order the “thug life” behavior of the State Department. Either way, it is a disgrace.

This is also really scary. The combination of, on one hand, spineless subservience to the Neocons with intellectual mediocrity, a gross lack of professionalism and the kind of petty thuggery normally associated with street gangs and, on the other hand, nuclear weapons is very scary. In the mean time, the other nuclear armed crazies have just declared that they have a thermonuclear device which they apparently tested yesterday just to show their contempt for Trump and his general minions. I don’t think that they have a hydrogen bomb. I don’t think that they have a real ICBM. I don’t even think that they have real (usable) nuclear warheads. But what if I am wrong? What if they did get a lot of what they claim to have today – such as rocket engines – from the Ukies?

In one corner, the Outstanding Leader, Brilliant Comrade, Young Master and Great Successor, Kim Jong-un and on the other, The Donald, Grab them by the xxxxx and Make ‘Merica Great, the Grand Covfefe Donald Trump. Both armed with nukes.

Scary, scary shit. Really scary.

But even more scary and depressing is that the stronger man of the two is beyond any doubt Kim Jong-un.

All I see in the White House are vacancy signs.

(Republished from The Vineyard of the Saker by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Donald Trump, Neocons, Russia 
Hide 339 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. We beat them is Syria, we are beat them in the Ukraine, they lost Afghanistan, they lost Iraq, their Navy apparently does not know how to use a radar, their soldiers are terrified to fight somebody capable of resistance, they failed to impress not only China, but even the North Koreans who are openly laughing at them. Hezbollah laughs at them. Even Venezuela refuses to be scared! The Iranians openly threaten them with consequences if they back out of the deal they signed. Even Pakistan is openly expressing its disgust with the USA. Ditto for Turkey. Heck – the Americans are losing on all fronts

    Such is the sad state of affairs in this country and the beginning of the end of the American Empire (and none too soon). We squandered the potential for world peace when the Soviets broke up. Instead of taking advantage of the peace windfall, the neocons redoubled their efforts to dominate by projecting military power. We have been paying the price since.

    Meanwhile, the Chinese have been expanding their power projection peacefully by leveraging their financial might. The gold-backed RMB is about to replace the petro-dollar. They have been quietly building alliances across the globe using trade as the incentive, while we have been killing and maiming people everywhere – and all in vain, apparently to win “hearts and minds”!

    Something that amused me a few days ago was a picture of a Chinese businessman in Pakistan, escorted by two pro-government, two anti-government, and two rebel businessmen. Apparently, this assured the safety of the Chinese businessman, even if his companions hated each other. For our part, we had refused to do business there because we had not found a means to unify these warring factions – and we are supposed to be the capitalists!

    A day of reckoning is fast approaching, my fellow countrymen, and the price we will have to pay is daunting. It may be a while before we can recover from the coming debacle, however, I take solace in the following:

    1. The accompanying pain will rewaken all our somnambulant citizenry to who and what has brought us to this low point in our history, and they may unite to rout the Jewish banking power that has resulted in our predicament.
    2. We will no longer be able to borrow the trillions that fund our illegal wars across the globe, and civilians can sleep peacefully once more.
    3. Without our support, and the increasing unification of the countries in the ME (note Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, …) Israel and Saudi Arabia will stand alone, surrounded by angry nations that have scores to settle. I doubt that those two mischief makers will survive another 5 years.

    So, an imposed world peace is possible – even probable. With increasing Russian influence in the Middle East and the sale of advanced weaponry to the emerging coalition of muslim countries, western invasions of these countries will become all but impossible. Already, the Syrian airspace has been shut out from Israel and the US by Russia’s command of the skies, by S-300 and S-400 defenses and the Russian air force. It is only a matter of time before Lebanon, too, enjoys the same protection, as will Iraq. Iran is already unassailable. Turkey has started to distance itself from NATO, and is still smarting from the EU rejection.

    Interesting, but painful times lay ahead.

    • Agree: Realist
  2. “First, the Russians fully expected the Americans to retaliate after the Russian expulsion of US diplomatic personnel in Russia.”

    Incorrect, the author left out a key point. As the Obama team left last December, it started a fire by expelling the Russians from a vacation compound for diplomats in New York, just to be dicks. The Russians expected Trump to correct this insult, and when he spinelessly refused, they retaliated.

    Now, whoever runs US foreign policy (no one is really sure), refused to let it end. They closed more Russian compounds, just to be dicks. Meanwhile, these dicks want Russia to help with the North Korea mess.

    It seems whenever the USA threatens to destroy North Korea, their leader threatens to harm the USA if that happens. Clearly, the North Korean leader is mad, at least those dicks think so.

    • Agree: Cyrano, Randal
  3. Cyrano says:

    Whichever European power used to be the dominant one at the time, in order to be truly certified as the top dog – they sought to prove superiority over Russia. That baton was picked up by US after WW2. No European power has ever succeeded in proving superiority over Russia – at least not military one.

    I don’t think that the exceptional ones believe that they can do it either, that train left the station in the 90’s, together with Boris. So now the exceptional ones are throwing temper tantrums, because the bear doesn’t want to lie down and play dead. They had their chance for a while and they didn’t really deserve it either.

    The bear that they used to know and love in the 90’s was a circus animal and that circus has left town. The world is changing and if you think that the best protection against hitting the iceberg is to blow the horn, for everybody to get out of your way because you are too big to sink, you are heading straight to the bottom, only maybe with accompanying loud noise from the horn, for which the world really doesn’t care too much about.

    • Replies: @Albert King
  4. Osten says:

    American media show paranoia about Russia.
    Trump Russia connections and election influence are nonsense.
    Public sees the nonsense so media dropped the publicity.
    Democratic Party will put on charm offensive to say they reject Antifa so to defuse Republican Trump supporters.
    If Democrats succeed they will regain many Congress seats in 2018 election.
    Republicans need to put pressure on FBI to complete Clinton investigation.
    That completion would clear air for better relations, restore public trust in government and slap media to be more honest.
    Republicans should be glad Russia is in Syria. Russia presence reduces American defense expense.
    Israel wants American presence.
    Saudi Arabia wants presence.
    People in Syria, Jordan and Lebanon and Iraq want peace after years of American wars that cause death and refugee humanitarian crisis.
    American journalists except for Seymour Hersh are not allowed to tell Americans facts about Middle East countries.

  5. Realist says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    “Meanwhile, these dicks want Russia to help with the North Korea mess.”

    Russia should tell the US to go shit in their hat and pull it down over your ears.

  6. TheJester says:

    The End of Bretton-Woods I and II …

    Another sign of the spasmodic, directionless, almost suicidal weakness of the United States is its recent abuse of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. The United States is going around the world identifying countries and individuals who will no longer be allowed to use the dollar and the dollar-designated US-controlled international payment system for financial transactions as an instrument of its foreign policy. Led by the BRICS, the rest of the world is racing to replace the dollar as the world’s reserve currency with local currencies and/or pseudo-currencies and the US-controlled international payment system with block-chain technologies.

    When the movement to de-status the dollar reaches critical mass, the United States will officially be recognized as a bankrupt Third-World country wracked by inflation. It will no longer have the luxury of recklessly printing petrodollars to pay its bills.

    Not all is bleak. The collapse of the AngloZionist Empire is the sine qua non for getting our Constitutional liberties back.

  7. KA says:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/450890/iran-nuclear-deal-exit-strategy-john-bolton-memo-trump

    John Bolton wants to scrap the deal, provide supports to outsiders and insiders to foment troubles against the regime and ban all commercial diplomatic and educational legal contacts to the rest of the world .

    He wants to inform China and Russia only after the whole thing is over ( Iran has become I guess Yemen!)

    Why is he outside the high security prison or outside the administration?

    • Replies: @anon
    , @annamaria
  8. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @KA

    Genesis of American relentless march to stupidity has been promoted and secured by dimwit halfling midget like Bolton
    Unfortunately Israel instead of keeping and maintaining the logical support from the intellectual , visionary and moral people has relied on morons like these endangering itself and USA .

    These morons wouldn’t get a job as a third shift janitor in a slaughter house solely on merits . They did what they could – race the bottom of the barrel of dishonesty because that was their upbringing . It made them street smart without necessary IQ.

  9. These moves are the epitome of stupidity on the part of the Americans. Nothing to be gained and everything to be lost. America just doesn’t get it; it is out of the equation. Our congress is bought and paid for by the neocons. The neocons are irrational, knee jerk reactionaries that are incapable of mastering the game of checkers, let alone chess. I agree in full with the article. I believe that Israel will cease to exist past 2020 and America will be in an extremely weakened position if Trump does not reel in the neocons. Trump is surrounded by Generals, not for the possibility of war, but to prevent a military takeover by the neocons. Generals are more reliable, more pragmatic than are civilians. Trump initially made several big mistakes: listening to rosenstein and kushner; firing Flynn, Comey and Banner. I would like to know who advised Trump on the consulate closing; I do not believe, as the press states, that it was his idea. I am still laughing at the monumental stupidity of such a move and the world still has not recovered its’ breath from the shock. The repercussions, the precedent, is eye opening, to say the least.

    • Replies: @annamaria
    , @Wally
  10. George Sm says:

    The US just tore up the principle that its CIA stations around the world are immune from the local governments seizing and searching thei HQ.

    If there are wise people in the world, the next ‘color revolution’ would be met by that immediate closure of CIA stations (aka US embassies and consulates) in the country and quick and thorough searches to find evidence that the CIA was backing the overthrow (aka regime change) of the local government.

    Seems like yet another case where the CIA (aka US government) has a lot more to lose in this exchange than they’ll gain from searching the San Francisco consulate.

  11. antiJohn says:

    The funny part is that I’d be very willing to hire John Bolton as an adviser on foreign policy. But I would never tell Mr. Bolton that I’d keep him around to make damn certain that I’m always doing the opposite of what he thinks. In that way, I think his advice would be almost invaluable.

  12. @Cyrano

    “Whichever European power used to be the dominant one at the time, in order to be truly certified as the top dog – they sought to prove superiority over Russia. ”

    Notice of course that there are no historical examples to back up this statement. That is because exactly the opposite was true.

    Russia was part of a ‘conservative coalition’ that ran Europe for a century. The Kings and Queens who held power and lived in luxury because of who their daddy was were in mortal terror that what happened in the French Revolution might spread throughout Europe. Thus Russia was an ally of England, Austria, Prussia and others in fighting against Napoleon. The Russian czars were very supportive of the other royalty in Europe and stayed a part of a coalition trying to maintain this system of privlidge throughout the 19th century.

    England clashed a bit with Russia as a part of ‘the great game’, but that was a fight for power and money in the indian sub-continent. England thought their slave cash-cow might be threatened as the Russians expanded to their south. Other than that, the royal houses that ruled Europe in the 19th century were all allies with Russia, and there were a series of Great Power conferences where Russia was a key player trying to make sure that the european royalty stayed in power and that notions such as freedom and justice were routinely crushed.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
    , @Wizard of Oz
  13. @Carlton Meyer

    The absurd point that Americans are not supposed to notice is that Trump is continuing and escalating a dispute that began with Crooked Hillary’s fake claims that the only reason the most hated politician in America could be elected was because of Russia meddling.

    Trump has clearly said/tweeted that he does not believe these claims and considers them to be fake news and nonsense. Yet now we see the Trump administraion pushing the world closer to nuclear war because of these claims.

    I suppose the one thing that shows us is that the recent stories that Trump is basically under ‘house arrest’ in the White House are essentially on target

  14. yeah says:

    I think there is a lot of confusion between “what ought to be” and “what is”. Ethics, international diplomatic immunity protocols, and plain decency say that the Russian consulate affair ought not to have happened.

    But let us analyze why it did happen, the “what is” side of things. The US state, encompassing all its departments and agencies, is neither weak nor stupid. Someone may wish it were so, but that does not make it so. Likewise, most of us wish it were a little more humane, a little more responsive to the needs of ordinary Americans, a little more restrained on the word stage, but that is not going to make it so. So what makes it tick? What causes it to do what it does? That is the analytical challenge.

    International realpolitik is a dog eat dog affair. From this assumption, all else can be deduced. If this assumption is wrong, nothing below is likely to be correct. So then, a top dog needs to keep baring its fangs and keep fighting if it is to remain top dog. If it cedes an inch, some of the uppity usurpers will surely circle in closer, looking to get in a deadly bite or two to oust the top dog. Viewed through this optic, all of US international actions make perfect sense, and have been successful – hugely successful. Russia is militarily surrounded: inch by inch, country by country, the US has muscled it out of its former sphere of influence. China has been made a partner in the global economic order, from which it cannot disengage without committing economic hara-kiri. It dare not snarl at the top dog. Beginning with Kissinger, the US has been throwing it juicy tidbits to keep it compliant, and that strategy has been brilliantly successful. The problem dog, though, continues to be Russia. That dog was not fed juicy tidbits because it has always been perceived (rightly or wrongly is a different matter) to be aggressive. How do you tame an aggressive dog? By starving it, to the point that it becomes emaciated. The policy of economic sanctions has that as its objective. But to be able to apply the final chokehold, what is required is to isolate it from the rest of the pack, to make it an international pariah. And that is where American soft power comes into play. The world has little of media other than the American one, little original ideas, research, technology, or viewpoints that can stand up to American ones. The American advantages are slipping, but they still remain. The SF consulate affair has isolated Russia in world public opinion one big step further. The seeds of doubt have been planted: what nefarious plots have the Russians been hatching in their consulates, what secrets are they frantically trying to burn to avoid discovery? They will increasingly be seen to be one more North Korea, albeit a much more dangerous one. That lays the groundwork for more action designed to weaken and isolate Russia. And it will likely succeed.

    The above is perhaps much too ugly, completely amoral, and perhaps much too raw for refined tastes, but the only questions should be: Is it logically valid? Does it accord with reality in describing the world as it is?

  15. Modern American Diplomats, or at least lets say senior employees of the State Department, really only have one skill set. That is in delivering ultimatums. After all, a person or a group is only skilled at what it is they regularly do. And the only task American diplomats are regularly given is to Deliver an Ultimatum. Beyond that, the job duties of a senior level diplomat seem to basically be don’t do anything to embarass us when you go get smashed at parties.

    These days, many duties of the ‘diplomat’ have been flat out usurped. If you are dealing with ‘the American government’, you’d better be talking with the CIA, the Pentagon as well as with the State Department. Langley and the Pentagon have both grabbed turf that used to belong to diplomats, and now in many ways these agencies also project American policy.

    The American regional commanders all exert ‘diplomacy’ in their regions. They are in many ways the Voice of America in their own spheres. And I’d rather suspect the local CIA station heads act in much the same way. Anybody who can order you to be killed can usually request your attendence to be told what to do.

    • Replies: @jacques sheete
  16. Historians call it the “thucydides trap”. That happens when an establish power is confronting with a rising power. It usually is not a peaceful transition. The name is drawn from the history of Athens and Sparta.

    I suppose its on my mind because I recently read this piece.
    “Beware the Thucydides Trap” by James Holmes

    http://thediplomat.com/2013/06/beware-the-thucydides-trap-trap/

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  17. Cyrano says:
    @Albert King

    You are a perfect target audience for one of the mottos that I have come up with: Those who don’t know history ought to do something about it and learn it.

    An alliance with Russia was always a weapon of last resort, because whichever of the Great Powers of Europe chose them as allies, they were always more weary of their “ally” than of their enemies. The name of the game for the last few hundred years has always been the same: Containment of Russia.

    When Nicholas 1 wanted to put the “sick man of Europe” – the Ottoman empire out of their misery, not least because they still held large territories populated by Christian Slavs as it happened to be, the 2 miserable empires of Europe – France and the British sided with Islamic Turkey against Russia. Some fine Christians they were. They were more worried about the Russian expansion than they were about protecting the Christians that were still under centuries long Islamic rule.

    Of course in the minds of the degenerates from Western Europe, Slavs were hardly human, and their Christianity was of inferior quality, so why should they concern themselves with them. The only reason why Constantinople is still in Turkish hands is because the western degenerates would rather see it in their hands than belonging to Russia, or even Bulgaria.

    Not to worry comrades, the way the things are going, your capitals will soon be in Islamic hands. That’s how much brain power is left remaining in the west. I am getting little bit off topic here.

    Perhaps the best example of the reluctance by the western powers to have Russia as an ally was WW2, when they all balked at alliance with USSR, leaving the door open for the non-aggression pact. The west only agreed to ally themselves with USSR, when all other options looked inadequate and they realized that they won’t be able to defeat Hitler on their own. Stalin, on the other hand, was no big fan of alliances with the west too, because he knew that these sleazeballs can’t be trusted.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @Hibernian
  18. @Greek Jazz

    Drawing direct parallels is always a very tricky thing–especially in the age of precision Guided Munitions, nuclear weapons and C4ISR. Operationally and tactically there are no parallels whatsoever between Athens, Sparta and US. None, zero. To start with, US is not a continental power and never was, unlike that was the case with Athens and Sparta. That alone precludes any legitimate parallels. Could some political and ideological parallels be drawn? Possibly, but even that should be done very cautiously.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @Anon
  19. hunor says:
    @yeah

    you failed to talk about who is holding the leash of the top dog. who is manipulating it , who is using it with all its might for destruction , when and where needed to attack other dogs ? there will be no exceptional bone awarded to the top dog for his service to the leash holders, in fact they will be destroyed like always the case with dogs. if you live like a dog you will die like a dog.

  20. neutral says:
    @yeah

    “what ought to be” and “what is”

    Well if you want to raise this issue, then the reality that an America with the future demographics will not be able to rule anything, even itself. A country consisting of so many inferior races simply will not be able to do the things it think it can, that is the ultimate iron law of reality. As for the whites look at the increasing levels of pure lunacy as they tear down statues, cannot find competent people to run their ships or fight over transvestites being able to go to the correct toilet.

    No doubt this is too raw for your tastes, but it is true.

    • Replies: @yeah
  21. Cyrano says:
    @yeah

    That lays the groundwork for more action designed to weaken and isolate Russia. And it will likely succeed.

    You need to have your head examined. No, wait, I’ll do it for free. You are a moron.

    • Replies: @yeah
  22. Erebus says:
    @Cloak And Dagger

    Good Post. A few extra thoughts….

    We squandered the potential for world peace when the Soviets broke up. Instead of taking advantage of the peace windfall, the neocons redoubled their efforts to dominate by projecting military power.

    It’s a little more complicated than that. The dominance America sought, and sorta still seeks, was on all fronts: legal, political, financial, cultural, economic, social, etc. and the juggernaut that was to take it there was globalization. Globalization is to be catalysed, and enforced by military power, whenever all other inducements fail to bring a country on board. Now, globalization, however defined, looks to be the great historical trend of the times, but the US’ Neocon dream of being Capo di tutt’i capi, of full spectrum dominance of the process of getting there and its ultimate systemic result is failing. Holding to that line, the Neocons have run into a world of Russian, Chinese and other roadblocks. The roadblocks are becoming plain to the non-Neocons, if not the Neocons themselves, and that’s largely why US policy looks like a pinball machine gone berserk.

    … pain will rewaken all our somnambulant citizenry… and they may unite to rout the Jewish banking power that has resulted in our predicament.

    I think it just as likely that the banking power will collapse first. The somnolent citizenry will awaken in disarray and after some confusion revert to a loose collection of states out of expediency. That would allow a lot more of the world to sleep even more peacefully, and may even be an improvement on your version for American citizens as well.

    …Israel and Saudi Arabia will stand alone, surrounded by angry nations…

    They have apparently both come to the same conclusion, but seem to have taken different lessons from it. The Saudis recently announced an exchange of diplomatic visits with Iran(!). Not an exchange of ambassadors, to be sure, but a compass may be coming around in Riyadh. Meanwhile, Netanyahu got a hearing in Washington, and then got an 11th hour impromptu hearing with Putin. Neither went well for him, and Russian diplomatic sources noted that he appeared on the “edge of panic”. Looks good on ‘im, but his geo-political failure will surely make him much more vulnerable in his upcoming corruption case, and a fine little war has long been the go-to distraction for cornered politicians. Let’s hope less panicked heads prevail.

    … western invasions of these countries will become all but impossible…

    It already is. As re-trained, re-equipped, and re-organized by the Russians, the Syrian Army has emerged from 6 years of bloody war as the most battle-hardened and efficient ground combat force in the M.E. As Pat Lang notes, “a new force has appeared in the Levant” and their primary allies, Hezbollah and the Iranian militias have similarly benefited (Iraq’s PMUs and Iran’s Republican Guards probably learned a thing or two as well). Add in Russia’s intent to remain in the region, and a whole new calculus appears. The “Assad is a goner” slam-dunk everyone thought they were looking at a scant 2 yrs ago has inverted 180 deg. The Imperial regime change program came a cropper, and a new axis of power arose. The GCC, after the requisite temper tantrums, are coming round to the new reality, but Israel remains behind the curve. A Lesser Israel is suddenly back in view.

    • Replies: @Logan
    , @Cloak And Dagger
  23. Randal says:

    For a while already the Russian diplomats have been openly saying that their American counterparts are недоговороспособны or “non-agreement capable”. …..
    Now the US has slipped even lower: the Russians speak of US “hellish buffoonery” and “stupid thuggery”.

    The Russians are obviously correct thus far in their assessment of the US foreign policy establishment. The US bipartisan elites behave in this way because they both believe that they can (might makes right) and believe they are uniquely justified in doing so (the exceptional nation, the shining city on the hill, “humanitarian” intervention, R2P etc).

    The question is, why did the Chinese and Russians foolishly collaborate in the latest attempt by the US to misuse the UNSC to target its enemies and set the scene for future justifications of military action, by supporting the foolish coercive sanctions resolution against North Korea last month? By doing so they played into the hands of the worst elements of the bipartisan US establishment idiocracy, and probably terminally undercut their own preferred approach of constructive engagement. Are they really naïve enough to believe that they can safely use the menace of US military thuggery to compel North Korea to behave as they wish?

    The far better alternative policy was right there in front of them, begging to be used. The North Korean nuclear issue is as clear a condemnation of the US’s policies of military aggression and coercive sanctions as you could wish for.

    The next question is, will they repeat their error by complying with the US regime’s evident wish for a ramping up of tensions?

    Putin rightly stated, in response to inevitable calls for yet more brutish sanctions by the US regime’s prominent warmonger Nikki Haley, backed by its collaborationists such as Merkel, that sanctions are useless. That’s true (which is not to say that they are harmless). Russia knows this full well.

    So why did Russia vote for them in the Security Council last month?

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
  24. For the normally hyper-diplomatic Russians, this kind of language is absolutely unheard of, this has never ever happened before.

    You haven’t been around much. That’s actually pretty mild compared to what they did under the rubric of the Soviet Union. It’s just as stupid now as it was then. This is just the sort of games played by countries like Russia and the US.

  25. yeah says:
    @neutral

    Look, I never said that America is perfect. As a matter of fact, I explicitly said America has a hundred problems, statue vandalism and trannies running wild included. But all others have a thousand problems. Would you migrate to Russia or China or any of those BRICS countries? Would you prefer to settle down in France? Would you place your investments in Germany? In a world gone blind the one-eyed man is king.

  26. yeah says:
    @Cyrano

    I am prepared to have my facts examined, my head is doing fine, thank you. But perhaps facts and logic do not interest you much.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  27. Logan says:
    @Erebus

    ” The somnolent citizenry will awaken in disarray and after some confusion revert to a loose collection of states out of expediency. ”

    Very few Americans think of themselves as citizens of their state. I don’t think this is a viable alternative.

    • Replies: @Cloak And Dagger
  28. @yeah

    Would you place your investments in Germany?

    No, but I might put them in China. I am already invested in Tencent and AliBaba. The gold-backed RMB is a game changer.

  29. @Erebus

    Great thoughts.

    but his geo-political failure will surely make him much more vulnerable in his upcoming corruption case, and a fine little war has long been the go-to distraction for cornered politicians.

    True, but it is unlikely that he will get much support from a military leadership that is still smarting from their last whupping from Hizbollah. Israel probably realizes that their army, trained on taking on little kids with stones, is no match for the battle-hardened soldiers of Lebanon and Syria – hence the panic.

    Retaking the Golan Heights is now a distinct possibility.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  30. neutral says:
    @yeah

    Would you migrate to Russia or China or any of those BRICS countries

    I would indeed, America is the last place I would ever want to migrate to, both Russia and China are still civilized. I would refuse to go to America even if someone put a gun to my head, why any sane person would want to move to the land of SJWs, surveillance state and nauseating social norms is beyond me.

    • Agree: JL
  31. @Logan

    Very few Americans think of themselves as citizens of their state. I don’t think this is a viable alternative.

    You are correct, but most of us feel unrepresented by the Federal Government in everything from legalizing weed to endless wars with our tax dollars. The constitution has become toilet paper. The Federal Government is supposed to only have the rights explicitly called out in the constitution and the rest is supposed to be with the states and the individuals. The inverse is in effect.

    The founders never imagined that our government would be so corrupted by foreign powers so as to render the constitution moot, although they warned us that we would have a republic only if we could keep it. We couldn’t.

    Thomas Jefferson is reputed to have written in his retirement papers (the veracity is contested):

    If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered.

    Well, guess what?

    • Replies: @Logan
    , @jacques sheete
  32. Cyrano says:
    @yeah

    When was the last time a US foreign policy initiative has played out as advertised? They either lie about their true objectives or they are incompetent. I vote that both of these statements apply. You seem to have an awful lot of confidence in your government that is not backed up by any accomplished results on their part.

  33. A sign of weakness?

    But US still has 15x the economy of Russia.

    And its soft power is taking over the world. Granted, US pop culture is destroying the US too, but at least it will take the world with it.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
    , @Erebus
  34. Cyrano says:
    @Priss Factor

    What’s US economy compared to Afghanistan? 35 trillion X? Did it do them any good there? Some things can’t be quantified with money.

    Like the fondness the rest of the world feels for US and its efforts to bring democracy to everyone, no matter what the cost (to the target country of course) and no matter how ungrateful the targeted country is.

    • Replies: @Randal
  35. “US diplomats of the era of James Baker must be absolutely mortified to see the kind of idiocy their successors are now engaging in.”

    While Saker’s Russian Triumphalism can get pretty wearing (the evil USA won in Ukraine – they launched a successful coup that took Putin completely by surprise AFAICT) I have to agree with this 100%. The complete collapse in Western seriousness and competence within a couple years of the Cold War’s end is truly horrifying.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  36. Logan says:
    @Cloak And Dagger

    I suspect the TJ quote is spurious. I don’t think the terms inflation and deflation, in this sense, were current at the time.

    OK. Looked it up. Inflation was first used in this sense in 1838, deflation in 1920.

    The Monticello organization has an excellent resource on spurious TJ quotes, of which there are an amazing number.

    https://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/private-banks-spurious-quotation

    This particular one, in its full form, apparently doesn’t show up till after WWII.

    That it’s spurious does not mean it’s untrue, of course.

    • Replies: @Cloak And Dagger
  37. The Scalpel says: • Website
    @yeah

    “The seeds of doubt have been planted: what nefarious plots have the Russians been hatching in their consulates, what secrets are they frantically trying to burn to avoid discovery? They will increasingly be seen to be one more North Korea, albeit a much more dangerous one. That lays the groundwork for more action designed to weaken and isolate Russia. And it will likely succeed.”

    The above does not accord with reality at all. The world sees the United States as a bully and one that ignores its treaties and international law. The situation that is being promoted is one where several of the week or dogs unite in a conspiracy to knock the top dog off his perch.

  38. The anti-Russia hysteria began immediately after the DNC realized their emails were about to be published by Wikileaks. It has been a gigantic, illogical noise machine to this day.

    While this giant noise machine roars in the legacy media, the alternative media is gradually exposing how extensive the Awan spy ring in Congress was and how far the establishment is going out of its way to conceal perhaps the most successful espionage and exfiltration operation in our history.

    It’s the Awan spy ring in Congress using blackberries synching to laptops, stupid.

  39. Erebus says:
    @Priss Factor

    But US still has 15x the economy of Russia.

    Bollocks. On a PPI basis, Russia’s GDP comes out just ahead of Germany, but has the tremendous advantage of being arguably the most diversified economy on the planet. As its debt is low, and imports are <15% of its GDP, it is arguably also one of the most self-reliant.

    And its soft power is taking over the world.

    The pop-culture wave broke and started receding a decade and a half ago, and the US’ financial not-so-soft power has been under assault since at least 2008. Both are approaching their end-game. You should try to get out more.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    , @Wizard of Oz
  40. @Logan

    I suspect the TJ quote is spurious. I don’t think the terms inflation and deflation, in this sense, were current at the time.

    Yes, you are right, however, he did write the following in a letter to John Taylor in 1816:

    And I sincerely believe with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; & that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale

    • Replies: @Logan
  41. JL says:
    @yeah

    Would you migrate to Russia or China

    I’m guessing you’ve never traveled to either country, which accounts for such a brash display of ignorance from an otherwise knowledgeable commenter. As an American immigrant in Russia, who’s also spent some time in China, I would much rather live in either country. I only travel to the US to visit family, and, as long as I have a choice in the matter, will never go to live there again.

  42. Randal says:
    @Cyrano

    What’s US economy compared to Afghanistan? 35 trillion X? Did it do them any good there?

    Depends what you mean by “good” and for whom, I suppose.

    The US’s massive superiority certainly allowed it to overthrow the government of Afghanistan, and to slaughter people there at will for over a decade without any effective response, at a cost that whilst not trivial (and certainly catastrophic for the tiny number of military individuals involved and their families) is certainly insignificant in national budgetary, demographic and economic terms.

    Some things can’t be quantified with money.

    Assuredly. But military power is one that broadly can. Usually wars in the modern world are won by those with the greater gdp (including deep pocketed backers). The exceptions being where the war is not important enough to the bigger power to justify the means and costs of winning, and especially where the stakes for the smaller nation are high enough to make fighting on necessary no matter the cost. In other words, wars of choice waged to try to impose occupation or collaboration governments.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
    , @Andrei Martyanov
  43. @Cloak And Dagger

    The problem with roughly one-sixth of our population coming from South and Central America is that we have a large number who have learned to live through societal failure and don’t have the motivation to avoid it.

    Argentina was once a first-world nation. It is still a relatively comfortable place to live if you are unambitious. Is this America’s future, or are we planning to take the whole world down with us a la that Planet of the Apes movie where the world ends up nuked in the struggle between the doomsday-bomb cultists and the apes?

  44. Randal says:
    @yeah

    But let us analyze why it did happen, the “what is” side of things. The US state, encompassing all its departments and agencies, is neither weak nor stupid.

    The evidence of the past couple of decades seems to cast your assertion into serious doubt.

    The US response to the collapse of the Soviet Union has certainly been “stupid” insofar as any state’s actions can be described as such – in other words, from the point of view of any reasonably honest conception of the national interest as opposed to the interests of the lobbies (often foreign or foreign-sympathising, but including the military and related business and other interests) that influence policy.

    It was not good policy to alienate Russia, it was not good policy to repeatedly undermine national sovereignty and the “international rule of law” (to which so many US sphere politicians and advocates of interventionism have hypocritically appealed on so may occasions), it was not good policy to destroy the government of Iraq, or to invade Afghanistan or to allow US vassals to destroy the government of Libya, and it is not good policy to try to confront China over ultimately unsustainable and anachronistic US dominance of the western Pacific.

    These policies serve the interests of many highly intelligent and well-funded interest groups, many of them foreign or dual loyalty, but they do not serve the interests of ordinary Americans in general. In fact they are highly counter-productive to any plausible conception of the interests of the American nation, and hence certainly qualify as “stupid”.

    Indeed, the invasion of Iraq is now widely viewed as an archetype of “stupid” in geostrategic policy terms, and will undoubtedly be taught as such in numerous history and international relations courses.

    • Replies: @Joe Levantine
  45. @yeah

    Well, at least those other countries don’t pretend to be bastions of liberty.

  46. Randal says:
    @yeah

    Viewed through this optic, all of US international actions make perfect sense, and have been successful – hugely successful. Russia is militarily surrounded: inch by inch, country by country, the US has muscled it out of its former sphere of influence. China has been made a partner in the global economic order, from which it cannot disengage without committing economic hara-kiri. It dare not snarl at the top dog. Beginning with Kissinger, the US has been throwing it juicy tidbits to keep it compliant, and that strategy has been brilliantly successful. The problem dog, though, continues to be Russia. That dog was not fed juicy tidbits because it has always been perceived (rightly or wrongly is a different matter) to be aggressive. How do you tame an aggressive dog? By starving it, to the point that it becomes emaciated. The policy of economic sanctions has that as its objective. But to be able to apply the final chokehold, what is required is to isolate it from the rest of the pack, to make it an international pariah. And that is where American soft power comes into play. The world has little of media other than the American one, little original ideas, research, technology, or viewpoints that can stand up to American ones. The American advantages are slipping, but they still remain. The SF consulate affair has isolated Russia in world public opinion one big step further. The seeds of doubt have been planted: what nefarious plots have the Russians been hatching in their consulates, what secrets are they frantically trying to burn to avoid discovery? They will increasingly be seen to be one more North Korea, albeit a much more dangerous one. That lays the groundwork for more action designed to weaken and isolate Russia. And it will likely succeed.

    As so often with those who claim to be adopting a brutally “realistic” and “objective” view of the world, your analysis is in fact so grossly subjective and parochial as to amount to a fantasy.

    In the real world, as opposed to your US sphere circle-jerk one, Russia is not particularly isolated or weak. Dislike by the US sphere establishments does not equate to “isolation” for a country that is a close ally of the now largest economy in the world and which trades and engages in diplomacy freely with most of the rest of the world, no matter how much you might wish it to be so. And for all the talk of US sanctions “strangling” Russia, far from shrinking, the Russian economy is actually doing quite well, and arguably the better for the sanctions. And for a country that is “militarily surrounded”, Russia certainly managed to frustrate the US’s and its regional allies’ designs in Syria very effectively.

    As for China, that country has repeatedly made clear its refusal to kowtow to US regime concerns, and while it is certainly integrated into the world economy that has not stopped it taking steps to render itself and its main allies in the SCO less vulnerable to coercion as a result of legacy US domination of the structures of that economy, whilst pushing towards realignments of those structures to better reflect modern reality.

    A truly competent US regime, in the “dog eat dog” world you claim to see so clearly, would have ensured in the 1990s that post-Soviet Russia was its ally in the effort to strangle the rising challenger, China. (I’m not saying that’s what they should have done, merely that that’s what your claimed premises would imply). Instead they gratuitously alienated Russia over and over again, and effectively forced it into the arms of the rising power.

    As for the “SF consulate affair”, it’s hard to grasp the degree of delusion required to see it as you do, as having: “isolated Russia in world public opinion one big step further. The seeds of doubt have been planted: what nefarious plots have the Russians been hatching in their consulates, what secrets are they frantically trying to burn to avoid discovery? They will increasingly be seen to be one more North Korea, albeit a much more dangerous one.” Most of the world hasn’t even noticed it, and of those who have, the prevailing view is probably that it’s just another example of US high-handedness, or of the comical American obsession with fantasies of “Russian interference.

    The slightest familiarity with actual global opinion (as opposed to US sphere establishment groupthink delusion) on your part might have rescued your analysis. The US has long been recognised as the greater threat to world peace amongst the powerful states by more than see the others as threats. The latest Pew poll last month confirmed this, with the proportions naming “US power and influence” as “the greatest threat to our country” at 35%, compared to 31% for Russia and the same for China. And those polls were only carried out in 38 countries, that did not include any of the main targets of recent US military aggression and threats of same – Serbia, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria.

    • Replies: @yeah
    , @utu
  47. Logan says:
    @Cloak And Dagger

    True enough, with the proviso that it is possible to borrow money and spend it on things that grow the economy more than enough to pay it off, coming out ahead net.

    Sadly, this is not usually what is done.

  48. @Randal

    “TIt was not good policy to alienate Russia, it was not good policy to repeatedly undermine national sovereignty and the “international rule of law” (to which so many US sphere politicians and advocates of interventionism have hypocritically appealed on so may occasions), it was not good policy to destroy the government of Iraq, or to invade Afghanistan or to allow US vassals to destroy the government of Libya, and it is not good policy to try to confront China over ultimately unsustainable and anachronistic US dominance of the western Pacific. These policies serve the interests of many highly intelligent and well-funded interest groups, many of them foreign or dual loyalty, but they do not serve the interests of ordinary Americans in general. ”
    So was America’s entry in WWI and WWII. The imperialist drive simply wrecked the once promising American republic which was an inspiration to much of the world but which views it increasingly as a financially broken bully who is about to wreck the boat for everyone in a vain attempt at keeping the position of top dog.

    • Agree: jacques sheete
    • Replies: @Randal
  49. @TheJester

    “When the movement to de-status the dollar reaches critical mass, the United States will officially be recognized as a bankrupt Third-World country wracked by inflation. It will no longer have the luxury of recklessly printing petrodollars to pay its bills.”
    Very true. Indeed, the Chinese are about to declare a new gold backed oil benchmark that will be another nail in the coffin of the U.S. Dollar as a world reserve currency; a scourge to Amerca’s ruling predatory class but a boon to world peace.

  50. Randal says:
    @Joe Levantine

    So was America’s entry in WWI and WWII. The imperialist drive simply wrecked the once promising American republic which was an inspiration to much of the world but which views it increasingly as a financially broken bully who is about to wreck the boat for everyone in a vain attempt at keeping the position of top dog.

    I agree, but at least those policies were justified (if that’s the correct term) by success, and by the real raw power of a rising world hegemon interfering to destroy potential rivals.

    They make far less sense in the context of a state past the height of its power and facing imminent (in global history terms) eclipse, for which the primary concerns should be preparing to manage relative decline and setting favourable precedents and relationships for the future.

  51. Cyrano says:
    @Randal

    Usually wars in the modern world are won by those with the greater gdp (including deep pocketed backers).

    Perhaps then we should use Vietnam as an example to support your thesis?

    • Replies: @Randal
  52. Randal says:
    @Cyrano

    Vietnam

    A perfect example of exactly the kind of war (a war of choice for the bigger power, which is not therefore prepared to apply the means and devote the resources required to win, and a war to impose an occupation/collaboration government upon the smaller nation, which therefore is prepared to bear almost any cost to resist to the end) to which the general rule does not apply (for reasons that are rather obvious once the situation is properly stated, as it is here).

    A example of the kind of war to which the general rule applies would be the Falklands War. Granted, the behaviour of the US and the realities of life in the age of the nuclear peace means there have been rather more of the exceptional cases in the past few decades.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  53. @Randal

    Usually wars in the modern world are won by those with the greater gdp (including deep pocketed backers)

    The problem with this, otherwise generally correct statement, is that what is known as a Material Preponderance Predictor was never tried in modern wars between powers with comparable, in terms of order of magnitude, GDP. That is to say, that the United States who self-appointed itself as a “finest fighting force in history”(c) didn’t encounter what generally is known as peer in decades. Meanwhile, reality of combined arms operations is only in general related to this Predictor, and requires very complex planning and calculations which are beyond the grasp of the general public. This is not to speak of the methods of planning and executing those operations (bar some generalities) being a very highly classified matter. Let’s put it this way: operationally it all starts with calculating the force (aka in Russian Naryad Sil), that is the numbers and structure, which are required for attaining one or the other objective. Needless to say that even such calculations are extremely secret since involve integration of a number of technological factors (from weapons to EW, to C4ISR) which are highly classified by definition. But, of course, there are always exceptions.

    • Agree: Sergey Krieger
    • Replies: @Randal
  54. Cyrano says:
    @Randal

    Your examples are all over the place. Vietnam refutes your theory, but Falkland war supports it to a certain extent. Either way, your theory is full of holes because you try to find excuses when actual events disprove of it. May I offer you my theory then?

    Most US wars are not existential by nature, their survival is not at stake, so there is less “ambition” to win them. From the perspective of moral, wars generally favor the defender, moral is usually higher when you defend your country, than when you (mindlessly) attack someone.

    Technological advantage can play role, but it can be overstated – example WW2 – Germany and Russia. Germany was supposed to be technologically superior, yet it proved that it wasn’t when it came to military technology.

    The 2 examples of Vietnam and the Falkland war featured the 2 dominant naval powers of the last 2 centuries. In order to be a really truly superpower you have to be good in land battles. I think British record is better than the American in this regard.

    As a general rule naval powers usually have greater success against a third rate military powers, that’s why they usually seek out their enemies on the other side of the world. Their success rates against a first rate land powers are sketchy.

    Countries like Russia, Germany and China are (or used to be) primarily land powers – which means that if they can walk up to a battlefield – most likely they’ll win the war – of course unless they are fighting each other, then other considerations apply.

    • Replies: @Randal
  55. Randal says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    One relevant factor is probably that there would be less time to recover from initial disadvantages and allow greater wealth and productive capacity to be brought to bear, because of the greater speeds, ranges and transport capacities of modern forces.

    All this, of course, requires ignoring the nuclear elephant sitting next to us, which hopefully means there will be no test of the questions you raise in our lifetimes.

    Needless to say that even such calculations are extremely secret since involve integration of a number of technological factors (from weapons to EW, to C4ISR) which are highly classified by definition.

    A corollary of that being that no one human being can have the knowledge needed to make the necessary calculation as more than informed guesswork, since any who are fully privy to the secrets of one side are most likely ignorant of some, at least, of those of the other side.

  56. Randal says:
    @Cyrano

    You will not, I think, find any theory of warfare that explains every case and predicts every result with certainty. I think mine (actually not mine, of course, but pretty much received opinion in general) holds up pretty well, though I don’t have any particular problem with your own (similarly incomplete) suggestions either.

    Most US wars are not existential by nature, their survival is not at stake, so there is less “ambition” to win them.

    Exactly my point. I have little doubt that if the national “will” had been there to win the /Vietnam war then the US could have won it by the kind of total war brutality that was used against for instance the Japanese – the mobilisation of millions of men and large parts of the economy and the wholesale destruction of entire cities full of civilians by incendiary and atomic bombing. It was the will that was lacking, not the capability.

    I do not say that such a victory would have been worth winning, of course, but history is full of examples of patriotic resistances successfully suppressed by sheer brute force, from the Jewish Revolt to Chechnya.

  57. yeah says:
    @Randal

    Your critique of my analysis is very well reasoned and convincing – and very correct in its own way. But please bear in mind that my opening and operative words were “Viewed through this optic”. Indeed, if the world is viewed through neocon and even some very brutal realpolitik eyes, the US moves have had a sense of inevitability, like one chess move forcing another. I abhor brutal and neocon views, but that does not mean that their actions have not had success. We err if we write off our opponents as stupid or failures.

    Of course, if policy had been informed by a higher level of ethics and a sense of fair play for the world as a whole, most of what you say would have been correct, especially post the soviet collapse. But in that case my little piece would have been unnecessary. I know I painted a repellent picture, but it was based on deducing actions from stated and implied policy. Many scholars have explained how this ‘empire thing’ is going to brutalize the world and derail the American Republic, and it seems to be coming to pass. I only analyzed, with a deep sense of despair and sorrow, why this juggernaut looks likely to “succeed”. BTW, this exchange has really been stimulating and forced me to think of my own biases.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @Wizard of Oz
    , @Kiza
  58. Cyrano says:
    @Randal

    Alright, here is my maximum thought on why US can’t win wars. The wars that US are usually losing are gorilla type of wars. I don’t know if Sigourney Weaver has anything to do with this – I suspect it might – ever since she shot that movie “Gorillas in the mist” people get all sentimental when it comes to fighting gorillas.

    OK, joking aside, my theory about warfare is incomplete and crappy, I agree with that.

    I actually think that the main problem why US ends up losing wars is because it gets into guerilla type of warfare. Very few armies have ever been successful at this. Large conventional armies are not good at fighting these kinds of wars. Germans can claim some success and the main reason is because they were ruthless and cruel.

    In order to win guerilla wars, the aggressor should be prepared to commit large atrocities – to scare off the civilian population from supporting the guerillas. Germans had no problem with this, while US tries to bring democracy, win hearts and minds, pretend to be the good guys and commit atrocities on top of it to scare off collaboration with the guerillas. Those are some mutually exclusive tactics right there. Paranoid tactics like that don’t win wars.

    Then there is the issue of the strategic bombing – which doesn’t do much against guerillas either, actually mindless bombing hasn’t been proven to work in any kind of warfare, but that’s not a reason to discourage US from practicing this type of warfare that they are so fond of. The other problem with guerilla wars is that they generally negate the technical advantage of the aggressor – there is only so much military hardware that you can bring in the middle of the mountains, and if you manage to do that, the guerillas will simply outrun you or hide.

    So, basically what I am trying to say is that I am trying to help US with their military strategy, because I am so sympathetic to their genuine and heartfelt efforts to bring democracy everywhere where no one asked for it, but I am out of ideas.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  59. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-06/zuckerberg-admits-facebook-conspired-russians-tank-hillarys-campaign

    A meager $50,000 and maybe… the Russians again.

    Jewish Globalists have no shame. They might as well just write THE PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS OF KREMLIN.

    Jewish Globalists have become the very thing they’ve decried the most. They are supremacist hate-filled lunatics who blame everything on scapegoats.

  60. @Randal

    After reading Vietnam: The Australian War by Paul Ham, it is hard not to conclude that had the US forces used Australian methods, especially with an Australian leadership, they would have been far more successful at a vastly reduced financial expenditure and lower losses of (US) life. Of course they would still have had to contend with the corrupt SVN leadership.

  61. utu says:
    @Randal

    A truly competent US regime, in the “dog eat dog” world you claim to see so clearly, would have ensured in the 1990s that post-Soviet Russia was its ally in the effort to strangle the rising challenger, China.

    Could you explain what was the plan behind letting Chine grow in the first place? Did they do it out of greed? W/o western technology China would not grow.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    , @Randal
    , @Cyrano
    , @Muse
  62. …Globalists have become the very thing they’ve decried the most. They are supremacist hate-filled lunatics who blame everything on scapegoats

    .

    It’s not a recent phenomenon, they’ve been that way for some time.

    Their buddy, Stalin, explained how it works “thusly”…

    “Blame others for your own sins.”

    J. V. Stalin, Anarchism Or Socialism ? December, 1906 — January, 1907

    Polybius, about almost 2500 years ago, also mentioned the concept.

    23

    1 Timaeus, while vehemently attacking Ephorus, is himself guilty of two grave faults, 2 the first being that he thus bitterly accuses others of the sins he himself is guilty of…

    POLYBIUS ,THE HISTORIES, Fragments of Book XII, VI. The Faults of Timaeus, p307

    http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/e/roman/texts/polybius/12*.html

    Moral: Sometimes it pays to look at the one crying “Thief!” not at whom he’s pointing.

  63. Johnny Rico says: • Website

    We beat them is Syria, we are beat them in the Ukraine, they lost Afghanistan, they lost Iraq, their Navy apparently does not know how to use a radar, their soldiers are terrified to fight somebody capable of resistance, they failed to impress not only China, but even the North Koreans who are openly laughing at them. Hezbollah laughs at them. Even Venezuela refuses to be scared! The Iranians openly threaten them with consequences if they back out of the deal they signed. Even Pakistan is openly expressing its disgust with the USA. Ditto for Turkey. Heck – the Americans are losing on all fronts

    Fantastically delusional.

    The American Empire has been expanding and gaining more control in certain respects and in certain geographical spheres for decades while it has been in slow decay and decline in other respects. China is really the ONLY competitor/rival that matters. China will soon displace the US from the top slot economically on paper. However, as far as global influence and power goes, it seems the United States is quite well positioned for a few more decades.

    While there is no reason for the United States not to be on friendly terms with Russia which is clearly just another viable form of democracy – the United States does not view itself as at war WITH Russia in Ukraine and Syria. That is just stupid to imply.

    We have not “lost” in Syria or Ukraine or Iraq or Afghanistan or anywhere else for that matter. We have not “lost” anywhere since Vietnam. A lot of these situations aren’t even wars by any reasonable use of the term.

    They are enormously expensive. But that is another issue. We are not “winning” these “conflicts” or situations and they aren’t a good thing but that, again, is another issue. We are not “losing” anything except money.

    Afghanistan, in the long term, may be geographically extremely important strategically. The Deep State, in my opinion, understands this and has committed to simply “being in” Afghanistan for a very long time. We own it. Like we own Saudi Arabia and almost all of the Middle East with the exception of Iran.

    The cost of “being in” Afghanistan is fairly predictable. Roughly $100 Billion/year, 10,000 ground troops (only about 1000 of which ever leave heavily protected bases), and a couple dozen dead every year. Afghanistan is the perfect live-fire, hands-on training the Army and Marine generals pray for.

    Eisenhower used North Africa to blood the troops before Italy and France. The Deep State will use Afghanistan to train the enforcers of Empire.

    Hysterical individuals have been predicting war breaking out any minute with North Korea, Iran, Russia, or China for a long time.

    This is just a case of Trump Derangement Syndrome subtly affecting those who consider themselves on the Alt-Right/Libertarian/formerly-supportive-of-Trump political spectrum.

    Nobody gives a shit what Hezbollah, North Koreans, or blonde Russians on Facebook think or say.

    Get over it.

    The US Navy knows how to use radar. Recent accidents are no more indicative of overall American military capability than the Kursk submarine disaster is of Russian sailing ability.

    Pakistan? Are you serious?

    Chill out.

  64. @utu

    I think it was a combination of greed and incompetence. They didn’t understand how quickly China will grow to become an economic rival.

  65. Randal says:
    @utu

    As I recall it, they started backing China as a counterweight to the Soviet Union. By the time the Soviet Union had vanished, greed (or the pursuit of wealth, if you don’t see international relations as zero sum) had taken over to an extent that precluded closing off relations.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  66. @NoseytheDuke

    You seem to think too much of the little brained basque australian cowards ,remember their record in singapore and malaysia.Face it the only enemy the basque british diaspora are able to defeat are armies with bows and arrows

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  67. Cyrano says:
    @utu

    Pure greed only. I remember reading somewhere in the late 90’s how US at that point was moving factories to China at the rate of 3 factories per week.

    They were explaining that as a result of this, every US citizen would save approx. $1800 per year – because of the lover production costs in China and consequently, the lower cost of the goods. But how long could this have realistically lasted?

    Once they outsourced all the manufacturing jobs, how would people earn any money to spend on cheap crap from China? I don’t see those $1800 of “savings” per year per person continuing indefinitely.

    Of course back then, there was a lot of talk about some nonsense like post-industrial, service based economy. Yeah, right, if you don’t produce anything, the only thing you have to worry about servicing – is your debts.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  68. peterAUS says:
    @Randal

    I have little doubt that if the national “will” had been there to win the /Vietnam war then the US could have won it by the kind of total war brutality that was used against for instance the Japanese – the mobilisation of millions of men and large parts of the economy and the wholesale destruction of entire cities full of civilians by incendiary and atomic bombing. It was the will that was lacking, not the capability.

    I do not say that such a victory would have been worth winning, of course, but history is full of examples of patriotic resistances successfully suppressed by sheer brute force, from the Jewish Revolt to Chechnya.

    Agree.
    The same applies to Afghanistan and Iraq, IMHO.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  69. peterAUS says:
    @Cyrano

    Agree with:

    Germans can claim some success and the main reason is because they were ruthless and cruel.
    In order to win guerilla wars, the aggressor should be prepared to commit large atrocities – to scare off the civilian population from supporting the guerillas. Germans had no problem with this, while US tries to bring democracy, win hearts and minds, pretend to be the good guys and commit atrocities on top of it to scare off collaboration with the guerillas. Those are some mutually exclusive tactics right there.

    Don’t agree with:

    The other problem with guerilla wars is that they generally negate the technical advantage of the aggressor – there is only so much military hardware that you can bring in the middle of the mountains, and if you manage to do that, the guerillas will simply outrun you or hide.

    Alternate history:
    Good:
    Nazi war machine mentality with US military technology in Afghanistan.

    Better:
    Balkans parties mentality, from wars in 90s, with US military technology in Afghanistan.

    The best:
    Hutus mentality from 1994 with US military technology in Afghanistan.

  70. peterAUS says:
    @Johnny Rico

    Agree with most.
    Especially with:

    Afghanistan, in the long term, may be geographically extremely important strategically. The Deep State, in my opinion, understands this and has committed to simply “being in” Afghanistan for a very long time. We own it. Like we own Saudi Arabia and almost all of the Middle East with the exception of Iran.

    and

    Afghanistan is the perfect live-fire, hands-on training the Army and Marine generals pray for.

    with

    The Deep State will use Afghanistan to train the enforcers of Empire.

  71. peterAUS says:
    @Randal

    Personally, don’t think it’s that simple
    Greed I mean.
    IMHO, it goes much deeper.
    My theory, something with Protestant/Puritan vs Orthodox religion/way of life/perception of reality.

  72. Cyrano says:
    @peterAUS

    I declare US the most humble empire in history. They could have won all of the wars that they’ve lost, only they were too modest to do that. They always want to give a chance to the underdog, being so big on fair play as they are.

    How can anybody not admire such modesty? If there was someone else in their place they could have bragged how they are exceptional, how their military is the “finest fighting …. whatever, mission accomplished and all that, but not US, no, they are just the apotheosis of modesty.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @MarkinLA
  73. MarkinLA says:
    @yeah

    what nefarious plots have the Russians been hatching in their consulates, what secrets are they frantically trying to burn to avoid discovery?

    Huh? There is possibly a wealth of information at the consulate that the CIA could use. There could be information about what capabilities the FSB has or information related to codes or codebreaking. There could be information on FSB assets in the US should there be any. You don’t want to leave anything for the CIA to get it’s hands on.

    • Replies: @JL
  74. MarkinLA says:
    @Cloak And Dagger

    battle-hardened soldiers of Lebanon and Syria

    They are fighting poorly trained and led militias. I can believe that the IDF is softer than it might have been in the 70s but I doubt they have anything to worry about with the Syrian Army.

    Battle hardened also means battle fatigued.

    • Replies: @Cloak And Dagger
  75. MarkinLA says:
    @Erebus

    Russia has a long way to go. Once you get out of Moscow or St. Petersburg, there are a lot of places that are third world. Don’t get me wrong, I like Russia but taking a train from Moscow to Bernaul (in the Altai region) and you see a lot of poverty once you get out of Moscow.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  76. MarkinLA says:
    @Cyrano

    No, The US was going to have the “knowledge” jobs. We in the US were going to be busy designing and perfecting all the new technologies while the Chinese would build them for us and accept their lower tier status for allowing them in the game. At least that was the economists wet dream.

    It went wrong when the Chinese demanded more and more of the process and greedy US management was only too willing to give it to them to continue to get their bonus checks. So now even some of the R&D is done in China and many of the engineering support jobs (such as QA) have left the US for good.

  77. @MarkinLA

    IDF is softer than it might have been in the 70s but I doubt they have anything to worry about with the Syrian Army

    I wouldn’t be too sure. They have received a lot of training from the Russians and they are better equipped than in the past. Moreover, it is not just the Syrian army. Unification is underway and it will be the combined might of Syria, Lebanon (and the Hizbollah), and Iran, plus who knows who else.

    Battle hardened also means battle fatigued.

    The physical fatigue will lapse in a few months of R&R. They did not have to suffer the mental fatigue of our troops fighting without cause in Vietnam, Iraq, etc. Moreover, the string of victories they have been enjoying does wonders for one’s morale.

    I wouldn’t get too complacent if I were you.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  78. MarkinLA says:
    @Cloak And Dagger

    I wouldn’t get too complacent if I were you.

    ???? I don’t have a dog in this fight. I was just pointing out that without Russia, Syria would not be all that. I doubt the Russians get involved unless the Israelis start it.

    • Replies: @Cloak And Dagger
  79. peterAUS says:
    @Cyrano

    Well, I believe that Saker and similar types are doing quite a good job there.
    Bragging about loses being victories I mean.

    It’s O.K, really.

    I came to conclusion ages ago that we simply see the world differently.

    In my book Ukraine is heavy Russian loss.
    With, say, Saker types, on the contrary.

    Same with Syria.
    Almost the same with Iraq and Afghanistan.

    No debate will ever resolve it. Ever.

    We simply present our “case” here and leave it to those “undecided” to make their own mind.
    But debating, arguing….waste of time really.

    I guess it boils down to “mechanical” vs “spiritual” approach to warfare.
    Something like that.
    I guess.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @Cyrano
  80. MarkinLA says:
    @Cyrano

    The US was probably overthinking these situations. I remember reading that the problem with Vietnam was that the US had all these political theorists, game theorists, and military strategists trying to determine what was the minimal amount of force that would bring Vietnam back to the bargaining table with the US in the strong position. The idea was not to destroy Vietnam and “win” but do just enough to make Ho rethink his options.

    The problem was that the North Vietnamese didn’t see the world in the same way. Given the condition of Vietnam now, it probably would have made more sense for Ho to go to the negotiating table and wait the Americans out as his “democratic socialist” (can’t call them communist) party slowly took control of Vietnam through the ballot box. LBJ was supposedly willing to invest money in Vietnam to build infrastructure (if they played along with us and pretended not be communists).

    So LBJ listened to his wise men and ramped up the pressure again and again with no seemingly useful result.

    The same was true of us in Afghanistan. We thought by going in and bringing in modernity that the people would be grateful and reject the Taliban causing them to peter out. However religious fervor was stronger than we thought and the Afghanis really didn’t care much about living in the modern world.

  81. @MarkinLA

    Sorry if I misunderstood your comment. I thought you were representing an arrogant Israeli perspective. Apologies.

  82. peterAUS says:
    @peterAUS

    Just to, extremely briefly, state how I measure victory/loss.

    The struggle between The Empire and Russia is about control of certain land/area.

    Two entities taking small pieces of a big pizza on a large table.

    Ukraine
    Before shooting started it was a Russian ally.
    Now more than half if controlled by The Empire.

    Iraq
    Independent country, outside of The Empire control.
    Now The Empire controls it.

    Afghanistan.
    Same as Iraq.

    Syria
    Before shooting started a stable country and Russian ally.
    Now unstable country where more than half of it is controlled not by Russian ally and probably third controlled by The Empire’s allies.

    Simple.

  83. Cyrano says:
    @peterAUS

    So, OK, US went to war in Vietnam but it was holding back because they are great humanitarians and spiritual people? Do you realize how nutty that theory is? Who has ever gone to war without totally committing themselves? Of course, how stupid of me, the exceptional ones.

    They went to war, but didn’t use all the means at their disposal because they didn’t want to hurt Vietnamese’ feelings? Let’s say I buy that theory, the events on the ground does not support it. US killed something like over 2 million Vietnamese civilians and that’s’ holding back?

    They had their a**es handed to them by the Vietnamese and that’s all there is to it. No wonder the US government can get away with the most outrageous lies that no one else but ignoramuses like you would buy. That’s why US is dangerous, because there is culture of ignorance which is not capable of holding their government to account for their actions around the world.

  84. Erebus says:
    @Johnny Rico

    We are not “losing” anything except money.

    That’s the view through 10′ of 1″ pipe. Look with a little wider view, and you’ll see that losing money is the very least of what America’s lost, and continues to lose. It’s already lost its republic, and is poised to lose both its Hegemony and the remnants of its democracy, and with it the country itself on account.
    Not that that matters to the people running it. They’ve pocketed the money America “lost” and stand well placed to run whatever entity replaces America on the N. American continent, even if their international influence will be forfeit.

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
    , @annamaria
  85. @Randal

    So why did Russia vote for them in the Security Council last month?

    Russia and China voted for the sanctions so as to avoid a direct, embarrassing, and very public diplomatic confrontation with the US. But in practice they will simply ignore them, especially China. I don’t believe for one moment that China will actually imperil North Korea, no matter what sort of kayfabe it votes on in the Security Council.

  86. hunor says:
    @peterAUS

    temporary gain against very soft targets. your empire passed its best days , after the second world war. /” the greatest generation “/. the young spirits of today can not possibly keep what they ancestors handed down to them. empires come and go. simple .

    • Replies: @annamaria
  87. US foreign policy since the end of the Cold War is one of the ugliest things ever.

    Consider this ‘Global War on Terror’.

    Well, which four nations are most responsible for creating this monstrous phenom?

    1. Israel. Because of Nakba and Occupation, it created an Arab culture of terror to resist Zionist imperialism. In the case of Algerian Terrorism, it ended when the French left. But Israel became a fixture, and terrorism continued. Whether one thinks the creation of Israel was a good thing or bad thing, it fostered a culture of terrorism as an act of resistance. To counter this terror, Israel aided other Arab terrorists to make Arab terror fight Arab terror. Arabs being stupid, they fell for the bait.

    2. The US. In the Cold War, especially in Afghanistan, US decided to aid Afghan terrorist resistance fighters against Soviet Occupation. Whether the Afghan resistance was good or bad, much of it depended on use of terror against Soviets and collaborators. Terrorism is after all the weapon of weak against strong. Maybe Afghan fighters could be deemed ‘freedom fighters’ for trying to overthrow foreign yoke, but their way of warfare was terrorism. And US aided and encouraged this. US did this the most in Afghanistan but also in other Muslim nations that were secular and allied with USSR. In those nations, US worked with Saudis(as they did in Afghanistan) to foster extreme Islam as bulwark against Marxism and secular-social-nationalism. Saudis and US thus spread the culture of Islamic Terror all over the Muslim World that would continue even after the Cold War when it was no longer needed by the US.

    3. Pakistan. Pakistanis feared India which was friendly with USSR during the Cold War. So, US and Pakistan became close, and together they aided the nationalist-terrorists of Afghanistan. More troubling, Pakistan offered sanctuary to lots of Afghan fighters and their families in Pakistan, thus radicalizing elements of Pakistan further. Worse, Pakistan along with the US worked with Saudis to spread extreme Islamic ideology. Now, if the Afghan use of terror had been restricted to Afghans against Soviets, the culture of terror may have been contained in the region. But Saudi and other global Jihadi fighters went to Afghan to fight alongside the Afghan fighters. Thus, US and Saudis jointly created the environment that led to rise of Alqaeda.

    4. Saudi Arabia for all the obvious reasons.

    So, 9/11 was blowback for US, Saudi, Pakistan, and Israeli policies. Those four nations were most responsible for working together to create a global culture of Muslim terrorism.
    So, after 9/11, the most pressing responsibility was for those nations to look in the mirror. Instead, US played poor little victim and pretended that these terrorists just sprouted like mushrooms in the part of the world that hates the US for its ‘freedoms’, such as shopping. So, 9/11 was an attack on shopping, and Americans must send a message to terrorists by going to Macys or Walmart.

    One thing for sure, 9/11 had NOTHING to do with Hussein and Iraq, Syria, and Libya. (Gaddafi did sponsor terrorist acts, but no more than other nations. Also, he would never have directly targeted the US. )

    But the global war on terror turned into attacking one secular nation after nation that had been most effective in containing terrorism in their own nations. Cruel Hussein had effectively clamped down on terrorists in Syria. Assad and Gaddafi had also been ruthlessly effective in containing terrorism in their own nations. And even though they did sponsor acts of terror here and there, it was no more than what Israel did and much less than what Saudis did, the main sponsor of global terrorism(often with blessing of US esp during the Cold War as the targets were allies of Soviets).

    In a way, Global War on Terror was a way of covering the tracks by US, Israel, Pakistan, and Saudis. They were most responsible for the growth of terror but obfuscated this fact by declaring ‘war on terror’ and then targeting nations like Iraq and later Libya and Syria that had NOTHING to do with 9/11.
    And now, we have all this talk of Iran again even though Iran had nothing to do with events in Afghanistan or US.

    When wolves declare war on ‘wolves’ to destroy more sheep, it’s a demented world.

    • Agree: Cloak And Dagger
    • Replies: @Parbes
  88. End of Soviet Union – On the News 12/8/1991 ABC News Coverage

  89. @Cloak And Dagger

    The USA of course still is a great power.
    So was the British empire after WWI, despite that the USA had to interfere militarily to prevent British capitulation.

    But few in GB saw the signs on the wall, the thirties was the period where an empire that could no longer maintain itself was wavering in policies.
    As prior to WWI, the British feared the German economic and political expansion to the south east, the Berlin Baghdad Basra railway the bone of contention.
    WWII was the war which the USA again won for GB, but the price was the end of empire.
    As some Britons understood ‘we won the war, but lost the peace’.

    We see the same in France, the day of the German capitulation, May 1945, still is a national holiday, their capitulation in June 1940 is forgotten.
    Empires, like commercial organisations, seem to be quite capable of ignoring the truth.
    Broke commercial organisations sometimes just realise they are broke when the bank refuses to pay the salaries.

    If Trump understands that the days of USA world domination are over, I do not know.
    But I hope he does.
    Alas those who do not see the signs on the walls make it impossible for him to adjust the USA to the new power distribution in the world.

    Politicians long in power apparently become blind, Merkel’s speeches in Germany are booed in such a way that she cannot make herself heard, luckily she often dresses in read, the first tomato impact was hardly visible.

  90. Erebus says:
    @MarkinLA

    Russia has a long way to go.

    Indeed it does. No argument.
    Still, while a rising tide may eventually lift all boats, it lifts those closest to the tidal front first. That front won’t ever reach some of them, especially in a country the size of Russia, just as it won’t in China.
    It’s like that everywhere, in my experience. Russia’s big problem is its constitutionally defined Central Bank. They’re gonna have to change that if they want to develop more briskly, but that will probably have to wait a while longer.

    • Replies: @annamaria
    , @NoseytheDuke
  91. JL says:
    @peterAUS

    It’s clear now why your measures of victory and loss are so distorted: You are severely misinformed on the most basic facts.

    The struggle between The Empire and Russia is about control of certain land/area.

    Wrong. It’s about energy, and the transport of energy. Control of land is a means to that end.

    Ukraine
    Before shooting started it was a Russian ally.

    Wrong. Ukraine has never been a Russian ally since its independence from the Soviet Union. At the best of times, it was neutral, for most of the time, downright hostile.

    Iraq
    Now The Empire controls it.

    Wrong. Iran controls it. This is common knowledge.

    Syria
    Before shooting started a stable country and Russian ally.
    Now unstable country where more than half of it is controlled not by Russian ally and probably third controlled by The Empire’s allies.

    Simple.

    Not simple in the least. While nominally an ally before, the country is now almost completely dependent on Russia for its very survival. Syria will be Russia’s forward ME operating base for years to come, and its presence there happened in a way that Syria never would have allowed had the war not happened. Not to mention the very public black eye the Empire received in its failure to oust Assad.

  92. @Andrei Martyanov

    Did you read the link he provided?

  93. @Cyrano

    There are problems of timing and of woolly definition about your “the West only agreed only agreed to ally themselvea with the USSR….. on their own”.

    The West, including America, wasn’t affected by any such calculus given that the Soviet Union had been in the war for 5 !/2 months when Pearl Harbour and Hitler’s declaration of war against the US occurred.

    And Britain was made a de facto ally in June 1941 by Hitller’s attack on the Soviet Union.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  94. JL says:
    @MarkinLA

    Russia’s foreign intelligence operations are run by an agency called the SVR, with headquarters in Yasnevo. The FSB, with its HQ in Moscow center, the infamous Lubyanka, has only a domestic purview. To the extent that they conduct any foreign operations, it happens only when there is a domestic connection, i.e. assassinating Chechens in foreign countries, running domestic assets operating in foreign countries, like Russian citizen ISIS fighters. These two agencies are successors to the KGB, which was broken up into foreign and domestic operations for what are probably pretty obvious reasons.

  95. @Albert King

    A broad brush may be useful for propaganda rallying the troops but it isn’t much good for delineating history. Russia was an ally of Great Britain fighting against Napoleon (most of the time) but it had bugger all to do with royals like the gaga George lll.

    And “slave” is a silly, because wildly imprecise, word to use with reference to Britain’s Indian interests. If you knew enough relevant history to back up your generalisations you wouldn’t use a word with such a large number and variety of connotations that mostly don’t apply.

  96. Erebus says:
    @peterAUS

    Simple.

    In my view, too simple by (much more than) half. A school-yard view of the world.

    The struggle between The Empire and Russia is about control of certain land/area.

    The struggle is not between the Empire and Russia. The Empire exists, and now holds sway over the developed, and much of the developing, world, including Russia. It’s called “Globalization”, and what we’re seeing is an internal struggle. It is about whether the US alone will (continue to) rule the Empire, or whether it will be forced to share power with Russia and China (and some others). That so long as Russia and China stick together, they will prevail is almost a truism to Grand Strategy thinkers, so the primary struggle has shifted to become one internal to America.

    It has to decide whether to continue to vie for Sole Hegemony against all odds, or will it acquiesce to sit at the table of great powers and be satisfied with what it can negotiate? The people made their choice last Nov, but America’s elites are still squabbling over it. The Afghanistans, the Syrias, the Iraqs are but visible tips of the same iceberg that has now surfaced in the US as Russian Consulate closings and Antifa. As it now sits, the odds favour the Sole Hegemonists internally, and America’s utter demise internationally, but that may change if a sufficiently cathartic event occurs exogenously.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @annamaria
  97. @basque british are small brained

    Consider this as addressed to Noseythe Duke…

    It is curious how the limited English of the chip-on-the-shoulder Asian troll so often combines with lack of sense of logic. And discourtesy to readers generally by subjecting them to careless bluster.

    Careless (or just ignorant)? Malaysia didn’t exist till the 1950s and any service there by Australians was a very effective contribution to cleaning out the Chinese communists. In the circumstances it is not of interest to know what he thinks he knows of the British disaster in defending Malaya and Singapore with a third rate general in command and many troops with little training.

    Likewise “are [sic] able to defeat” and “armies with bows and arrows” defy rational consideration as much as the curious pseudonym. I guess he is young and has recently read something about the possible contribution to British DNA of early immigrants or returning paleolithic or mesolithic people from the Basque country during the warming after the last Ice Age.

  98. @Erebus

    At best your reply is careless. I presume that your PPI is not Pixels per inch, Producer Price Index or Payment Protection Insurance but should be PPP.

    When I Googled for “how does Russia’s GDP compare with Germany’s on a PPP basis” i found that Germany’s was slightly higher 2013-2016 but, more important, Russia’s per capita GDP was only about 60 per cent of Germany’s on a PPP basis.

    Still, the boycotts and embargos may be good for Russia. Not irrelevant to that possibility was the alleged fact that a smaller proportion of Russians than Getmans (persons in Germany?) Live in poverty.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  99. Muse says:
    @utu

    Could you explain what was the plan behind letting Chine grow in the first place? Did they do it out of greed? W/o western technology China would not grow.

    I viewed the change in US policy as having two distinct eras. Kissinger/Nixon and the Clinton eras.

    During the Nixon/Kissinger era, relations with China seems to have been used as a method to counter the USSR.

    The Clinton era pushed through NAFTA, and most favored nation trade status for China to benefit global capital/financial interests, retailers like Walmart and big agriculture, who benefitted from global labor arbitrage and relaxed agricultural export restrictions. Clinton sold out the traditional Democratic base, made himself rich and had all the trashy women he desired in the process. This strategy was called triangulation by Clinton. He turned the domestic political order on its head by taking money from traditional Republican donors, as well as interests outside the US, much to the GOP’s consternation. The level of corruption in government ushered in by Clinton reached new heights, and I believe the Clinton family as a rule internationalized pay to play politics in a way heretofore unseen as well.

    Kissinger maybe wrongly thought that the US could beat China in the long game. Clinton probably did not give a damn and figured he would be dead prior to the reckoning.

    • Replies: @utu
  100. Hibernian says:
    @Cyrano

    “Stalin, on the other hand, was no big fan of alliances with the west too, because he knew that these sleazeballs can’t be trusted.”

    Poor Joe, prisoner of the Politburo (h/t Harry Truman.)

  101. @TheJester

    Not all is bleak. The collapse of the AngloZionist Empire is the sine qua non for getting our Constitutional liberties back.

    Then the next obvious step would be to get our natural liberties back, but that’s too much to hope for especially in the vaunted “Land ‘O Libbberteeee….”

    Constitution or not,

    Nay, indeed, have we not seen (p. 13) that government is essentially immoral? Is it not the offspring of evil, bearing about it all the marks of its parentage?

    - Herbert Spencer, Social Statics [1851]. chap 20, The Right to Ignore the State, p 207

    http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/spencer-social-statics-1851

  102. And speaking of Constitutions as a protector of freedoms,

    When we have made our constitution purely democratic, thinks to himself the earnest reformer, we shall have brought government into harmony with absolute justice. Such a faith, though perhaps needful for the age, is a very erroneous one. By no process can coercion be made equitable.

    - Herbert Spencer, Social Statics [1851]. chap 20, The Right to Ignore the State, p 210

    http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/spencer-social-statics-1851

  103. @American tourist

    Modern American Diplomats, or at least lets say senior employees of the State Department, really only have one skill set. That is in delivering ultimatums.

    Exactly.

    This has been a key problem with US foreign policy since forever. The other skill set involves outright mendacity, which is used when ultimatums don’t work fast enough. Has there ever been a treaty that the US didn’t flout?

  104. @peterAUS

    Just to, extremely briefly, state how I measure victory/loss.

    How about we start measuring it the way it was measured for at least in a duration of the 20th (and 21st) century and under different conditioned is distilled to: victory being the ability to achieve political objectives of the war. You are, certainly, free to use whatever metric you want but my circle of communications which includes both American and Soviet/Russian professionals (some of them graduates of VAGSh) seems to be speaking absolutely the same language when speaking of victory.

    Ukraine
    Before shooting started it was a Russian ally.

    LOL.

  105. @yeah

    Would you migrate to Russia or China or any of those BRICS countries? Would you prefer to settle down in France? Would you place your investments in Germany?

    Hey, even Humpty Trump recognized, at least while he was campaigning, that other countries were ahead of the US in a lot of things, among them high quality infrastructure.

    If America is still so great, would he have won on the promise to make it great

    again

    ?

    FYI, ‘Merka is a a huge corrupt, degenerate, indebted, militaristic welfare state (both corporate and indigent) that’s falling apart morally, philosophically, materially and financially, and there are tons of places that are not only more desirable as places to live, but would be even more desirable if they weren’t hounded 24/7 by the greedy jackboots that have also been running this country into the ground for many decades.

  106. @Cloak And Dagger

    The founders never imagined that our government would be so corrupted by foreign powers so as to render the constitution moot…

    Ahem…

    “In place of that noble love of liberty, & republican government which carried us triumphantly thro’ the war, an Anglican monarchical, & aristocratical party has sprung up, whose avowed object is to draw over us the substance, as they have already done the forms, of the British government…

    It would give you a fever were I to name to you the apostates who have gone over to these heresies… who have had their heads shorn by the harlot England. In short, we are likely to preserve the liberty we have obtained only by unremitting labors & perils.”

    Jefferson, Thomas, Letter To Philip Mazzei
    Monticello, Apr. 24, 1796

    http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new2?id=JefLett.sgm&images=images/modeng&data=/texts/english/modeng/parsed&tag=public&part=116&division=div1

    You are correct, however, in that no one probably could have predicted the corrupt Zio-state as puppetmaster to the most brain dead and fraudulent political entity ever to have polluted the face of the planet.

  107. Joe Hide says:

    Article’s informational goals are side tracked by excessive emotionalism.

  108. Erebus says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    PPI = Purchasing Parity Index. There are other acronyms which amount to the same thing.

    Yes, the sanctions and oil price collapse forced Russia off point. They needed it.

  109. @Johnny Rico

    We have not “lost” anywhere since Vietnam. A lot of these situations aren’t even wars by any reasonable use of the term.

    Sure, and I am an alien from planet Zoltar.

    Nobody gives a shit what Hezbollah, North Koreans

    But they do, whoever those “nobodies” are.

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
  110. The gentleman doth protest too much! If the author hadn’t laid it on so thick, he might just have convinced a few naive souls but the excessive tone screams panic. That fits with what Putin is up to at the moment. He’s putting forward a UN resolution calling for peacekeepers in the Donetsk/Lugansk “sausage”. As in the past, he’s probably just stalling and nobody seems to be taking it very seriously but the very fact that he putting forward the resolution tells us that he’s terrified of the US arming the Ukrainian military and is trying to stave that off. It also tells us that he’s scared silly of properly equipped and trained Ukrainian forces.
    That’s not the only bad news for Putin. The more Trump appears to be losing, the more he needs a victory to validate his presidency. Other than Putin, he’s running out of enemies he can beat. And of course, Putin seems to pop up everywhere. Ukraine: Putin! Syria: Putin! Iran: Putin! Even North Korea: we’re told that NK couldn’t launch a single missile without motors supplied from or via Russia. And Russia is NK’s principal oil supplier. For Trump, beating Putin means four victories for the price of one. Five, in fact: it would kill Russiagate stone dead.
    By the way, I was amused by the “hyper-diplomatic Russians”! Is the author perhaps thinking of the extremely polite way they asked the Ukrainians for permission before occupying part of their territory?

    • Replies: @EugeneGur
    , @annamaria
  111. @Erebus

    is poised to lose both its Hegemony and the remnants of its democracy, and with it the country itself on account

    Looks like the view through a crystal ball rather than just “a little wider” view. My crystal ball is in the repair shop. I’m glad yours is in working order.

    stand well placed to run whatever entity replaces America on the N. American continent, even if their international influence will be forfeit.

    You seem to be predicting Black Swan events AND have it all figured out. So as not to appear vague or cryptic you may consider employing some evidence or relatable observations with what is basically 100 words of vague and cryptic doom-mongering.

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  112. @yeah

    You stimulate thought about what are the insurmountable differences. Obviously religious views can be vsry dangerous because faith based values and factual beliefs which are widely shared by millions who spend virtually no time talking to outsiders or thinking sceptically about such matters can maintain divisions between people for a very long time. The time it took for the secular Communist religion to lose its hold is not encouraging when one contemplates the untestability of jihadists’ faith or that of Christian anti-abortionists for that matter who might make their vote for the Presidency turn on just that issue.

    To a non American the quasi factual belisfs and assumptons about America’s actual and its proper place and role in the world which seem to underly American policy are little less of a worrying conundrum than those of the mass of Russians, and their elites, who support Putin or the Chinese who support the CCP in its aggression towards neighbours and ŕepression of free speech and the rule of law. That Americans have imagined that they have the military and economic strength, not to mention political stamina, to sort out the world’s wicked rulers by force since 9/11 has seemed bizarre to me since the Iraq War began as I said firmly at an international conference on failed states in 2003. All of which I suppose leads one to wonder how such high IQ educated people as the neo-cons were (and I daresay are) could so misconceive the world and what might work for creating a better world.

  113. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    The Thucydides Trap is perfectly valid as an explanatory model. It describes the behavior of states and state-groups in the context of power projection capabilities available at a given point in time. As to your ‘U.S is not a continental power’, one needs only observe that it is indeed a continental power, not just on the NA continent, which is obvious, but also elsewhere.

    Human behavior, especially group behavior, has been remarkably unchanging over time, only the methods have varied.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  114. EugeneGur says:
    @Michael Kenny

    It also tells us that he’s scared silly of properly equipped and trained Ukrainian forces.

    Sure thing, like Russia was scared stiff of the US-trained and equipped Georgian Army, which ran away at the first sight of the advancing Russian troops.

    Has it ever occurred to you that Putin as any Russian might not want to fight Ukraine more than absolutely necessary because lots of our relatives and friends would be caught in the crossfire? That he wants to minimize the loss of civilian life in Donbass? That won’t happen, of course, because neither the US not that insane “government” they installed in Ukraine will let it happen. But it’s worth a try. The US, on the contrary, is happy to promote chaos, death and destruction anywhere and would fight Russia to the last Ukrainian.

    For Trump, beating Putin means four victories for the price of one. Five, in fact: it would kill Russiagate stone dead.

    One problem here – Trump needs to achieve that victory first. I doubt he can – Putin as an opponent is way out of his league.

    • Agree: Cyrano
  115. @Andrei Martyanov

    General Vo Nguyen Giap and Ho Chi Minh’s Vietnamese defeated both the French in 1954 and then the Americans between 1963 and 1973. For a stretch of about 5 years the Vietnamese were inflicting roughly 8000 combat kills on US forces per year.

    Ronald Reagan pulled the Marine detachment out of Beirut in 1983 I believe after being hit hard by Hezbollah. One hit, 283 dead.

    For reference, the single most intense instance of combat American forces have experienced in war were the 6 hours of Omaha Beach. Roughly 1200 dead in 6 hours. Tarawa is comparable. And Americans won both battles.

    We lost the war in Vietnam. The popular conception is that Americans didn’t “lose” a single combat engagement in Vietnam.

    In Lebanon, the reality, in my opinion, is that Reagan cut-and-ran and “negotiated” with terrorists while Americans like to believe we never do that kind of thing.

    Aside from Vietnam and Lebanon, I cannot think of another instance where American troops have “lost.”

    Maybe you know of one and have more than snarky replies :)

    And I stand by my statement about Hezbollah and the North Koreans which you both misquoted and by doing so took out of context.

    Hezbollah may have “defeated” Israel in 2006 or at least taught the IDF some lessons and you and I may give Hezbollah a lot of credit, but most Americans aren’t even aware of these things. Hezbollah is just some rag-head name they hear once a month on the radio next to the term “terrorist organization.” “Hezbollah.” “Saddam Hussein.” It all sounds the same and carries approximately no weight.

    As far as North Korea goes. Just a distraction. A hurricane or fake chemical attack in Syria is all it takes to push Kim Jong-Un off the front page. North Korea bores people. He’s worse than a Kardashian trying to stay relevant.

    What is remarkable to me about “North Korea” is how similar the current situation is to how it was during the Obama years AND to the situation in 1950.

    Read anything by Bruce Cumings on Korea. Or this stuff:

    How History Explains the Korean Crisis
    August 28, 2017

    How Sony, Obama, Seth Rogen and the CIA Secretly Planned to Force Regime Change in North Korea
    The secret backstory to the U.S.-North Korea standoff.
    By Tim Shorrock / AlterNet September 5, 2017

    http://www.alternet.org/grayzone-project/how-sony-obama-seth-rogen-and-cia-secretly-planned-force-regime-change-north-korea

    https://consortiumnews.com/2017/08/28/how-history-explains-the-korean-crisis/

    Again – all this stuff is enormously expensive but that is apparently the price that both Democrats and Republicans, both liberal and conservative, are willing to pay for being “the exceptional nation.”

  116. utu says:

    I would like to see an article about Syria. It might be the greatest success of Putin so far. The Evil Empire was stopped. The Yinon Plan for ME was interrupted. Syria did not become Iraq and Assad did not share the fate of Qaddafi. And still just two years ago it seemed inevitable.

    Personally I still do not understand how this was possible. The nuclear blackmail on part of Putin seems like the only explanation.

  117. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    The US does not control the Empire because it’s controlled itself by Tel Aviv and the Globalists. That’s why Russia and China are targeted for elimination. They want a multi-polar world which conflicts with the One World Government project.

    • Replies: @Avery
    , @annamaria
  118. @Anon

    The Thucydides Trap is perfectly valid

    No it is not, it is a fine example of an American doctrine-mongering (done mostly by people who never served a day in uniform not to talk about tactical or operational command) and US being precisely NON-continental power and having NO experience whatsoever (as in shared historical experience) with real continental warfare. NO, I underscore, no American officer or soldier ever fought in a direct defense of his homeland. Again, American strategic thought is surprisingly sterile for a nation which is involved in wars non-stop for the last 25+ years. Hence such simulacra (yet another “doctrinal meme” by US media “experts”) as “hybrid warfare”.

    the context of power projection capabilities

    Against third-rate militaries and third world states? Yes. This is the extent of US “power projection” capabilities and even here US doesn’t do that well. The United States does not have resources and capabilities to “project power” against China or Russia and even US favorite post-First Gulf War “shtick” of PGMs is very stale today, to put it mildly. But here we begin to drift into evolution of nuclearism and I am not interested in discussing it.

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
    , @Anon
    , @annamaria
  119. Cyrano says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Alright, so “choosing” USSR as an ally wasn’t a conscious decision by the west, it was just something that fell into their lap.

    I still think that the argument can be made that the west benefited more from having USSR as an ally in WW2 than did USSR having them as an allies.

    The only meaningful contribution that the west (US) did to USSR war effort between 1941-1944 was sending them thousands of tons of spam.

    I heard of a joke that when the Russian soldiers were opening the cans of spam donated to them by US, they were saying: “Oh, look, I am opening the 2nd front”, in reference to the promises about a second front by Roosevelt which didn’t come until it was irrelevant.

    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
  120. @utu

    Personally I still do not understand how this was possible. The nuclear blackmail on part of Putin seems like the only explanation.

    LOL. Learning actual military history and military science might help in understanding how. Bar some important, however limited in numbers, exceptions of Western military history and thought the way it was and is written it is not conducive to learning, as overwhelming empirical evidence of a Western elites’ imbecility and military impotence testifies.

    • Troll: utu
  121. annamaria says:
    @KA

    “Why is he outside the high-security prison or outside the administration?”
    Because Bolton, an Israel-firster, is well within the moral parameters of ziocons who have infiltrated the US government at all levels. All these Kristols, Kagans, Clintons, Feith, Judy Miller, and a legion of likes, should have been locked into high-security prisons for their crimes against humanity.
    As for Bush and Cheney, these two deserve capital punishment for high treason.

  122. annamaria says:
    @Boris M Garsky

    The US has been suffering from the incompetent opportunists for the sin of unaccountability on the top.

  123. annamaria says:
    @yeah

    “Likewise, most of us wish it were a little more humane, a little more responsive to the needs of ordinary Americans, a little more restrained on the world stage, but that is not going to make it.”
    Do you live in Ukraine? – For the US citizenry, “a little more” in this context sounds wrong.

    “But to be able to apply the final chokehold, what is required is to isolate it from the rest of the pack, to make it an international pariah. And that is where American soft power comes into play.”
    That was a “soft power?”–Stupidity would be the right word (ziocon-inspired stupidity, to be precise). The sanctions have pushed Russians to become more self-reliant, while punished the EU producers. At the same time, the US has carefully excluded the Russian-made gadgetry for the space program from the sanctions. You are funny.

    “The SF consulate affair has isolated Russia in world public opinion one big step further. The seeds of doubt have been planted: what nefarious plots have the Russians been hatching in their consulates, what secrets are they frantically trying to burn to avoid discovery? They will increasingly be seen to be one more North Korea, albeit a much more dangerous one.”
    Only a ziocon of Kagans’ caliber would come with such a dramatic story. Sounds perfect for the low-IQ dedicated readers of the NYT and for the Washington Post editors who certainly could use some of your idioms: “The SF consulate affair has isolated Russia in world public opinion one big step further,” “nefarious plots have the Russians been hatching in their consulates,” “one more North Korea, albeit a much more dangerous one.” Congratulations. Eliot Higgins and Dmitri Alperovitch come to mind, upon reading your post.

  124. annamaria says:
    @Simon in London

    “…the evil USA won in Ukraine – they launched a successful coup…” – Correct.
    The amazing achievements of the liberated Ukraine:
    “Thousands march to honor Nazi collaborator in Kiev, Stepan Bandera’s Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists encouraged locals to ‘destroy’ Jews and Poles in the 1940s:” https://www.timesofisrael.com/thousands-march-to-honor-nazi-collaborator-in-kiev
    “Neo-Nazis march in Lvov ‘in honor’ of Ukrainian Waffen SS division: “https://www.rt.com/news/155364-ukraine-nazi-division-march/
    “Ukraine nationalists march in Kiev to honour Bandera:” http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30655184

  125. @Johnny Rico

    ” We lost the war in Viet Nam”

    US Casualities : 55 000

    N Viet Nam casualties : 2.5 million

    So this is the “Modern” criteria in establishing the winners and losers of armed conflicts:

    Whoever suffers the most casualties is the winner.

    The only loss of the Viet Nam conflict by the US was/is in the minds of leftist US haters who WANT/WANTED to see the US lose.

    My ( deceased) half brother came back from Viet Nam with a stiff leg and an unbroken spirit, he was a decent guy who held no malice, and I really don’t care to hear such garbage from fools such as yourself.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army Vet, and pro jazz musician.

  126. Avery says:
    @Anonymous

    { That’s why Russia and China are targeted for elimination.}

    A couple of things:

    How do you, quote, ‘eliminate’ a country the size of China with 1+ billion people which has enough thermonuclear warheads and ICBMs to cause major damage to US?
    How do you, quote, ‘eliminate’ a country the size of Russia that has more and newer nuke warheads than US, and has more modern ICBMs?

    US certainly can cause a lot of damage to both or either if it chose to, but not much of US would be left afterwards either.

    And when did US exactly target China for elimination? At this point US is almost entirely dependent on China for all sorts of light manufactured goods and China holds a lot of US debt. Last thing US would want is the elimination of China.

    Also, China is largely immune to ‘regime change’, because their leadership structure is, in computer parlance, highly fault-tolerant. : their current standard-issue president can die of heart attack tomorrow, and another standard-issue Party-man will take his place. Nothing will change.

    Russia, on the other hand, has a fragile leadership structure entirely dependent on one man.
    Bad man, Yeltsin: Russia on her knees.
    Good man, Putin: Russia bounces back with vengeance.
    Nobody knows what comes after Putin.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  127. annamaria says:
    @Johnny Rico

    It was not your intention, but you have created a perfect image of a colossus with legs of clay.
    The tremendous material, intellectual, and moral resources have been squandered, for nothing.

  128. annamaria says:
    @Erebus

    “Not that that matters to the people running it. They’ve pocketed the money America “lost” and stand well placed to run whatever entity replaces America.”
    Agree

  129. annamaria says:
    @hunor

    “…the young spirits of today can not possibly keep what they ancestors handed down to them…”
    And what they were handed down? – seven wars, unaffordable colleges, ziocon-infested government, “deep state” deciders, and marasmic MSM. Not much.

  130. annamaria says:
    @Erebus

    “…they’re gonna have to change that if they want to develop more briskly, but that will probably have to wait a while longer.”
    The homeostasis takes time. Sudden changes could kill.

  131. @Andrei Martyanov

    “This is the extent of US “power projection” capabilities and even here US doesn’t do that well.”

    Or – given actual history and present reality rather than wishful personal standards and expectations – one could make the argument that the United States does this better than any nation in history.

    The only first-rate militaries and first world states that the U.S. would go “against” are Russia and China. Let’s not pretend like there is a whole basket of them to choose from.

    This is also a straw man. The notion that the U.S. doesn’t engage these two in open warfare because it is incapable of doing so or is afraid of the challenge – a notion that is thrown around a lot here – is absurd.

    Why? Because it would be pointless and suicidal. NOT engaging first-rate militaries for the simple reason of “proving” something would seem to be a no-brainer.

    Contrary to what you would have us believe, American military leaders (AND even regular Americans who have never served a day in uniform) have read Sun-Tzu and Clausewitz and have studied and learned the lessons of Prussian and German operational art.

    This constant dick-size comparison between Russian and American military doctrine and capability is tiresome and pointless.

    The US did not defeat the Germans on the continent until after Russia did ALL the heavy lifting. They landed in Normandy three years after Barbarossa and a year after Kursk. True.

    But this misses a few things.

    The United States emerged from BOTH world wars practically unscathed and in fact, relative to the ENTIRE rest of the world, much stronger. It still holds this position.

    China is ascendant but they have problems. Like too many people and no oil. The oil they use is easily cut off by the US. This is the real reason the US and Israel manufacture conflict with Iran. Because if Iran is not 100% in the American camp and can count on a certain degree of good relations with China and Russia, it spoils total and complete American control of Persian-Gulf oil.

    It is arguable whether Russia is any stronger relatively than it was in 1939.

    I don’t believe any nation has the power or control they would like to believe they do, especially the United States. But IF any of the three nations mentioned has power and control, it is the United States.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  132. Cyrano says:
    @Authenticjazzman

    Hey jizzman, you are back? How did you get your nick name? Is it because you are master-debater? By your logic, Germany won over USSR in WW2, their casualty rate was 1/3 that of the USSR.

    So in order to win a war, you just have to rack up the number of casualties suffered by your enemy – right?

    That’s why US wants to stay a while longer in Afghanistan. As soon as they kill few more thousands Afghanis – they can declare victory. Thanks man, it’s all starting to make (no) sense to me now. You f**king moron.

  133. annamaria says:
    @Erebus

    “…or whether it will be forced to share power with Russia and China (and some others)…

    This is an impossible situation for the US: The Empire of Federal Reserve can only survive on looting and stealing, including printing the world-dominating currency at will. The concept of international law has become foreign for the US. Consenting to the international rules would deprive the “deciders” of the money (loot) & power. The US is approaching something akin to a revolutionary state of affairs, which is, thankfully, still in an anemic phase domestically. The looted $$$trillions (looted by MIC & banksters) are too sweet a reality to forfeit it. The parasites will lead the US to a demise. We can only pray for a more or less soft landing. The greatest danger is the endemic incompetence on the top of the US government.

  134. peterAUS says:
    @utu

    Personally I still do not understand how this was possible.

    Simple.

    Air power.

    Two ways:
    preventing Western air power to support the opposition (“no-fly zones”)
    supplying own air power to Assad’s regime.

    That tipped the game.

    After that, attempts to (re)organize and improve Assad’s regime military.

    • Replies: @utu
  135. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    If it soothes you to make assertions using frequent capitalization, then fine. But it’s pretty clear that you are overly keen on pushing some sort of triumphalist Russian meme. To have a “continental” presence/power in your book apparently, requires having a shared history.

    Which should beg the question, whether that includes the “shared” death of 30-40 million of her population in the wars waged by your exemplary nation? I think in your zeal you are missing much that has been common and not-in-common between global powers. Russia also limped back from Afghanistan, or did you forget? To say nothing of the Latvian War of Independence, Estonian War of Independence, Lithuanian-Soviet War, Georgian-Ossetian Conflict, Polish Civil War, Spanish Civil War, First Chechen War.

    Did you notice the number of nations steadily joining NATO or wishing to join the Euro in the meantime, out of the obvious desire to align with the West? Wars are won over multiple pathways. Did you notice, using any method of your choice, a comparison of the per capita wealth and income growth since each war, fought by each power? Again, there are more ways than just guns to win a strategy. And being good at Chess apparently is not all that helpful. History, on the other hand, especially as written by the Greeks, has been useful.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @Cyrano
  136. annamaria says:
    @Michael Kenny

    “…he’s terrified of the US arming the Ukrainian military and is trying to stave that off. It also tells us that he’s scared silly of properly equipped and trained Ukrainian forces. … Putin seems to pop up everywhere. Ukraine: Putin! Syria: Putin! Iran: Putin! Even North Korea: we’re told that NK couldn’t launch a single missile without motors supplied from or via Russia.”

    Sir, are you aware that Syria is a sovereign state?
    Are you aware of Minsk II? Are you aware that the eastern Ukrainians’ sin was to ask Kiev junta (illegally installed by the US State Dept. & CIA, with the involvement of the Kagans’ clan) for federalization, similar to the federal government of the US? Instead, the puppets in Kiev have initiated a civil war.
    Have you heard that Russia has nuclear weapons and that Russians are good at defending their people and territory?
    Are you aware that Kiev government includes neo-Nazis (this fact was recognized by the US government, btw) and that arming the neo-Nazis and providing Ukraine with lethal weaponry is endangering the civilian populations of eastern Europe?
    And finally, are you aware that the US “couldn’t launch a single missile without motors supplied from or via Russia?” https://www.space.com/26551-us-military-launches-russian-rocket-engines.html
    It is obvious that you have no children in the US army. It is also quite possible that you are very unhappy with the approaching end of the mass slaughter in Syria, which was part of Clean Break (Oded Yinon plan for Greater Israel). No wonder that Israel continues bombing Syria, to compensate for the Israel-propped ISIS’ defeat by the Syrian army.http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-08/israel-launches-air-strikes-syria-and-assads-waiting-game
    Here is the kind of Ukraine that the Kagans’ clan has been longing for: https://www.timesofisrael.com/thousands-march-to-honor-nazi-collaborator-in-kiev/

  137. @Cyrano

    “the only meaningful contribution the west (US) did to USSR war effort between 1941-1844 was sending them thousands of tons of spam”

    Bullshit. My own dear deceased mother worked, in Detroit, in war production, assembling for shipment to the Russians “Bazookas”, shoulder-held anti-tank rocket-launchers.
    She told me back in the fifties, about the Russian officers who, during the war, on occasion were escorted through the factory and tutored in the operation of these combat devises.

    The US supplied the Russians with millions of tons of war materials, without which they would have been confronting the Germans with single-shot antique rifles and mules.

    And regarding the “Spam” : So do you think that the Russians would have been better off without food?

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro Jazz msuician.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  138. annamaria says:
    @Anonymous

    ‘The US does not control the Empire because it’s controlled itself by Tel Aviv and the Globalists. That’s why Russia and China are targeted for elimination. ”

    1. Nice that Israel is rather close to other well-armed but morally superior states.
    2. There should have been going some interesting interaction among the Russian Jews in Russia and abroad. Perhaps, the intelligent Russain Jews in Israel and EU/US provide some needed education for the American ziocons and other Friends of Israel.

  139. annamaria says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    “The United States does not have resources and capabilities to “project power” against China or Russia and even US favorite post-First Gulf War “shtick” of PGMs is very stale today, to put it mildly.”

    This is a paradoxical statement considering the enormous amount of resources invested in the military capabilities of the US. On the other hand, the moral decay, at all levels, could be very expensive.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  140. peterAUS says:
    @Avery

    How do you, quote, ‘eliminate’ a country the size of China with 1+ billion people which has enough thermonuclear warheads and ICBMs to cause major damage to US?

    Regime change.

    How do you, quote, ‘eliminate’ a country the size of Russia that has more and newer nuke warheads than US, and has more modern ICBMs?

    Regime change

    Also, China is largely immune to ‘regime change’, because their leadership structure is, in computer parlance, highly fault-tolerant. : their current standard-issue president can die of heart attack tomorrow, and another standard-issue Party-man will take his place. Nothing will change.

    Disagree.
    Uyghurs?
    Tibet?
    Coastal vs rural.
    Obscenely rich vs 21st century serfs.

    Russia, on the other hand, has a fragile leadership structure entirely dependent on one man.

    Disagree.
    Hub of several groups, with spikes, as President in the middle.
    He goes down, one of power groups (most likely “siloviki”) will put another of their own again..

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  141. annamaria says:

    Laughing on the Way to Armageddon — Paul Craig Roberts

    http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/09/08/laughing-way-armageddon-paul-craig-roberts/

    “The important question is who is it that is trying so hard to convince Americans that Russian influence prevails over us? Do the idiots pushing this line realize how impotent this makes an alleged “superpower” look. How can we be the hegemonic power that the Zionist neocons say we are when Russia can decide who is the president of the United States?
    The US has a massive spy state that even intercepts the private cell phone conversations of the Chancellor of Germany, but his massive spy organization is unable to produce one scrap of evidence that the Russians conspired with Trump to steal the presidential election from Hillary. When will the imbeciles realize that when they make charges for which no evidence can be produced they make the United States look silly, foolish, incompetent, stupid beyond all belief?”
    A cry in the wilderness.

  142. @Authenticjazzman

    US Casualities : 55 000

    N Viet Nam casualties : 2.5 million

    Are you for serious? How many of those 2.5 million Vietnamese were civilians? You have no idea what scale or proportion all this is. Or rather, you can not grasp it, since United States doesn’t know what war is.

    Whoever suffers the most casualties is the winner.

    You certainly should inform US Army War College Combat Studies Institute, since they seem to be a bit “behind” on their studies. I am sure they will be amused to learn of this new metric.

    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
  143. @Authenticjazzman

    The US supplied the Russians with millions of tons of war materials, without which they would have been confronting the Germans with single-shot antique rifles and mules.

    While I disagree with Cyrano’s estimates of Lend-Lease impact, which was in some areas substantial, your statement is no better than Cyrano’s since suffers from a complete arrogance and ignorance, because should you have known better, you would have known that in terms of military production USSR and US are roughly matched (USA sure as hell produced more strategic bomber aircraft) in WWII. Moreover, Soviet Union outproduced Nazi Germany in every crucial military category not only by numbers but often fielding either comparable or much better technology. But you also should know that main destination for Lend-Lease was Great Britain, not USSR. UK got three times more of that.

    • Replies: @jacques sheete
  144. @annamaria

    This is a paradoxical statement considering the enormous amount of resources invested in the military capabilities of the US.

    Actually, it is not paradoxical and, while I usually try to avoid it, I have to quote myself:

    Arthur J. Alexander in his “Decision Making In Soviet Weapons Procurement“ came up with quantification of what he called “classes of forces” (or constants) influencing aggregate defense expenditures for USSR. This quantification remains virtually unchanged for modern day Russia. To quote Alexander, two of the most “heavy” constants he mentions are: “History, culture and values–40-50 percent. International environment, threat and internal capabilities–10-30 percent”. Taken by their maxima, 50+30=80%, we get the picture. 80% of Russia’s military expenditures are dictated by real military threats, which were, time after time over centuries, realized for Russia and resulted in the destruction and human losses on a scale incomprehensible for people who write US military doctrines and national security strategies. This is especially true for Neocon “strategists” who have a very vague understanding of the nature and application of military power—expeditionary warfare simply does not provide a proper angle on the issues of actual defense. ….In layman’s lingo, the United States lacks geographic, historic, cultural, economic and technological pressures to develop and have a coherent defensive military doctrine and weapons which would help to implement it.

    So, there is nothing paradoxical in here. System in US is rigged for this type of warfare–it just cannot do, with some hypothetical exception of US Navy–hypothetical being PLAN deciding to mount amphibious operation against US Pacific Coast with 5 000 000 strong force–anything else. Add here sheer incompetence of contemporary elites in warfare and voila’.

  145. peterAUS says:
    @Johnny Rico

    Maybe you know of one and have more than snarky replies :)

    A little pointer from years of experience, if you wish.

    That attitude is common with………..them……….

    That is how…their…..elites communicate, especially with somebody they see as lower on social ladder.

    Try, if you have time/inclination, to get a debate/argument between Western trained officer and their officer of similar rank. American or Brit, preferably vs…them.
    Or, try to get a …conversation….between their senior and junior officer. One rank difference even. Or even the same rank, just one step difference in hierarchy.

    Watch, listen and see how it goes.
    Could be interesting.

  146. @peterAUS

    Regime change is impossible in China. None of the minority groups you mentioned have any particular strength, and both military and information control is highly advanced. Its mind-boggling to imagine a serious scenario that would allow it anymore. Xi Jinping has prevailed now and there’s no meaningful opposition left – even the other power blocs that once existed are so intrinsically tied to the Communist Party that they couldn’t exist without it.

    Uyghurs?

    At most, ISIS levels of power. Minimal against a modern military.

    Tibet?

    Not even above.

    Coastal vs rural.

    Power is one-sided here: rural areas can’t survive without urban support. They’re aware.

    Obscenely rich vs 21st century serfs.

    Wasn’t enough even at its worst under Jiang Zemin where actual murders were happening; not enough now with Xin Jinping is as popular as he is and at least putting on a good image.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  147. peterAUS says:
    @Anon

    Did you notice the number of nations steadily joining NATO or wishing to join the Euro in the meantime, out of the obvious desire to align with the West?

    They’ll never admit that.

    Would require taking a long hard look at own history, society…all elements of society.

    Their elites can’t do that.

    Besides, no need to push for it.
    It could destabilize Russian Federation too fast.
    Nobody wants that.

    Slowly……..one piece at the time.

    Or, who knows……current cleptocracy could be replaced with something really good.
    And that could, then, push back into Western own, current, bulls*&t.

    “spes ultima perit”

  148. Cyrano says:
    @Anon

    Did you notice the number of nations steadily joining NATO or wishing to join the Euro in the meantime, out of the obvious desire to align with the West?

    Those are just lackeys jostling for imperial favors. Like the central Europeans who just recently switched sides and will find out very soon what exactly “western values” really means – Islamization of their countries in order to please the western phonies.

    Maybe they are also want to get under the famous US “nuclear umbrella”, although if the real s**t storm ever hits, not even nuclear tent would provide adequate protection.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @annamaria
  149. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @TheJester

    When the movement to de-status the dollar reaches critical mass, the United States will officially be recognized as a bankrupt Third-World country wracked by inflation.

    The death of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency will have the effect of a high tariff wall, behind which the US can rebuild its industrial base.

    • Replies: @JerseyJeffersonian
  150. AnonFromTN [AKA "Anon"] says:

    Yes, the actions of the US against Russian diplomats are certainly impotent hysterics. However, there is another side of it. These actions created a precedent. Just like US interference in former Yugoslavia created a precedent saying that international law is null and void, from that moment on replaced by the law of the jungle, these actions say that all conventions regarding diplomatic missions are null and void. Unless the great majority of existing states condemn these actions individually and collectively (via the UN), these actions mean that no diplomatic mission of any country anywhere has any protection from the host country.
    Yes, diplomatic missions were attacked before, but states did it by proxy, using well-organized “frenzied crowds”, “revolutionaries”, or “unknown thugs”, maintaining plausible deniability. Now the US government openly acted like thugs. This is new and very dangerous development. If most countries pretend that nothing extraordinary happened, thuggish behavior becomes new normal. Brave new world, indeed.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @Kiza
  151. peterAUS says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    China regime change thing.

    Uyghurs.
    At most, ISIS levels of power. Minimal against a modern military.

    Would you, please, expand on this?
    Like…how exactly would Chinese military deal with that, should it happen?
    Just curious.

    Coastal vs rural.
    They’re aware.

    Would you please expand on this. Like, how are rural areas aware they can’t survive without urban support. I mean, it would appear it’s actually other way around. Like, you just block all the roads to a big city and watch city starve.
    And if you want to unblock roads and bring in food..I don’t know…looks to me a bit harder.
    What’s your thought about it?

    Obscenely rich vs 21st century serfs.

    You say it can’t happen.
    Don’t know really.
    I mean, all these recent things in Europe and US are about it.
    But, can’t happen in China.
    Well..maybe, but I don’t get why.
    What’s China’s obscenely rich 1 % secret?

  152. peterAUS says:
    @AnonFromTN

    Agree.
    A very good point.

    Interesting, overlooked by many.

    You are, IMHO, uncomfortably correct with:

    This is new and very dangerous development.

  153. Parbes says:
    @Priss Factor

    Superb post! If only the bovine American and Western publics were fully aware of these simple, undeniable, clearly elucidated facts!

  154. LauraMR says:
    @Cloak And Dagger

    As dykstra says, the US is still a great power.

    I would say the US is still a power without parallel.

    And that is missing from Saker’s analysis.

    Whoever might be doing the “laughing”, they are just rodents mocking a bear.

    The US can afford to be distracted, it can even afford to get drunk on the job or do away with it altogether.

    Because the US is way ahead of the rest. Way ahead.

    The gnats, roaches, and other insects can pretend this is a conversation of equals, but it simply isn’t. Their opinions amount to background noise.

    This is not about right or wrong. It is about might and, in particular, military and economic might.

  155. utu says:
    @peterAUS

    You are explaining the obvious tactical staff. We all understand that. My question was about how come Pootie-Poot was allowed to it in the first place. It would be so easy to sabotage his efforts. Yet they did not do it. There were some attempts but nothing major.

    • Replies: @fergus
    , @peterAUS
    , @annamaria
  156. peterAUS says:
    @LauraMR

    Whoever might be doing the “laughing”, they are just rodents mocking a bear.

    Mmm….

    You probably meant “sparrows mocking an eagle”.
    You know…Russian bear….American eagle.

    Their opinions amount to background noise.

    Loud background noise.
    Some tenants, those in the basement in particular, don’t mind it, actually.
    Dampens the noise from above.
    Especially from the top floor.

    This is not about right or wrong. It is about might and, in particular, military and economic might.

    Yup.
    Well…..that’s where perception management comes in.
    You keep repeating that “Empire is going down” and BRICS/whatever is gaining upper hand and it, could, maybe, make a difference.
    If not on those within The Empire at least on those within “alternatives”. Keep own guys happy. Or happy enough not to start being a threat.
    The threat to the cleptocracy on top.

  157. fergus says:
    @LauraMR

    I partially agree. The US under Zionist control, has no moral values whatsoever and will do anything.

    An analogy might be if you had a garden and spent a whole year working in it and growing lots of lovely flowers and vegetables, then along comes a gang of criminals and despite your year of hard work they wreck it in ten minutes.
    That is the only power the US has – the power to destroy, but it has one advantage over normal people, it is never constrained by any kind of morality, no one who is would engage in eg pedophilia to the disgusting extent the US regime does.

    Not something to be proud of though, is it?

  158. @CanSpeccy

    Yes, that is an intellectual possibility. But would the U.S. under such circumstances have the smarts and the leadership to see the opportunity being presented, and to make_it_so?

    Considering that we would still be graced with a tier of raving sociopaths in positions of power in the Holy, Holy Capitalist Economic System, and similarly in the Holy, Holy Financial System, I must say that, barring the empowerment of a strong national leader, backed up by a truly determined citizenry, our fate might be closer to that of Ukraine. Oligarchy, perhaps leading to warlordism or gangsterism, unless we have someone of the focused purpose and vision for out nation like Vladimir Putin has been for Russia, may be inevitable.

    The regional and local autonomy, and the talented and dedicated citizens to make it function has been progressively whittled away by the metastasization of the Federal government; states and localities don’t stand a chance in a nation whose leading economic forces and national political parties have formed an unholy symbiosis against an informed, and civically-minded and civically-active citizenry. It is adjudged to be against their interests to disrupt their comfortable circle jerk by permitting, let alone encouraging, such a national citizenry to evolve out of their favored role for us as as mere passive “consumers”.

    I consider it more likely that the nation will fragment into smaller, more culturally homogeneous statelets. The situation has gotten that fraught. It’s getting ready to blow. As Col. Lang observed in a thread over at his blog, Sic Semper Tyrannis, analogizing a bit with past history, John Brown may not yet have appeared, but Kansas has begun to bleed.

  159. @Johnny Rico

    This is also a straw man. The notion that the U.S. doesn’t engage these two in open warfare because it is incapable of doing so or is afraid of the challenge – a notion that is thrown around a lot here – is absurd.Why? Because it would be pointless and suicidal.

    Don’t you think that you just killed your own argument? Isn’t it the point of deterrence–to show your enemy that engaging you means suicide? Man, talk about Sun Tzu being timeless;-)

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
  160. fergus says:
    @utu

    Do you always express yourself in baby language?
    Does anyone take you seriously?

    • Replies: @utu
  161. @Erebus

    A lot of places in the US are pretty close to third world living standards now too Mark.

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  162. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Cyrano

    if the real s**t storm ever hits, not even nuclear tent would provide adequate protection.

    Worse than that. Nuclear ICBM warhead can be set to detonate at ground level in case the rocket gets hit. M.A.D. guaranteed regardless of the anti-missile efficiency. As a matter of fact, a 100% efficiency rate would quckly drop to zero when the nukes start detonating nearby.

  163. peterAUS says:
    @utu

    I am not sure I quite understood you.

    My question was about how come Pootie-Poot was allowed to it in the first place. It would be so easy to sabotage his efforts.

    If…if I read this properly:
    My question was about how come Putin was allowed to it in the first place. It would be so easy to sabotage his efforts.

    Well….well….
    Nobody allowed Putin anything.
    He (or, better, the leadership of Russian Federation-LoRF from now on here) saw the need and an opportunity and seized it.
    Who dares wins. Joking.

    It would be not so easy to sabotage LoRF efforts here.
    Or, yes, US/whatever sabotaged the effort->LoRF countered that sabotage->US/whatever sabotaged again->LoRF countered…………………………….end is what?
    We know what that end would be.
    Literally.

    I mean, we could now try to play that game.
    I start as LoRF and you as US/whatever.
    I guarantee you we’ll get into point of The LAUNCH.
    So……………who’ll blink first?
    Will anybody blink?

    In this scenario US/whatever (Obama administration first and foremost) blinked first. Even before the game escalated into something serious.
    I give Mr. Obama a big point for that.

  164. Wally says:
    @Boris M Garsky

    And who are the “neocons”?

    Just say it. Everyone else already knows.

    concerning Charlottesville:

    “We have been working on the ground and behind the scenes leading up to, during, and after the rally.”
    - Zionist Jew Anita Gray, regional director of the Anti-Defamation League.

    must read: http://www.unz.com/article/how-the-jews-won-the-battle-of-charlottesville/

  165. @Johnny Rico

    Johnny Pobre would seem be a better handle for you. You are simply outclassed in this conversation not to mention just plain wrong but do please keep going, it’s very entertaining.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  166. Cyrano says:
    @LauraMR

    Right, they are all roaches, only you are above all that, so superior and out of reach. You know that there is a poetic justice in all of this?

    The unwanted Euro trash that the old continent exported to the new world for centuries has come full circle. Now that they made few bucks in the new world, they started to believe that they are better than anyone else including the Europeans who once couldn’t care less about where the destinies of the lowlifes that they produced might take them.

    The particular irony lies in the fact that the nouveau greatest will not only end up destroying themselves, but also the civilization and the culture that spawned them, that’s how clueless they are.

  167. utu says:
    @fergus

    It was G.W. Bush language.

  168. Art says:
    @yeah

    Likewise, most of us wish it were a little more humane, a little more responsive to the needs of ordinary Americans, a little more restrained on the word stage, but that is not going to make it so. So what makes it tick? What causes it to do what it does? That is the analytical challenge.

    The challenge is to say the word “JEW.”

    The comment went on with hundreds of words – but not on of the “Jew.” What a waste broadband.

    Nothing good is going to happen until the fact of Jew control of our foreign policy is acknowledged.

    Think Peace — Art

  169. annamaria says:
    @Cyrano

    They are wishing to join NATO and the Euro but on their own terms. Anyway, they are going to learn some hard lessons: “…the European Commission began a lawsuit against Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic for refusing to take in refugees, allowing the EU top court to impose fines.” https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/06/hungary-and-poland-no-refugees-no-terror
    “The eastern allies Poland and Hungary have vowed not to budge. Their staunch opposition to accepting asylum-seekers, and criticism of Brussels for trying to enforce the scheme, are popular among their nationalist-minded, eurosceptic voters. Speaking in Hungary’s parliament earlier on Monday, Prime Minister Viktor Orban said: “We will not give in to blackmail from Brussels and we reject the mandatory relocation quota.” https://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-eu-infringements/eu-to-open-case-against-poland-hungary-czech-republic-over-migration-idUSKBN1931O4

  170. annamaria says:
    @LauraMR

    “Because the US is way ahead of the rest. Way ahead.”
    USA! USA! Laura. USA!
    Seriously, the sooner the US conducts a thorough disinfection against ziocon infestation, the sooner the US recovery. http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=amid1982perlefeith
    As for the military and economic might, please tell us, Laura, when has the US won a war against a strong opponent? During the last half a century the US has been doing slaughter in various weak and poor countries around the globe. But to mention this amorality would be a “background noise” (according to you).
    And what makes the foundation for the US’ economic “might” — the machinations of the Federal reserve? The Quantitative Easing for the mega-criminals in the financial sector? (“gigantic squeed on the face of humanity”).
    Tell us, Laura, how come that being “way ahead of the rest. Way ahead” does not prevent the US from buying the rocket engines from Russain Federation (despite the illegal economic sanctions): http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-space-russia/u-s-needs-up-to-18-more-russian-rocket-engines-pentagon-idUSKCN0X600H
    Have you been to China to see their marvels of engineering? No? You prefer to display your loyalty by yelling “… the US is way ahead of the rest. Way ahead.” — Who needs this? After the US Congress gave 29 standing ovations for Bibi, only ziocons could be satisfied with the state of affairs in the US.

  171. annamaria says:
    @utu

    Going motherese?

    • Replies: @utu
  172. Tony says:
    @Cloak And Dagger

    Keep smoking what you smoking boy if it makes you happy to think that way.

  173. utu says:
    @annamaria

    Term of endearment that G.W. Bush came up with for Putin.

  174. utu says:
    @Muse

    I agree about the two eras and your description of Clinton method is right on the money. Still I would like to go deeper with analysis because I do not believe that policies are initiated by people like Clintons. They just carry them out. The decisions has been made earlier by a different body. Just like with the transition to neoliberalism that started under Thatcher and Reagan but it was designed and planned much earlier and possibly Thatcher and certainly Reagan were oblivious to it. In 1980′s they were high ranking meetings between bankers like Rockefeller with high ranking Chinese officials. I wish I had time and means to do the research on it.

  175. @NoseytheDuke

    Oops! Sorry, this comment was meant for MarkinLA.

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
  176. Erebus says:
    @utu

    Personally I still do not understand how this was possible. The nuclear blackmail on part of Putin seems like the only explanation.

    I think Syria’s rescue was along the same lines as Crimea. In the first place, develop a fully defined objective. Take a careful look at the enemy’s objectives and the resources, tactics, and talent he is bringing to bear, followed by intense calculation of the forces and resources needed to prevent his success, and ensure yours.
    Defeating ISIS was but a part of the objective. The Russian calculus came up with a strategy that would also ensure success for Assad’s own endeavours to maintain Syria as an intact and a cohesive society. Many programs went operational across all aspects of the war. Diplomatic, intelligence, political, social, psy-ops, etc programmes were developed and tuned to enhance each other, including the intensive re-building of the Syrian military. We didn’t see/hear much about that, but it was all going full bore under the carefully gauged, but much more visible air campaign. Probably most importantly, it gave the SAA something worth fighting for and the full backing of the Syrian people.
    The Russians gave the world a textbook lesson on how quantitatively little military power is required when executed in concert with a full court press of socio-political programs to solve a problem. Yeah, after being shocked and awed for the last 3 decades, it’s a little hard to believe that a war can be won without complete destruction of the society surrounding it, but there it is. I too hope we don’t have to wait for a textbook to read some insights into how it all happened.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  177. @peterAUS

    I’m surprised you have a problem with those points.

    Without any claim to special knowledge i would formulate these responses.

    The Uighurs are a very small minority who would stand out visually if not in their far west home territory. Cp. perhaps the IRA without Eire next door and a thousand miles further from London.

    The poor inland people have about as much clout against the coastal powerhouse as peasants distant from Paris had when the Paris mobs and middle classes made the revolution.

    As for the obscenely rich: who cares when everyone is expecting to become better off as in America till 1930? And Xi’s anti-vorruption drives are well calculated to appease the 99 per cent’s blood lust.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @Anon
  178. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    Why don’t you give him and the rest of us reason to see you as entitled to express yourself superciliously de haut en bas?

  179. peterAUS says:
    @Erebus

    Nice example of how people can see the same thing and, for some reason, see it totally different.

    This is how I see some elements of your post:

    Probably most importantly, it gave the SAA something worth fighting for and the full backing of the Syrian people.

    No way that all Syrian people back SAA. I mean….it’s just……….anyway.

    The Russians gave the world a textbook lesson on how quantitatively little military power is required when executed in concert with a full court press of socio-political programs to solve a problem.

    The problem has not been solved at all.
    The thing started with Assad’s regime controlling of all of Syria and decent Middle East country.
    The thing as we speak is most of the country destroyed and large parts of country NOT under control of the regime. And the war is still going on.
    Again…….just…….are we in the same Universe?

    a war can be won without complete destruction of the society surrounding it, but there it is.

    The best part.
    War is still going on. Nobody won.
    Society is fragmented, most of infrastructure destroyed….refugees…
    I mean….really….the same Universe?

    Fascinating, really.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  180. peterAUS says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Well……….

    1. Uyghurs
    Wikipedia should be good enough. We are just tossing ideas….

    They make 45.84% of Xinjiang province. The biggest ethnic group there.
    The province itself is called Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region and it’s not that small.
    It is the largest Chinese administrative division and the eighth largest country subdivision in the world, spanning over 1.6 million km2 (640,000 square miles).
    Xinjiang borders the countries of Mongolia, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India. The rugged Karakoram, Kunlun, and Tian Shan mountain ranges occupy much of Xinjiang’s borders, as well as its western and southern regions. Xinjiang also borders Tibet Autonomous Region.
    Well…it looks to me as quite good terrain for instigating a separatist problem in China.
    Ethnic makeup for trouble is ideal.
    So………….with a help from a CERTAIN party, what’s the problem?

    2. Rural vs urban
    Well, Balkans………………..
    Bosnia in particular.
    If certain conditions could be met, rural rage against urban opulence, why not.
    You mentioned Paris.
    How about Sarajevo?
    Hell…how about Red vs Blue states in USA?
    How about election results in France?
    Or Great Britain re Brexit?

    3. Agree. As long as that works. If/when it stops working and it could if CERTAIN party really goes for it, well………who knows.
    Last time it created Mao.

    My point is………..China is not invulnerable to social conflict which could be used to destabilize it.

  181. Erebus says:
    @peterAUS

    Nice example of how people can see the same thing and, for some reason, see it totally different.

    Yeah, true enough.
    Blockquoting is tricky on this damn phone, so some quick rejoinders is all I can muster.

    - The ones who didn’t support Assad & the SAA left. Millions of them, literally.
    - Look at the enormous amount of intelligence and sabotage by ordinary civilians the SAA benefited from to see what kind of support they received.
    - Yup, lots of buildings etc were destroyed, but the nation stands.
    - The “large parts of the country” are empty desert for the most part. That was a part of Assad’s early strategy. Yield the desert and hold the cities, particularly the West.
    - The war is over in the sense ISIS’ back is broken and it is no longer a strategic/existential threat. The “moderate headchoppers” have been almost completely neutralized.
    - Yes, it will take some time, probably a decade to kill ISIS completely, but the war’s political outcome is not in doubt. There will be a secular, multi-confessional Syria at the table when it’s time for signatures and very likely Assad will be the signatory.

    That adds up to a win to my eye.

  182. Kiza says:
    @yeah

    Well, you are still one of the most truly deluded individuals that I have encountered online. Because there are tons of US/Israeli regime trolls online who make similar claims but they know them to be patently false. You make them honestly.

    Yet, I find your insistence to open our eyes to: “…if policy had been informed by a higher level of ethics and a sense of fair play for the world as a whole, most of what you say would have been correct…” the pinnacle of your immaturity and low-forehead thinking.

    You obviously have never heard of a term “reciprocity” and consider US actions unchallengeable. But, as a guy who did not even bother replying to your text wrote – what a great precedent for all government who want to show that their opposition works for the CIA – just examine the local US consulate or embassy as US did to Russia.

    It was only the conventions and the US military might which were making this impossible before. Now the US military might is declining in relative terms and US has busted the international conventions, so watch what happens during the next color revolution if the targeted country has Russian/Chinese support! The US Embassies and Consulates have become a fair game, just like for the Iranian students in 1979: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_hostage_crisis. Unlike the Russian consulates, the US ones are the rich pickings.

    • Replies: @KA
  183. Kiza says:
    @AnonFromTN

    I got an impression that US could not quite understand why Britain did not just SWAT the Ecuadorian embassy in London and grab Julian Assange. I think it was the British FM who suggested this be done, but the UK government decided that grabbing Assange was not worth establishing such precedent for their own embassies worldwide.

    Even to this day, I cannot understand why US breached international conventions and invaded the Russian consulate. I accept that “stupidity” is a too an easy way out, but any other way I look at it makes no sense. I believe that Russians are also equally perplexed by this move (still in shock).

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @AnonFromTN
  184. @Andrei Martyanov

    “you have no idea what scale or proportion all this is”.

    Listen friend I have been “Mensa” qualified, with a tested IQ above 150 points, for the last forty-plus years, and there is nothing you can comprehend which I cannot.

    You are talking down to me, so we can just agree to disagree.

    ” I am sure they will be amused to learn of this metric”.

    And you are missing my point entirely, as I am not stating that this IS the “New metric” rather I am asking the question as to whether it is.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army Vet, and pro Jazz musician.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @poop
  185. @nickels

    ” Very non Clausewitzian”

    So what, he was not God, and I form my own observations and conclusions, regardless of what historical “Authorities” have stated.

    Most historical “Wise men” were in fact consumate BS Artists, who only held their positions of privilege because their mentors : Royality, did not understand what the hell they were talking about, and assumed therefore that they must be much wiser than themselves.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US army Vet, and pro Jazz msuician.

  186. @Authenticjazzman

    Psst, Jazz…”We,” da pipple lost both world wars, too.

    The bankers, who supported the Reds, won big time at “our” expense.

    Let us not be suckered into any more wars to benefit bankers and other war profiteers.

    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
  187. @Andrei Martyanov

    Speaking of volumes of war materiel, what’s your view of the Persian Corridor and the supplies funneled to Uncle Joe through that asset?

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  188. @Kiza

    Which British FM (? Foreoign Minister) suggested a raid on the Ecuadorian Embassy to grab Julian Assange? Can you give a link or two? It is so unbelievably unprincipled and stupid I would very much like to have it as a weapon with which to abuse some of my English friends :-)

    • Replies: @Kiza
  189. Miro23 says:
    @LauraMR

    This is not about right or wrong. It is about might and, in particular, military and economic might.

    You borrowed that line from Hitler. It’s the law of the jungle. Germany was eventually turned to rubble and the US could be turned into a radioactive moonscape.

    Right and Wrong and mutual respect between nations are superior concepts.

  190. @peterAUS

    Uighurs…. Your original suggestion was regime change so those facts are irrelevant. In fact action by the Chinese government to protect the brave Han settlers in the far west against the terrorists would probably shore up support… just a popular aspect of Manifest Destiny….

    How about Sarajevo indeed? Under siege, including artillery bombardment by Bosnian and othet Serb forces which have nothing to do with tural discontent and much to do with what became of the Yugoslav Army.

    Generally the organising of the poor and scattered rurals against the central government would be impossible in the absence of the sort of freedoms and fair elections that allowed the Brexit campaign to succeed.

    No question though about China being vulnrrable to social conflict. There is plenty but any attempts to capitalise on it get nipped in the bud severely and promptly. The hardliners dispose of the weak seeming conciliators even if concessions are eventually made when they do not seem to be the result of pressure.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  191. Great article !!! Each word of which “hits not in the eyebrow but in the eye”. And it’s indeed really scary when such powerful players do not know how to lose gracefully.

  192. @Authenticjazzman

    Listen friend I have been “Mensa” qualified, with a tested IQ above 150 points, for the last forty-plus years, and there is nothing you can comprehend which I cannot.

    Go, as an example, to St.Petersburg and visit Piskarevskoye Cemetery then we may talk about your IQ–you, as most Americans, have no concept of what war brings and what it is to have whole generations of men (and even women) in your families being wiped out by war. Even IQ of 300 is not going to0 help you to grasp that since it is not a function of “intelligence” which you parade here non-stop, obviously being fixated on this IQ BS. IQ is not gonna help when one has no clue. Yes, I am talking down to you.

    • Agree: Sergey Krieger, Cyrano
    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
  193. @jacques sheete

    Speaking of volumes of war materiel, what’s your view of the Persian Corridor and the supplies funneled to Uncle Joe through that asset?

    What can possibly be my view on that? Realities, the scope and scale, of Eastern Front struggles called for not refusal of any help and in this case Persian Corridor (together with far Eastern one–many Lend-Lease aircraft went this way from Alaska) was, obviously, very important. Again, Lend-Lease, probably spared about a million of Russian lives and for that Russians are profoundly grateful.

    • Replies: @jacques sheete
  194. AnonFromTN [AKA "Anon"] says:
    @Kiza

    Yes, even US vassals prefer to play by the rules, but not the US. It’s purely American flavor of stupidity: dumb, ignorant, and proud of it. You can call it exceptionalist hubris. Worst thing is, it’s suicidal, but the perpetrators aren’t even smart enough to understand that. The retarded elites who wanted this became elites through decades of negative selection: nobody decent has a chance in money-based American political system. The negative selection of elites killed the Soviet Union, now it is killing the US. This is sad: America used to be a decent country.

    • Replies: @Kiza
  195. @Andrei Martyanov

    No. I think you are avoiding this argument.

    You disagreed with me and then failed to respond in any substantive manner to my elaboration.

    I’m calling your bluff. You got nothing.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  196. @Andrei Martyanov

    “Yes I am talking down to you”

    And I really don’t give a shit about what you have to say, however you can take this to the bank:

    You are a blabbermouth clueless jive-talker , and myself , well I can pick a up a Saxophone or a flute and blow a dynamite Jazz/blues solo, American style, which artists the worldover, including Russia, have been trying to imitate for the last eighty years, and they still haven’t got it, so put that in your pipe and smoke it.

    And as far as the cemetary in ST Petersburg is concerned, well you can make a trip to Luxembourg or France and view the graves of thousands upon thousands of young American men, including two relatives, who lost their lives because the Russians and French were not able to handle the Wehrmacht themselves.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army Vet, and pro Jazz musician.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  197. @jacques sheete

    ” The bankers who supported the Reds, won big time at “Our” expense”

    No argument out of me, as I have been aware of this fact for decades.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army Vet and pro jazz musician.

  198. @Johnny Rico

    I’m calling your bluff. You got nothing.

    OK. You won, I surrender.

    • Replies: @Randal
  199. peterAUS says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Uighurs…. Your original suggestion was regime change so those facts are irrelevant. In fact action by the Chinese government to protect the brave Han settlers in the far west against the terrorists would probably shore up support… just a popular aspect of Manifest Destiny….

    Mmm….a bit of reaction.
    You piqued my interest now in this particular. Wasn’t much thinking about it so far. Was just tossing ideas. I’ll take a better look.
    “Brave” Han settlers…..”terrorists” …..interesting choice of words.
    Well, agree, if you see Han settlers as brave and Uyghur insurrection as terrorist, we probably shouldn’t be debating this anymore. Let’s agree to disagree and move on.

    How about Sarajevo indeed? Under siege, including artillery bombardment by Bosnian and othet Serb forces which have nothing to do with tural discontent and much to do with what became of the Yugoslav Army.

    Probably.
    Or, maybe Balkans is a bit more….complicated….place than “informed” people wish to think.
    Anyway, when/if you have time/inclination just skim through this:

    https://balkanologie.revues.org/447

    As for this:

    Generally the organising of the poor and scattered rurals against the central government would be impossible in the absence of the sort of freedoms and fair elections that allowed the Brexit campaign to succeed.

    Well, again, just by looking at history of revolts…..I just strongly disagree.

    No question though about China being vulnerable to social conflict.

    Yeah.

    There is plenty but any attempts to capitalise on it get nipped in the bud severely and promptly.

    I see.
    Well……compliments to the ruling regime in China.
    They, apparently, resolved the problem that has pestered elites since times of Babylon.
    Impressive.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  200. Randal says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    turcopolier said…

    all

    US is evacuating intel assets from DZ by helo. pl

    Reply 09 September 2017 at 03:50 PM

    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/09/israel-is-testing-russia-.html#comments

    A straw in the wind, or just a false alarm? Lang certainly has the experience and the connections to be taken seriously.

    Time will tell.

    • Replies: @Miro23
  201. @NoseytheDuke

    Dude. I’ll entertain the fuck out of you. But you’ve got to be awake. Looks like you started drinking early today. Lemme know

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  202. Miro23 says:
    @Randal

    Very good article and comments from some people who know about Syria and the Middle East.

    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/09/israel-is-testing-russia-.html#comments

  203. Randal says:
    @Miro23

    It’s been a great place to monitor the developing end game in Syria.

  204. @peterAUS

    You missed my literary device (which I would probably find had a Greek name if I could find my Fowler). Of course I wasn’t intending the Han settlers to be objectively regarded as innocent hardworking contributors to local society.that the Uighurs ought to have welcomed. In case that wasn”t obvious enough I added the ironic reference to “Manifest Destiny”.

    For the rest I think you are getting well away from your original “regime change”.

    I note that John Derbyshire, who is entitled to be taken seriously on China, used to quite often predict trouble for Chinese governments but hasn’t for some years now as far as I know. Maybe control through modern technology and rapid economic growth keeping most of the populace supportive now keep the Chinese Communist Party firmly in control.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  205. @Andrei Martyanov

    OK, thanks for your honesty.

    In fact, the figure is that the US shipped, through the Persin Corridor, enough materiel to fully supply 60 Soviet divisions. I think you’d agree that’s substantial.

    Incidentally, for those who aren’t aware of it, the Persian Corridor was established by the Allies 3 months prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor. It was initiated by surprise attack on the navy of neutral Persia [Iran] which was occupied for the duration.

  206. @Johnny Rico

    Too bad for you that your crystal ball was in the shop but in regards to America losing its Hegemony and the remnants of its democracy, a crystal ball is hardly required since the process is already well underway and it has been for quite some time now, even Blind Freddy could see it.

  207. @jacques sheete

    He has got more important things to do rather than argue with you. It is useless anyway. Waste of time better spent elsewhere.

  208. Erebus says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Maybe control through modern technology and rapid economic growth keeping most of the populace supportive now keep the Chinese Communist Party firmly in control.

    Because the Chinese people seem to run their personal lives under the guidance of the old Chinese saying: “The mountains are high, and the Emperor is far away”, China’s successful ruling regimes have tended to run the country by 2 (or more) of Lao Tzu’s maxims: “Govern a great nation as you would cook a small fish” and “Keep their heads empty, and their bellies full”. Mutatis mutandis, the current one is no different.

    The world being more complicated nowadays, what with social media driven, regime changing, colourful revolutions abounding, the above maxims hold to a point. When that point is breached, the regime acts swiftly.

    In the case of the Uighurs, the regime seems to be counting on Russia to rein in Turkey to remove their international ideological & financial support, while combining investment and Han “migration” to quiet them down domestically. Whenever that is punctuated by violence, as in the 2009 riots in Urumqi, and the 2014 stabbing attacks in KunMing and GuangZhou, the regime takes care of business without ado.

    Parenthetically, there is a fair bit of scuttlebutt, all plausibly deniable, that ethnically Uighur Chinese agents have been active in Syria in the same way ethnic Chechen Russian agents are known to have been. I expect that they’ve provided solid, actionable intelligence on both the war and domestic fronts that the Russians used in prosecuting the war, and that the Chinese have used to disassemble troublesome networks in XinJiang. That the Russians seem to have turned Turkey will take what remaining wind there was out of the Uighur sails.

  209. One thing I never hear about from alts is their position on military spending. Would your anti-imperialism mean a smaller military; or do you agree with Trump when he called for substantially increasing U.S. military might?

    [In other terms: do alts trust America with an enhanced military; are they confident the U.S. won't revert to its imperialist ways with an augmented military?]

    Why do I never see this addressed?

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
  210. peterAUS says:

    Why do I never see this addressed?

    Shhhh…..
    Don’t confuse the people….I mean the alts.

    Now, I’ll just wait……..
    It’ll be a good fun I am sure.

  211. @Stephen R. Diamond

    It isn’t just a matter of raw spending, the force structure has to be totally reconfigured. If I had my druthers I would keep America’s nuclear deterrent but would redesign the rest of the military solely for domestic defense, and then go full Tokugawa: Closed borders, no trade, no foreign influence. We could still maintain a formidable military at a fraction of what we are currently spending.

  212. Kiza says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    It was August 2012 when the British Foreign Office sent a threatening letter to Ecuador:
    ““Under British law we can give them a week’s notice before entering the premises and the embassy will no longer have diplomatic protection,” a Foreign Office spokesman said.”
    Makes you laugh how some Brittopaedofiles have not woken up yet to the reality that they are not a wave-ruling imperial power any more, to which no international conventions that it signed can be applied. But is this not the same kind of behavior as US?

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-wikileaks-assange-ecuador/britain-threatens-to-storm-ecuador-embassy-to-get-assange-idUSBRE87E16N20120816

    https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/aug/16/julian-assange-ecuador-embassy-asylum

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  213. Kiza says:
    @AnonFromTN

    This is sad: America used to be a decent country.

    I certianly agree with you on this.

  214. KA says:
    @Kiza

    I want to add a twist here . May not be fully related but important in overall frame of reference we use to understand American way of explaining to the world.

    Hostage seizure by Iran has been portrayed by America over last 40 yrs as something that beyond the pale, beyond the minimum of civilizational expectation , it’s the least , it is something close the concept of mortal sin of the medieval time . Rest of the world along with American citizen have been indoctrinated to accept this dogma as self evident truth .

    It is hypocrisy on the part of the American deep state to lay this ground for concurrent and continuing demonization of Iran while gleefully killing sometime all over the globe national leaders ,changing regimes , waging war on civilians and using terror to achieve those objectives .( now the event in San Francisco has removed even that moral blanket covering the convoluted arrangements of the mental limbs underneath )

    But what is more interesting is the readiness of the American voters and citizen to fall for this explanation, organic involuntary unconscious psychological bend to ignore this obvious inconsistency , and support the ruinous destructive American policies against Iran . I am not blaming them. It is beyond blame . This is a deficit and this is corrosive . Now this default state of mind is destroying itself . If it were fear to challenge ,then it is fear that is preventing them to question the path elite have taken which will destroy is destroying the common folk . It if it were paralysis and indifference,then the same laziness is actively engaged in destroying the passive onlookers . If it were fear ,again it is same fear that is making them confused immobile and hopeful against hopes .

    • Replies: @Kiza
  215. @Authenticjazzman

    And as far as the cemetary in ST Petersburg is concerned, well you can make a trip to Luxembourg or France and view the graves of thousands upon thousands of young American men, including two relatives, who lost their lives because the Russians and French were not able to handle the Wehrmacht themselves.

    You may be (I doubt it, but may be) a good sax player but you have issue with arithmetic–so, my suggestion to you is to concentrate on playing jazz, your IQ maybe good only for that. But since you stated an utter BS, here are the facts: Piskarevskoye Cemetery houses graves of about 540 000 people, about a third of those who died in 900 day siege in Leningrad–that is almost twice more than all killed in US military history combined. You evidently can not comprehend the issue of scales and proportions even with your IQ. About your relatives (if you are telling the truth, of which I have doubts, but I could be wrong) go and try to impress someone else in your neck of the woods as per Wehrmacht–you may continue to live in your parallel universe but Red Army handled cream of the cream of Wehrmacht just fine. Western Allies came on board when it was pretty much settled issue. Just for people like you, that is those who are untouchable in IQ department. Read this (Allied strategic discussions in 1943) and if you have any issues with that, I am sure that you can easily find contacts of David Eisenhower and express to him your disapproval of his and his outstanding grandfather, Dwight D. Eisenhower, knowledge of history, do not forget to tell him about your IQ, I am sure he will impressed:

    In general, try to start your education on the issues of actual WWII history and basics of strategy and operational art by reading a primer:

    https://www.amazon.com/When-Titans-Clashed-Stopped-Studies/dp/0700621210/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1505061882&sr=8-1&keywords=David+glantz

  216. @jacques sheete

    In fact, the figure is that the US shipped, through the Persin Corridor, enough materiel to fully supply 60 Soviet divisions. I think you’d agree that’s substantial.

    It is substantial but that material started to really pour in by 1943–this is well established fact. A lot of military technology was, as very many specifically Western historians pointed out, of a low quality. In the same time there was never denial of US-made trucks being a serious strategic asset, plus, of course, legends in their own right US-made P-39 Cobras of which 4 500 was provided through Len-Lease and these aircraft gave an excellent account of themselves at Eastern Front. Food–that was huge, it is difficult to put any number on that since that help was more than just supply, for many it was a decider between life and death. Having said all that, the real overall impact of Lend-Lease was somewhere between 4 to 10% (by different estimates) of Soviet war-time production–substantial, but by far not decisive.

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
  217. @Andrei Martyanov

    There are multitudes of conflicting historical reports, and the “numbers” are always different.

    ” About your relatives, if you are telling the truth”

    You are implying that I am a liar, and I do not wish to communicate with you any longer, period.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro jazz artist.

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  218. @Andrei Martyanov

    270K killed in all US military history? Are you being serious here?

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  219. @Beefcake the Mighty

    270K killed in all US military history? Are you being serious here?

    You have reading comprehension problems?

    Piskarevskoye Cemetery houses graves of about 540 000 people, about a third of those who died in 900 day siege in Leningrad–that is almost twice more than all killed in US military history combined.

    540 x 3 = 1, 620, 000 which are known and documented. Some historians put the number at about 2 million, well yes, that is about twice of what US lost KIA in its all two plus centuries history combined. The largest US losses being about 600, 000 in Civil War. If you need a very precise numbers and ratios, US government archives site has all what is needed. Indulge yourself.

    https://www.archives.gov/research/military/ww2/army-casualties

    Again, overwhelming majority of Americans is not capable to grasp the scale of WWII–it is completely OUT of an American experience.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  220. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Well, the rural district of the Vendee gave the Paris government almost as much trouble as the rest of Europe put together, so I wouldn’t underestimate poor rural people*. I agree that if China ever decided to simply wipe out the Uighurs by murder or resettlement or some other method, they probably could, but they won’t.

    *Yes, this is an exaggeration.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  221. @Andrei Martyanov

    My reading comprehension is fine, the problem is your inability to clearly and coherently state your point. Evidently, in the zeal of your Mother Russia bullshit (easily the equal of the most obnoxious Team USA nut-hugging), you were attempting to be clever. Not advisable in your case.

    As always with discussions of WW2, the real ugliness of the Russian character is on full display. No wonder your neighbors are so willing to accept empty American security guarantees.

    • Agree: utu
  222. @Anon

    Yes, they won’t, because, as I assume you agree, they don’t need to in order to prevent regime change.

  223. annamaria says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    You mean, this neighbor? http://theduran.com/poland-commits-act-of-barbarism-and-begins-destroying-soviet-war-memorials/ “Poland commits “ACT OF BARBARISM” and begins DESTROYING Soviet war memorials” [600.000 Soviet soldiers died in Poland while fighting the Wehrmacht armies]
    Or, perhaps, you meant this neighbor? http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-u-s-has-installed-a-neo-nazi-government-in-ukraine/5371554 “Three Years Ago: The U.S. has Installed a Neo-Nazi Government in Ukraine”
    There is also this neighbor: “Nationalists & Waffen SS veterans march in Riga to honor fallen Nazi fellows”

    https://www.rt.com/news/381085-riga-march-latvian-waffen-ss/

    Or everything goes because of the “real ugliness of the Russian character?” – Is this a line from Atlantic Council or from the Heritage Foundation?

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  224. @annamaria

    Oh Good Lord, the Poles are bloody fools for letting themselves be used as pawns by the Americans (as they did by the British in 1939) but it’s their damn business what statues they keep in their country. Don’t make me laugh.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  225. Kiza says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Andrei, you are wasting your tine with this US “Mensa character”, yet even I learned a bit more about Russian history from what you wrote, so thank you. But can you accept that most citizens of the new countries, such as US, have very poor sense of history and even lower respect. The “Mensa character” probably skipped even those few classes of US-centric history of the World they teach in US.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  226. Kiza says:
    @KA

    You are pointing out logical inconsistencies in the thinking of US citizens, but the ideology of exceptionalism actually explains those quite well: what applies to mortals of other countries does not apply to Übermortals of US – government officials and citizens. In other words, when US attacks and occupies Russian consulate(s) contrary to the international conventions it signed – this is a prerogative of the exceptional people, when the Iranians did the same to US in 1979 – this was a crime.

    Exceptional really means: above any law.

  227. @Authenticjazzman

    From assessing your claimed IQ against your comments, I had already assumed you to be a liar, but if your IQ actually is as you claim it to be then the time has surely come to reassess the practical importance of IQ and its limitations.

    You used to write in your self aggrandising tagline that you were a Mensa (why the quotation marks?) member since 1973 and to be US Army Airborne qualified but now you’ve done a switcheroo with those terms, what changed? Perhaps your IQ has dropped since being accepted as a Mensa Member leaving you merely “Mensa” qualified. I’m confused but then I haven’t ever claimed to have a high IQ in the first place.

  228. annamaria says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    Guess, you are not related to General R. E. Lee. And none of your relatives fought Wehrmacht. And all that civilizational stuff (memory, the sanctity of graves and such) are nothing. Correct?

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  229. annamaria says:

    9/11.
    The chronology of the crime of the century: https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-truth-behind-9-11-who-is-osama-bin-laden-2/3198

    “Barely four weeks later, on the 7th of October, Afghanistan was bombed and invaded by US troops. Americans were led to believe that the decision to go to war had been taken on the spur of the moment, on the evening of September 11, in response to the 9/11 attacks and their tragic consequences.
    Little did the public realize that a large scale theater war is never planned and executed in a matter of weeks. The decision to launch a war and send troops to Afghanistan had been taken well in advance of 9/11. The “terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event” as it was later described by (former) CentCom Commander General Tommy Franks, served to galvanize public opinion in support of a war agenda which was already in its final planning stage.
    The tragic events of 9/11 provided the required justification to wage a war on “humanitarian grounds”, with the full support of World public opinion and the endorsement of the “international community”.
    Several prominent “progressive” intellectuals made a case for “retaliation against terrorism”, on moral and ethical grounds. The “just cause” military doctrine (jus ad bellum) was accepted and upheld at face value as a legitimate response to 9/11, without examining the fact that Washington had not only supported the “Islamic terror network”, it was also instrumental in the installation of the Taliban government in 1996.
    …………………………..
    The myth of the “outside enemy” and the threat of “Islamic terrorists” was the cornerstone of the Bush administration’s military doctrine, used as a pretext to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, not to mention the repeal of civil liberties and constitutional government in America. Without an “outside enemy”, there could be no “war on terrorism”. The entire national security agenda would collapse “like a deck of cards”. The war criminals in high office would have no leg to stand on. Al Qaeda was a creation of the CIA going back to the Soviet-Afghan war. This was a known fact, corroborated by numerous sources including official documents of the US Congress..”

  230. @Beefcake the Mighty

    the real ugliness of the Russian character is on full display.

    You forgot to also add a genetic inferiority of Russians–Mr. Clapper made this discoveryrecently.

    http://observer.com/2017/05/james-clapper-russia-xenophobia/

    But I think that this “ugliness” of Russian character is somehow very tightly connected precisely to WWII in American “interpretation” and recent, well publicized, events, especially warfare related. Call it a hunch;-)

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  231. @Kiza

    US-centric history of the World they teach in US.

    It reminds of famed Studs Terkel who wrote in Introduction to his famous, 1980s edition, of “The Good War” book:

    “in 1982, a woman of thirty, doing just fine in Washington D.C., let me know how things are in her precincts:”I can’t relate to World War Two. It is in schoolbook texts, that’s all. Battles that were won, battles that were lost. Or costume dramas you see on TV. It is just the story in the past. It is so distant, so abstract. I don’t get myself up in a bunch about it.”[

  232. @peterAUS

    WizardOfOz has mostly replied and accurately; but additionally, the “secret of the 1%” is that rising tides lift all boats and continue to do so, at least for some time yet. Regardless of any other complaints, the average Chinese expects to have a better life than that of his parents and with something simple as real wage increases keeps from anything akin to open rebellion.

    There’s a lot of issues and a lot of tensions, but most of it isn’t in a way that suggests violence as a solution. For example, there’s a large number of rural people who have made some money in the city who wish to redevelop their native areas, opposed by the Party who might wish them to keep the money in the cities and focus on urban areas. But the Party isn’t monolithic, there’s enough of a sense that such people can get what they want through working within the channels such that there isn’t that much hopelessness.

    The standard solution to someone who feels desperate in one of the country places in China is to move to Shenzhen or Shanghai, then send money back home. There’s nothing like that in other nations for some reason. It might an difference in ethic, if long-term Confucianism has fostered this concept instead of taking it to warfare.

  233. @peterAUS

    Xinjiang is tiny populationwise and has extremely limited water supplies. Any rebellion would be unrealistic. PLA doesn’t care for human right laws if pressured, and at any rate, specialize in population suppression.

    I won’t say that anything is invulnerable for all time. Within the next ten years, though, its as likely as asteroid impacts on Holy Terra.

  234. @Andrei Martyanov

    I regret making this statement, and offer apologies.

    I am actually pro-Russian in light of Anglo-Zionist machinations, and have nothing but scorn for Americans who ignore the SOVIET war effort in WW2. However, Russian chauvinism (no other word for it) gets to be a bit much.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  235. @annamaria

    It’s beyond ridiculous to compare Russians wanting to dictate to Poles what they should do with Soviet monuments on Polish territory, to American southerners wanting to keep Confederate monuments in their own states.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  236. annamaria says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    You mean, human decency is not in vogue anymore?
    How would you react if a grave to the Unknown American Soldier somewhere in Europe were vandalized and then dismantled on the orders from a local government? – Any voice of dignity from American veterans of the WWII would be a diktat from DC – correct? Judging from your silence re WWII, your family has avoided the participation in the fight against Nazism; perhaps this explains both your ignorance about the Soviet casualties (enormous) and your disrespect to the memory of those who gave their lives during the fight. You may want pretend to be displeased with the “Anglo-Zionist machinations,” but it does not seem that you are aware that the Anglo-Zionist machinations include a very high threshold of tolerance towards the glorification of Nazism in Latvia and Estonia and the active support for neo-Nazis in Ukraine (alone the same line the CIA has been supporting the “moderate” jihadists in the Middle East).
    What is the point of conversation about western civilization when the memory of the past barbarities is dismissed as inconsequential? The Anglo-Zionist machinations include manipulation of memory; only certain memories must be celebrated, others could be smeared.

    • Agree: Andrei Martyanov, Cyrano
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    , @Anon
  237. @Beefcake the Mighty

    However, Russian chauvinism (no other word for it) gets to be a bit much.

    So, stating historical facts is chauvinism now? OK. I’ll give you an example of what chauvinism is. In mid-May 1945, after the end hostilities, Patton, as he himself wrote in his diary, was received by Marshal Tolbukhin, a Commander of the Third Ukrainian Front. Patton was awarded Order of Kutuzov 1st Class. Guess what Patton wrote, I quote:

    He was a very inferior man and sweated profusely at all time

    This was compounded with Patton’s insistence that he can defeat Red Army. What, of course, Patton didn’t know that Fyodor Ivanovich Tolbukhin had a reputation in the Red Army as extremely humble and kind man, this is not to mention that he was married into Russian aristocratic lineage, his wife (yes, you are not misreading it) was a countess. What Patton evidently also didn’t know that Tolbukhin, that is “inferior man”, throughout his career commanded the masses of troops, including attached tank and air force armies, which were beyond the grasp of Patton. As an example, during brilliant Iassy-Cisineau Strategic Operation, between two Soviet Fronts (Malinovsky and Tolbukhin) they had at their command 1.3 million men and faced more than 900,000 Wehrmacht troops of Army Group South Ukraine. Well, in 9 days the whole strategic area imploded as a result of brilliant operation. So, you see, one has to know what “inferior” is. This is not to mention Patton’s famous, and I quote:

    “The difficulty in understanding the Russian is that we do not take cognizance of the fact that he is not a European but an Asiatic and therefore thinks deviously. We can no more understand a Russian than a Chinaman or a Japanese and, from what I have seen of them, I have no particular desire to understand them except to ascertain how much lead or iron it takes to kill them. In addition to his other amiable characteristics, the Russian has no regard for human life and is an all-out son of a bitch, a barbarian, and a chronic drunk.”

    One has to ask the question then, who is “inferior” and who is a chauvinist? I guess Patton’s Third Army’s gross (in fact scandalous–more than three fold: 103 800 instead of confirmed by US Army later 30,800) inflation of casualties it inflicted at Germans during Battle of The Bulge was also done without Patton’s knowledge, right? You can read in detail about this “superior” man not being really superior in excellent “ADVANCE AND DESTROY, Patton as Commander in the Bulge”, by JOHN NELSON RICKARD. This is just a small example among a whole constellation of how any Russian attempt to state facts is called–… choose your own terms: chauvinism, ugliness, inferiority, what have you. Yet, I think a lot of it has to do with… projection of own vices on somebody else. But then there is another thing–Russia has an excellent memorial to Allied Soldiers in no less than Victory Park–a magnificent memorial at Poklonnaya Mount. Bar Alaska small memorial to pilots who ferried Lend-Lease aircraft to Soviet Far East, can you point out to me any monument to Soviet soldiers in US?

    I am sure I can predict the response;-)

  238. Cyrano says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    To this day there are people who call Paton “an intellectual incarnation of Alexander the Great” or some other nonsense like that. That dimwit boasted that he should have been allowed to march on Moscow.

    They should have “allowed” him, to see how far he would have gotten. Of course, the way he wanted to do it was by rearming the defeated German army (an admission perhaps that those he commanded were not god enough for the task?) and then march on Moscow.

    • Agree: Andrei Martyanov
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  239. @annamaria

    I’d like to think I’d react by being intellectually honest enough to wonder why these countries don’t want to honor the war dead of a (forced) political union my country USED to be part of. I’d like to also think I’d be honest enough to contemplate the role my country played in bringing about this war. I’d also like to think I’d have the decency and good sense not to brag incessantly about the number of war casualties my country suffered, as if that proves anything more than the contempt that union’s government had for its subjects and willingness to use them as weapons, effectively (not to mention the basic ham-fistedness of its military leaders).

    But hey, if I thought that way, I wouldn’t be Russian, now would I?

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @annamaria
    , @Cyrano
  240. Erebus says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    I’d like to think I’d react by being intellectually honest enough to wonder why these countries don’t want to honor the war dead of a (forced) political union my country USED to be part of.

    But Beefy, that’s not why they’re doing it, or they would have been taking down memorials 20, or even 25 years ago. They’re doing it now to reinforce a new narrative that’s not gaining the traction (a part of) Poland’s elites wants it to gain.
    So, if that’s how you’d react, you’d be reacting exactly the way that narrative’s pedlars want you to react. A textbook perfect example of how it works. Indeed, Russians are typically more sensitive to authority generated bullshit.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  241. annamaria says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    That was a long and torturous answer (with Russophobic overtones a la Atlantic Council) but at least it was clear about your attitude towards the American soldiers killed and buried in Europe as well as towards the American veterans of the WWII. It seems that your family somehow has nobody to “brag” about re war casualties.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  242. Cyrano says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    I’d also like to think I’d have the decency and good sense not to brag incessantly about the number of war casualties my country suffered, as if that proves anything more than the contempt that union’s government had for its subjects and willingness to use them as weapons

    Helluva logic, my friend. You are right, the USSR government shouldn’t have used its citizens as “weapons”. Instead they should have surrendered to the Nazis, who were famous for their humanism.

    Have you ever heard of Mein Kampf? I think it talks about how Hitler wanted to turn the whole territory of USSR into one giant concentration Kampf, and after he exterminates all Slavs (Russians being the prime target), he was going to make the land Mein – I mean his.

    So, yeah, your assessment is correct, they shouldn’t have used USSR citizens as weapons, they should have had faith in God, no wait they were Commies, so even that option wasn’t available to them.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  243. @Erebus

    Fully agree, the Poles are not being wise in general, but primarily by allowing themselves to be used by the Americans, and (like in 1939) it’s not gonna end well for them. However, they have every reason to have bitter memories of the Soviet period, and again, it’s THEIR damn country. What, there’s some kind of statute of limitation on this? They need your approval for their motivations?

  244. @annamaria

    No, they don’t, and I am glad for it because every American military action of this century and the last was pointless at best, a criminal enterprise more often. And sure as Hell I wouldn’t think that the fact that some ancestor died in a stupid war overseas gave me some kind of say in another country’s internal policies. And I am Russophobic? LOL, quit hitting the vodka, no idea if you’re Russian but this kind of sense of aggrievement and eagerness to fight someone who’s basically sympathetic to you is exactly what I’m talking about.

  245. @Andrei Martyanov

    A synopsis of the “Heroic Russian effort” against the Wehrmacht:

    Russian commanders feeding hundreds of thousands or millions of untrained/unprepared young Russian peasants into sure death. The only chance of a victory being through their shear overwhelming numbers.

    Plus without US military aid the Russians would have lost , period.

    The real heros having been my mother along with legions of other Americans on the home front, manufacturing 24/7 the war materials, millions of weapons for shipment to the Russians who were in spite of their supposedly “Superior” communist system, unable to produce the same equipment themselves.

    My mother worked at a converted factory in Detroit assembling “Bazookas” , shoulder held anti-tank tubes, and she told me about Russians officers being escorted through the plant, and being instructed in the employment of said devices.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army Vet, and pro Jazz artist.

    • Replies: @Avery
  246. @Cyrano

    To this day there are people who call Paton “an intellectual incarnation of Alexander the Great” or some other nonsense like that.

    There are, sadly, very many of those. Some, like Carlo D’Este, defined him as “Genius for War”. What is saddest in all that is how that big mouth self-aggrandizing mediocrity became the pivot of an American WWII myth. It is really an absolutely astonishing thing when former Soviet military professional such as myself is forced to explain to some American WWII “experts” that Cobra (a plan of breakout from Normandy) had nothing to do with Patton but was solely Omar Bradley’s stroke of genius and that he completed this plan in general in one night. Obviously when I hear this 3rd Army’s 90 degree turn to relieve Bastogne I had to explain to some “uber-patriots”, that if not for Hodges’ 1st Army and particular heroism and steadfastness of 2nd and 99th Divisions which blocked Dietrich’s Army advance on the Northern face of the Bulge it could have come to a disaster and as John Eisenhower (Ike’s son) later, absolutely correctly, pointed out–the Battle of the Bulge was won in the sector of the 1st Army (Northern face) very first days, because Nazi’s momentum was extinguished there. It is obvious to anyone who bothered to look at the map.

    They should have “allowed” him, to see how far he would have gotten.

    SHAEF did make some estimates in May of 1945 and admitted that the Red Army had a very heavy margin in personnel. They also pointed out that Allied forces had advantage in air forces–they didn’t, but they didn’t know it then, they faced the largest and most experienced tactical-operational air force in the world in May of 1945. But common sense, not least through Ike’s guidance, prevailed. But sure, Patton did think that he could handle military leaders who had behind their belts victories over people of Meinstein, Model, Paulus or Kluge caliber at their and Wehrmacht (and SS) top form. Talk about being delusional.

    • Replies: @yeah
  247. Avery says:
    @Authenticjazzman

    {Plus without US military aid the Russians would have lost , period.}

    Without US aid the war on Eastern front would probably have lasted 1 year longer.
    SU would have lost more men KIA and given up some more territory.
    But USSR would still have won.

    One of Wehrmacht best, Paulus’s army, did reach Stalingrad in 1942/43, fairly deep into USSR.
    But not deep enough.
    And by that time Wehrmacht was totally spent.
    When the Red Army launched the encirclement of the 6th army, Wehrmacht made a valiant effort to breakthrough (von Manstein): but it just didn’t have the strength of Summer of 1941 anymore.
    von Manstein failed and the 6th was wiped out.

    The Urals, where most of SU war production had been moved already, was/is still 1,000s of kilometers from Stalingrad. SU still had 10s of millions of fighting age men ready to fight the genocidal Nazi invaders to death.
    Soviet generals, after the disasters of early 1941, had leaned the art of war and become experts, as shown by Zhukov’s victory at the Battle of Moscow.
    There is no way SU would have lost.

    The comforting myth some Americans cling to about US contribution to WW2 in Europe is just that – a myth. A desperate attempt to feel relevant vis-a-vis the defeat of Nazis. US single-handedly defeated a tough, worthy opponent – Imperial Japan – during WW2, and that’s about it.

    {The real heros having been my mother…… unable to produce the same equipment themselves.}

    Between 1941 and 1945 Soviets manufactured about 75,000* T-34 tanks. (acknowledged as the best overall medium tank of WW2)
    All in Soviet factories.
    All by heroic Soviet mothers, fathers, young women, old men,…..

    ——-
    * total WW2 Sherman production 50,000.

    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
  248. Cyrano says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    That’s about all that you have the brains for – yawn, you stupid ape.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  249. yeah says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Andrei, there is a time to walk out from a debate. That time is as soon as you encounter strongly cherished beliefs of the “My mother, right or wrong” variety, or crass arrogance (often bolstered by generous amounts of ignorance), or gut-level antipathy towards some nationality, race, religion, whatever. Such debates are not exercises in logic or prose; they are insult-hurling contests, often accompanied by screams, curses, and verbal kicks.

    You debated many on this topic, including some whose posts are normally very rational, polite, and well-argued. You obviously ran into “MMRW”, “a+i”, or the gut-level antipathy thing. We are all human after all, and therefore prone to failings.

  250. @yeah

    You don’t think the Russians here are guilty of the very same things, even towards those who are sympathetic? Like the Patton thing; who cares what he said about some Russian general 70 years ago? Seriously, who worries about shit like that? Talk about a national inferiority complex. And yeah, Americans are abysmally ignorant of history, but again, how does it matter that US memorial cemeteries don’t mention the Red Army?

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  251. @Beefcake the Mighty

    You see, you are a virtuoso in misrepresenting things, let me show how:

    1.

    but again, how does it matter that US memorial cemeteries don’t mention the Red Army?

    You deliberately go for falsification here, since Red Army soldiers have no place in US memorial cemeteries. But cemetery and memorials are not the same, as are monuments–I have shown you one such monument and it is a part of a memorial, which is NOT cemetery. So, you see how you begin to BS people?

    2.

    Like the Patton thing; who cares what he said about some Russian general 70 years ago? Seriously, who worries about shit like that? Talk about a national inferiority complex

    Here you demonstrate your complete ignorance on the state of US military historiography which is a very large and vibrant (sometimes too much for its own good) field and is represented by thousands of titles of books, magazines, documentaries etc. which are read and watched by millions of Americans. But you go further and invert completely the case (see in bold in your quote), I agree it is a national complex of inferiority for the US which is known even in the last 25 years self-proclaiming itself an exceptional, indispensable nation, the finest fighting force in history, what have you–all are signs of serious inferiority complex, especially in declaring itself a sole (with some minor help from those commies) victor over Nazi Germany even today. It is known among normal humans as “stolen valor”. Or as Alexis De Tocqueville succinctly observed in his classic work “Democracy In America” in 1837:

    “All free nations are vainglorious, but national pride is not displayed by all in the same manner. The Americans in their intercourse with strangers appear impatient of the smallest censure and insatiable of praise. The most slender eulogium is acceptable to them; the most exalted seldom contents them; they unceasingly harass you to extort praise, and if you resist their entreaties they fall to praising themselves. It would seem as if, doubting their own merit, they wished to have it constantly exhibited before their eyes. Their vanity is not only greedy, but restless and jealous; it will grant nothing, whilst it demands everything, but is ready to beg and to quarrel at the same time. If I say to an American that the country he lives in is a fine one, “Ay,” he replies, “There is not its fellow in the world.” If I applaud the freedom which its inhabitants enjoy, he answers, “Freedom is a fine thing, but few nations are worthy to enjoy it.” If I remark the purity of morals which distinguishes the United States, “I can imagine,” says he, “that a stranger, who has been struck by the corruption of all other nations, is astonished at the difference.” At length I leave him to the contemplation of himself; but he returns to the charge, and does not desist till he has got me to repeat all I had just been saying. It is impossible to conceive a more troublesome or more garrulous patriotism; it wearies even those who are disposed to respect it.”

    The problem with many Americans, even “elites” that far from not knowing world’s history, they do not know own one either. Am I in a ball park?

  252. @Avery

    I give up : Mark twain : “Argue with a fool what do you get : two fools”

    Look something you obviously do not have the intellect to grasp :

    There are MULTITUDES of historical studies, reports, viewpoints, etc filling tomes and tomes, and they ALL present DIFFERENT numbers, and totally different depictions of the same events, as if the very same situations/events comprised of totally different and occurances and outcomes.

    The Russians ran their untrained, unprepared young men into battle and unavoidable death with no regard for how many were killed for no tactical gain, and this madness could not have gone on indefinately, before their total effort imploded.

    Look you are obviously anti-American and I regard you are a complete clueless neophyte, blathering on to satisfy your hatred for all things american.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro jazz artist.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @Avery
  253. @yeah

    Andrei, there is a time to walk out from a debate.

    I do not “debate” here, I present facts. Then again, it is a public forum last time I checked–your prescription is only good for when people “debate tete-a-tete”. My understanding is (I could be wrong, of course) that many people simply read these discussion boards so on my part it is not “debate” in a full meaning of the word. As per:

    “My mother, right or wrong” variety

    Decatur’s full phrase reads like this: “My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right.” If people can not handle well-documented facts, well, who do you think has to “walk out”?

  254. @Authenticjazzman

    There are MULTITUDES of historical studies, reports, viewpoints, etc filling tomes and tomes, and they ALL present DIFFERENT numbers, and totally different depictions of the same events, as if the very same situations/events comprised of totally different and occurances and outcomes.

    Listen “specialist” in tactics, you continue to speak in platitudes and BS non-stop without presenting a single serious document or historic source. You cannot since you do not have appropriate training as either military or historian, or both. So, “genius”, apart from being totally ignorant on anything Russia related, you also have no clue on your own nation’s history.

    Look you are obviously anti-American

    No sax-man, he is not “anti-American” and, btw, neither am I but I have no inhibitions to calling BS, especially in military field, from the nation whose military history is dwarfed by that of Russia. It is a cold hard fact of history which can be only obfuscated by means of non-stop propaganda and brain-washing. Again, you have very serious math deficiencies (for your alleged high IQ) if you can not compare the scales of Eastern Front from 1941 to 1945 and a Western one after June 6, 1944. Your repeating some propaganda points makes no difference to the fact that Red Army hoisted the flag in Berlin on May 2, 1945.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  255. peterAUS says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Don’t particularly like to get involved in this type of conversation.

    Just two things.

    The war US waged in Europe was quite different from type of war Soviets waged.
    Different objective first and foremost.

    Germans didn’t fight Yanks for the same reason and for the same motives they fought Soviets.
    And vice versa.

    It’s like discussing skill-sets of fighters in professional boxing match vs the same fighters trying to kill each other in a parking lot.
    Just my impression, of course.

    Now, for “relaxed” attitude re casualties.
    Zhukov and Battle of the Seelow Heights?

  256. “you do not have appropriate training as military”

    “without presenting a single document or source”: you just don’t get the point. they are all different with different numbers and they have no relevance.

    Nonsense : I spent three years in the US Army, and my family has many high ranking military amongst it’s members, including a ww2 General who hobby upon retiring after forty years of military service was his Rose garden.

    Don’t know whether this post will be blocked or not, but anyway:

    YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT

    You are a bloody fool and have no clue as to what you are blathering about.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet and pro jazz artist.

  257. @peterAUS

    The war US waged in Europe was quite different from type of war Soviets waged.
    Different objective first and foremost.

    Actually, if you read attentively all Allied documents (references to some of them are posted by me above–from Eisenhower At War) prior and at the Tehran Conference, the main objective was one–a defeat of Nazi Germany. Obviously, I do not consider Atlantic Charter to be a serious military-political document. So, I am not exactly sure what are you trying to say? That Western Allies were worried–hell yes they were, especially after Kursk. How do you think the whole situation accelerated towards Tehran Conference?

    Germans didn’t fight Yanks for the same reason and for the same motives they fought Soviets. And vice versa.

    You can read statements of many Wehrmacht officer and soldiers (in Glantz and House) that “war at the Western front was proper sport, in the East–it was unmitigated horror”. Sure, those Slavic untermensch for some reason refused to be exterminated, how arrogant of them.

    Now, for “relaxed” attitude re casualties.
    Zhukov and Battle of the Seelow Heights?

    I don’t have Krivosheev immediately at my disposal–I will look at my Flash-drive) but the actual losses at the Heights of the Red Army were exaggerated and in terms of a larger strategic objective, which was Berlin, here is how Alexey Isaev assesses it:

    В силу ряда обстоятельств Зееловские высоты стали жупелом сражения за Берлин. Однако в действительности это была достаточно ограниченная область, затрагивавшая только полосы наступления 8-й гв. армии и 69-й армии. Уже подразделения соседа справа 8-й гв. армии, 5-й ударной армии, видели Зееловские высоты в лучшем случае в бинокль. При [453] этом нельзя сказать, что 3-я и 5-я ударные армии пробивалась с Кюстринского плацдарма намного большими темпами, чем 8-я гв. армия.

    В этом разделе читатель чаще встречал слова «форсирование», «переправа», чем «высоты». Командующий 2-й гв. танковой армией С. И. Богданов вспоминал:

    «Местность, изобилующая сетью озер, каналов, стесняла маневр танков, и танковые части для преодоления значительного препятствия (оросительный канал, который долго преодолевался пехотой) затрачивали много времени, т.е. объездных путей по причине слабого грунта устроить было нельзя, а восстанавливать или наводить переправу на месте взорванной противником по той же причине было невозможно. Танки вынуждены были искать обходные пути или удобные места для устройства переправ. Все это связано было с потерей времени, а следовательно, с потерей темпа наступления. Если сюда прибавить упорное сопротивление и организованную защиту немцами возможных мест переправы танков, то станет ясным, в каких тяжелых для танков условиях действовали наши части»{235}.

    Такие же слова про реки и каналы мы находим в журнале боевых действий 4-го гв. стрелкового корпуса 8-й гв. армии: «Еще более серьезным препятствием на пути наших войск была система озер, рек и каналов, расположенных в глубине обороны до самого города»{236}.

    Преодоление многочисленных каналов серьезно замедляло темпы продвижения советских войск. Для продвижения вперед артиллерии и танков приходилось строить переправы под огнем противника. Затем у переправы выстраивалась пробка из тракторов с орудиями на буксире, танков, автомашин и гужевых повозок пехоты. Например, через переправу у Платкова проходила пехота и артиллерия 5-й ударной армии, боевые и вспомогательные машины 12-го гв. танкового корпуса. Главу о преодолении Одерского рубежа войсками [454] 1-го Белорусского фронта следовало бы назвать не «Зееловские высоты», а «ирригационные каналы», но это было бы чересчур эксцентрично.

    Но не следует думать, что взлом обороны перед Кюстринским плацдармом был унылым и дорогостоящим перемалыванием немецких дивизий, опирающихся на систему каналов и инженерных заграждений. Если схематически изобразить линии, по которым происходил прорыв обороны 9-й армии, то получится буква «X» или два поставленных рядом математических знака: > <. 1-я и 2-я гв. танковые армии сначала протиснулись смежными флангами между Гузовом и Герльсдорфом, затем, встретившись с резервами, разошлись к межозерному дефиле к югу-западу от Мюнхеберге и лесу Претцелер Форст. Танковые армии увлекали за собой стрелковые соединения. Особенно ярко это проявилось в наступлении 8-й гвардейской армии, шедшей по следам корпусов армии М. Е. Катукова.

    Однако штурм собственно Зееловских высот и обходные маневры дорого стоили 8-й гв. армии, учитывая изначально слабый состав ее соединений.

    I have no reasons to doubt Alexey’s assessments.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  258. @peterAUS

    It’s like discussing skill-sets of fighters in professional boxing match vs the same fighters trying to kill each other in a parking lot. Just my impression, of course.

    Explain. I am all eyes and ears and if it is what I think it is (I could be very wrong, of course) this could be a very fascinating discussion.

  259. @peterAUS

    Found Krivosheev, he was all along at my Flash-drive. Here are the numbers from Berlin Operation. A rather telling picture once one considers what was the objective and who defended it.

  260. @Andrei Martyanov

    …the real overall impact of Lend-Lease was somewhere between 4 to 10% (by different estimates) of Soviet war-time production–substantial, but by far not decisive.

    But it WAS decisive. Completely decisive.

    Without the 250,000 trucks and jeeps (not to mention the locomotives and boots) the United States and Britain provided the Red Army AND the offensives in North Africa, Italy, and France AND the strategic bombing campaign against the German homefront AND the bombing missions against the Ploesti refinery complex, the Soviet Union simply could not have won the war against Hitler. At best the war would have been stalemated like it was in the fall of 1943.

    To state otherwise is to ignore some widely accepted numbers and evidence.

    Wikipedia has listed Soviet military deaths at between 8.8 and 11.4 million. This is a highly problematic number to pin down. Some sources believe it is much higher.

    Which is an issue that underlies everything we are discussing here. This point cannot be understated: numbers coming out of Stalin’s communist Soviet Union are completely unreliable. The numbers on one side of every equation never add up to the same numbers coming out of the other side of the equation. Tank-factory production numbers are a good example. If they are really that high, then the Germans sure destroyed a lot of them.

    German military deaths are given as between 4.4 and 5.3 million. It is said that 2 out of 3 German soldiers died fighting the Red Army. Using the higher number of 5.3 million German combat deaths, this gives us 3.5 million German dead in the Russo-German War.

    If we use 10 million Red Army dead as a round average, this means the Wehrmacht from start-to-finish maintained an average 3-to-1 kill ratio. This is highly impressive and it is the case right up until almost the very end.

    The Red Army was never in the same class as the German mobile panzer formations. The firepower and effectiveness of the elite SS Panzergrenadier divisions, Grossdeutscheland Division, and Tiger battalions increased during the war. By 1943, 40% of German armor on the Eastern front was Panthers and Tigers. The rest being up-armored and up-gunned Mark IVs and the various, highly effective assault guns and tank-destroyers.

    The problem for both sides in a war involving such huge distances was mobility and transport. The Red Army simply could not until the spring of 1944 successfully exploit breakthroughs and launch follow-on deep penetrations necessary to cut off and destroy large German formations precipitating any type of general collapse.

    “…Red Army handled cream of the cream of Wehrmacht just fine. Western Allies came on board when it was pretty much settled issue.” (from another of your comments)

    To say the Red Army “handled just fine” the cream of the cream is not a bit of a stretch – it is simply incorrect.

    It is well known that Stalin whined about the need for an Allied invasion of France for a very long time before June 1944. Even through the last eleven months of the war the Germans still extracted a 3-to-1 price on the advancing Red Army. That doesn’t seem like “handling just fine.”

    There is also the mystery of why after the “collapse” of the German Army Group Center as a result of Operation Bagration in June 1944 the war in the East continued for another year. Stalin timed Operation Bagration to coincide with the Normandy invasion for good reason.

    Were Hitler not forced to divert elite units to other areas of Europe starting in 1942 and escalating to the transfer of seven panzer divisions from the Eastern Front to Normandy in 1944 and had the Red Army lacked the mobility that 250,000 trucks and jeeps provided in the first successful operations in the spring of 1944, Stalin may very well have been forced to come to terms with Hitler.

    Any talk of the significance of Lend-Lease using counterfactual scenarios is pure speculation, yet suggesting the British and Americans on one side and the Red Army on the other were not equal partners in defeating Hitler is no better than anybody else’s opinion. It is not a “fact.”

    It is also an argument which is basically what people mean by “debate” here in this forum. You are debating no matter what you might believe.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
    , @Cyrano
  261. peterAUS says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    So, I am not exactly sure what are you trying to say?

    and

    Explain. I am all eyes and ears and if it is what I think it is (I could be very wrong, of course) this could be a very fascinating discussion.

    well…you could’ve said “please” too, but, anyway, sort of like this:

    war at the Western front was proper sport, in the East–it was unmitigated horror

    The war in West was war between Western states (for a lack of better word).
    Defeat would mean, say, “Dutch” treatment.
    The war in East was existential struggle of Slavic peoples against Nazis.
    Defeat would mean….well….let’s not go there because Nazi apologists would swamp the thread.

    So, I mean that, when Westerners discuss this, they do not take that into account.
    Their approach is……………lacking, IMHO.

    Smooth move with that Russian quote.

    I mean, we could get embroiled in that topic here, but, let’s not.

    My impression is that Russian attitude towards own casualties was much more relaxed than US/British/etc.
    But, I believe it’s a bit more complex issue than just simplistic “total disregard for human life”.

    And, well, I read, ages ago, a book Patton wrote (have it still somewhere, something about standing orders..instructions….whatever)
    ONE element caught my eye even then.

    It was an instruction to his soldier on how to advance under fire.
    It was something like this:
    “When under fire by German machineguns one should not hit the ground. If he hits the ground he will be immobile and a good target for pre-register mortar/artillery fire. The best course of action is to keep advancing in quick step, holding your Garand rifle under you armpit and firing in a general direction of incoming fire. Multiple rifles firing on semiauto will force German machnegunner to duck for cover”.
    In essence, “marching fire” against concealed MG-42. More likely two MG-42s with interlocking fields of fire.
    Enough said.

    Actually there is more.
    In the same book, Patton stated his method of dealing with subordinates.
    In brief: if a regiment has not accomplished a given objective, commanding Colonel is to be relieved.
    He personally relieved, as stated in the book, several Colonels.
    There is an incident when he describes approaching a Colonel in a middle of battle. He said, something as “his demeanor was showing he was concerned about me relieving him on the spot”..

    I have always had a bit of……….curiousity…….on how Yanks see Patton.
    Well, probably on the same level they see Lee, Gettysburg, and the Picket’s Charge.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  262. @Andrei Martyanov

    Fine, I should have more carefully distinguished memorials. Doesn’t affect my point at all, which is: why do you care so much? Has nothing to do with American ignorance or lack of appreciation for the Soviet war effort.

    The rest of your post simply supports my observation about the Russian character, at least when it comes to WW2. You are quarreling with someone who agrees that the Soviet war effort dwarfed the Anglo-American. Yet, you simply cannot escape your seige mentality, you blindly charge ahead with Mother Russia vs. Americans. You seem congenitally unable to refrain from lectures about Soviet military superiority (which you of course conflate with Russia), independent of context (or reliability of your own sources). No wonder Russia is so backwards in many ways.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  263. BTW, in defense of Americans, they share the Russian view of the war, namely that peace-loving Russia (well, Soviets, but whatever) were attacked by dastardly Hitler (or Germans as such, depending on your degree of cuckoldry), in betrayal of the Nazi-Soviet pact. The difference, of course, is that Americans still retain some sense of sensibility, and note that if you dance with the Devil, you suffer the consequences.

    So what’s the problem?

  264. utu says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    The Americans in their intercourse with strangers appear impatient of the smallest censure and insatiable of praise. Alexis De Tocqueville

    I have observed this phenomenon. But I do not think it is as strong nowadays as experienced by Tocqueville.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  265. @peterAUS

    well…you could’ve said “please” too, but, anyway, sort of like this:

    Please.

    So, I mean that, when Westerners discuss this, they do not take that into account.

    They don’t.

    As per book by Patton? There are many things about his “views” on war which I simply don’t pay attention to, especially after his campaign in Loraine and against general background of the Western Front. Ike, Bradley, obviously, George Marshall–those were great military leaders.

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
  266. @utu

    I have observed this phenomenon. But I do not think it is as strong nowadays as experienced by Tocqueville.

    Many everyday Americans, many of whom I know personally, and some very close, are warm and good people–there is always a great deal of self-deprecation and self-irony–features I am in love with absolutely. There is a lot of humor in that and ability to laugh at one-self is a first sign of health and morality. But once one goes more towards “intellectual” elites, things begin to change. Once one gets to the power “top”–it all becomes all too Tocquevillish. But then again, Tocqueville was echoed almost 140 years later by none other than Senator Fulbright.

  267. @Andrei Martyanov

    Eisenhower and Marshall not only were never combat commanders – they NEVER saw combat. They were extremely talented managers of the overall war effort.

    Patton can only be reasonably compared in performance to the likes of Bradley, Hodges, Rommel, Montgomery, Guderian, Hoth, Clark, Model, Kluge, Manstein and a couple dozen more corps, army, army-group commanders and field marshalls (this list is nowhere near complete). Zhukov, Rokossovsky, Konev, and Vatutin are the only Russian names that come to mind.

    Patton may be over-rated but he is still worth taking a look at. Conventionally historically, he is compared with Rommel and Montgomery as the three best combat commanders of the war.

    Literally hundreds of books have been written on these three. It is hard to ignore that.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  268. Cyrano says:
    @Johnny Rico

    All right, you imbecile. Even if the Germans were not 3 times better – as you claim, but 5 times better than the Russians, they still lost the war. Which part of this you don’t understand?

    If anything, your argument works against trying to prove that the Germans were superior. It proves that the Germans were superiorly stupid – because they knew about the numerical superiority of the USSR and they still attacked – believing that their “genetic superiority” will carry the day. It didn’t.

    How were they superior and in what? Even if they were “superior”, obviously they weren’t superior enough which is all that matters in the end. The cold hard fact is – GERMANY LOST THE WAR. Am I getting through? I doubt it.

    If you feel so sorry for the Germans “unfairly” losing the war, take them to Hollywood, walk them on the red carpet and declare them “moral victors” or something, you f**king stupid idiot.

    • Replies: @Avery
  269. Avery says:
    @Cyrano

    {The cold hard fact is – GERMANY LOST THE WAR. }

    Even colder:

    Red Army Untermenschen calmly stood and pissed on the alleged MasterRace ashes of Hitler. The coward was too chicken S_____ to stand and go down fighting.

    Most of the other so-called MasterRace scum Nazi leaders also committed suicide.
    Cowardly, filthy scum.

    Himmler was caught trying to flee like a rat and ended up offing himself.
    Goebbels , an alleged MasterRace , in reality a club-footed degenerate rump, murdered his 5 children, then offed himself.
    Goering, an obese swine drug addict, also offed himself.

    There is your so-called MasterRace : a degenerate gang of sewer rats.

    • Agree: Cyrano
  270. Avery says:
    @Authenticjazzman

    {Look you are obviously anti-American and I regard you are a complete clueless neophyte, blathering on to satisfy your hatred for all things american..}

    Wow.

    An alleged “Mensa” qualified alleged airborne trained US Army vet unable to counter my facts about tank production figures and in desperation resorting to calling me names.
    What a Mensch.

    Authentic Armenian duduk qualified Aficionado.
    Unqualified since……
    Landlubber trained since…..
    And [email protected] trained poster extraordinaire.

    [Armenian Duduk | Yanni - Prelude and Nostalgia]

    [Hans Zimmer, Lisa Gerrard & Jivan Gasparyan - Duduk of the North (OST Gladiator)]

    So subtle, so beautiful.

    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
  271. Cyrano says:
    @Johnny Rico

    So, the Germans were better than the Russians in everything – superior technology, superior commanders and yet the lost the war? How come? The Russian’s had third rate commanders compared to Guderian, Romel, Patton, Model, Montgomery and yet the won the war? Great mystery!

    Wait, I know what it is. The 250 000 trucks did it. All by themselves. Because they were no ordinary trucks. They were western and very brave trucks and also very democratic trucks.

    This is what I suggest. Since it seems that US suffers from the same tragic fate as the Germans – superior in everything, yet they keep losing wars, next time US goes to war, they shouldn’t bother sending the army or navy or air force. Just send 250 000 trucks and the job will be done. That’s all it takes. It has already been proven.

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
  272. @Cyrano

    In your first comment you accused me of not understanding that the Germans lost the war when I clearly stated otherwise:

    … yet suggesting the British and Americans on one side and the Red Army on the other were not equal partners in defeating Hitler…

    You don’t read very carefully. You think name-calling, labelling, and misrepresenting another’s words are a substitute for evidence and argument.

    In your second post, you are already backtracking:

    …yet the lost the war? How come?…

    Your rhetoric suggests you understand that I know what I, in fact, clearly stated above. Your drunken state betrays you. (I’m assuming you are drunk and don’t have some undisclosed mental illnesses or learning disability – my apologies if I’ve misjudged this situation).

    I thought my argument was clear from what I wrote. But I’ll try to restate it simply:

    The British and American war effort and Lend-Lease material contributions were, in my opinion, hugely significant in defeating Hitler. Without them Hitler would have probably forced Stalin, at the very least, to some type of settlement and possibly have defeated the Soviet Union. I believe these contributions had a much greater impact than what Andrei Martyanov believes.

    That is all.

    I’m sorry this has triggered such an emotional response in you. Especially since everything I wrote comes from the research and work of several well-known, highly-regarded, mainstream historians.

    As far as your use of terms like “superior” and “unfairly” and the false dichotomy with the trucks you use in your rhetoric – they are exactly that – YOURS. I did not say those things. Don’t put words in my mouth.

    Try again with a little less angry nonsense.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  273. Cyrano says:
    @Johnny Rico

    The British and American war effort and Lend-Lease material contributions were, in my opinion, hugely significant in defeating Hitler. Without them Hitler would have probably forced Stalin, at the very least, to some type of settlement and possibly have defeated the Soviet Union.

    Your knowledge of history is fascinating. Hitler didn’t want peace. Your “hypothetical” situation where without the land lease Stalin would have asked for “peace settlement” actually did happen – land lease or not.

    Stalin used the Bulgarian ambassador to Moscow Ivan Stamenov to send peace feelers to Hitler. Hitler – the idiot that he was – outright rejected the idea, thinking that winning the war is a done deal.

    http://web.b.ebscohost.com/abstract?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=00296236&AN=119437093&h=kbM9FNrsGUywnfvx1AYSeBIVhaEqAmgZZN3ZV8IW2LCh8Lgjqj2uWi%2f1R7FUD7EkRO8e3AfJaxSMgwaOxxTD5w%3d%3d&crl=c&resultNs=AdminWebAuth&resultLocal=ErrCrlNotAuth&crlhashurl=login.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26profile%3dehost%26scope%3dsite%26authtype%3dcrawler%26jrnl%3d00296236%26AN%3d119437093

    It’s interesting what Ivan Stamenov comment was to Stalin when he heard about the idea. Apparently he said: “Why are you afraid of the Germans? You should be able to beat them even if you have to retreat to the Urals”. Which is almost how it happened (you see the Russians didn’t have to retreat all the way to the Urals).

    The reason why Stalin used the Bulgarian ambassador as intermediary was of course because Bulgaria – a Slavic country – was an ally of Germany, but obviously their ambassador to Moscow didn’t have very high opinion about the Germans and their army. Now f**k off, you don’t know diddly about history.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  274. @Cyrano

    I would say you’re the dumb-ass because your own quote about the Urals (and the ability of the SU to continue or re-enter the war even after surrendering large tracts of territory) undercuts your argument, and means that these “peace offers” were useless and the Germans (at the time at least, hindsight being 20/20 and all) were right to rebuff them.

  275. @Beefcake the Mighty

    BTW, interesting to note that mere days after the invasion, Stalin was willing to make such substantial concessions, no?

    • Replies: @Anon
  276. @Johnny Rico

    Eisenhower and Marshall not only were never combat commanders – they NEVER saw combat. They were extremely talented managers of the overall war effort.

    Johnny Rico, I am not really answering this to you–everything is clear here with you–but for people who read. Who knows, though, you may make eventually some recovery from utter delirium you write thus exposing your complete ignorance on how armies fight.

    1. I do not remember numbers from the top of my head (and I do not have any desire to go back to combat and staff manuals for the army, as in operational-strategic formation) but I have some stunning news for you–the main duty of the Army (and higher–up to the army group) Commander is to provide effective development of operational plans and their fulfillment by means of effective operational Command, Control and Communications (C3) of his army. That involves having both Command Posts and own Army Staffs, including own OPD (Operational Planning Department, G-2 and the whole shebang) in order to make a decision. So, Johnny Rico, if you think that being military leader means jumping on the tank which is spearheading the assault on the enemy position, you really should confine yourself to Hollywood, which you already are doing successfully as all your posts so abundantly demonstrate. There is a reason why Army Staffs are usually located within the depth of army deployment plan (it varies in all kinds of things: defense, offense, deployment, re-deployment), that is removed, from immediate front line (even regiment or brigade HQ are NOT on the front line and are “sunk” to some depth of the unit’s operational “strip” and why NO army commander can command and control his army without his staff. That ability requires a helluva lot than just “seeing combat” and no, even Patton didn’t ran in a front of his army’s tank columns.

    2. There are many examples of people who were, as you repeat a typical amateur crap like “managers”, who didn’t see “combat” in WWII. Among them Marshals Vasilevsky, Zhukov, Rokossovsky, Tolbukhin if by “combat” you mean doing things which are absolutely forbidden for commanders of the armies, let alone of army groups. But then again, you exhibit a typical ignorance on the basic issues of war.

    Since I don’t have time to answer all points of your “enlightened” posts, what I found may help you grasp when you read starting from page 18 what Staffs (HQs in general) and COs do and why it is not “clear” combat. It is in English.

    http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/cgsc/carl/download/csipubs/mcgrath_op23.pdf

    In general, Johnny, get you facts and numbers straight, especially on the losses ratios or, better yet, learn not to express your opinions on issues you have no clue about.

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
    , @peterAUS
  277. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    Not really. There was no immediate way to push the Germans out, so it’s not unreasonable to try to stop the bleeding.

    Did you read the linked article or not?

  278. Cyrano says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    You are a moron. Nothing you say will ever convince me otherwise. When Stalin offered peace to Hitler, the Germans had advanced maybe a 1000 km inside the USSR. And based on this Hitler was confidently predicting victory?

    Napoleon took Moscow and still lost. How about some perspective here? Hitler had no basis for such confidence beside his deranged mind – which is kind of what you two have in common.

  279. @Andrei Martyanov

    You sure expended a lot of energy agreeing with me. I never said anything about Hollywood.

    Your rudeness, overblown opinion of your own knowledge, and arrogance assuming others don’t know those things does not serve you well.

    My views are not unorthodox. They are based on research of war historians like David Glantz who has uncovered much that was buried in the Soviet archives only in the last 20 years or so.

    Nobody has ever accused the Stavka or Stalin of providing reliable numbers or information. The Great Patriotic War was as good a narrative propaganda effort as any. A lot of commenters including yourself have effectively bought into that narrative and mistakenly weave its false lessons into your present writing.

    Be careful.

    I’d provide you with a list of books that might help you but, of course, you already know everything :)

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  280. @Avery

    ” Unable to counter my FACTS about tank production numbers”

    Anyone who is naive enough to believe the profoundly inflated and exaggerated “historical” reporting, regarding “tank production” “casualities” or any other aspect of the war, served up by the Soviet propagandists, is either hopelessly brainwashed or stupid beyond hope.

    And as far as the “superior” battle strategies of the Soviet Generals are concerned : they had only one main strategy and that being : Pushing young Russian men, as cannon fodder, into sure death.

    And of course there was the other version of Russian “Strategy” resulting in such strategic victories as the horrible and insane Wilhelm Gustloff tragedy.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army Vet, and pro Jazz musician.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  281. peterAUS says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Hmm…..well……
    True, the “Russian” approach.
    Maybe there is more there to it.
    Just maybe.

    the main duty of the Army (and higher–up to the army group) Commander is to provide effective development of operational plans and their fulfillment by means of effective operational Command, Control and Communications (C3) of his army. That involves having both Command Posts and own Army Staffs, including own OPD (Operational Planning Department, G-2 and the whole shebang) in order to make a decision. So, Johnny Rico, if you think that being military leader means jumping on the tank which is spearheading the assault on the enemy position, you really should confine yourself to Hollywood, which you already are doing successfully as all your posts so abundantly demonstrate. There is a reason why Army Staffs are usually located within the depth of army deployment plan (it varies in all kinds of things: defense, offense, deployment, re-deployment), that is removed, from immediate front line (even regiment or brigade HQ are NOT on the front line and are “sunk” to some depth of the unit’s operational “strip” and why NO army commander can command and control his army without his staff. That ability requires a helluva lot than just “seeing combat” and no, even Patton didn’t ran in a front of his army’s tank columns.

    Mostly correct, IMHO.
    Mostly, but lacks two elements.

    One is, a personal feel for the …………elements necessary for make that decision.
    Personal……feeling………
    It is not enough to rely on staff work to get all the necessary information to make that decision.
    The Commander would be wise to travel around (minding his safety and security, of course) and see, with his own eyes his own men and material, terrain, feel the weather….stuff like that.

    Second, even more important, is to be seen by the troops.
    A human touch…….
    Sharing a bit of danger, encouraging the troopers, speaking with them, LISTENING to them.

    And yes, sometimes, leading by example at the shwerpunkt.
    Say, a brigade commander with a leading company. Next to the company OC. Translate that into higher levels of CiC.

    And, that is what made Patton really popular.
    He had that way of traveling in a jeep, just with a radioman and a couple of bodyguards, all over the front line. Up to a regiment commander.

    One more thing..
    SPEED.
    If he is with the leading regiment he can grasp the changing situation better and affect the necessary changes faster than if just siting in his command post.
    That also made Patton efficient….and popular.
    BTW, Rommel had a similar approach.

    Now, I know that “Russian school” has some……..misgivings……..about all above, especially that human touch, but there we are.

    BTW, that ‘far away’ (no personal touch thing) worked well in WW2 for Russians I guess.
    Cultural thing, probably.
    You know, elites and holoi poloi. Proper communists. Avangarde and masses. Expendable masses I mean.
    But, in Chechen wars and especially in the latest skirmish in Georgia, I think it didn’t. Especially in the latest. Didn’t the commander of Russian forces lead from the front (true, maybe just a bit too much from the front)?

    • Replies: @Ondrej
    , @Andrei Martyanov
  282. Cyrano says:
    @Authenticjazzman

    Anyone who is naive enough to believe the profoundly inflated and exaggerated “historical” reporting, regarding “tank production” “casualities” or any other aspect of the war, served up by the Soviet propagandists, is either hopelessly brainwashed or stupid beyond hope.

    Hey jizzman, are you playing with yourself again? Just to show you how retarded you are – if USSR inflated all numbers including casualties, how can the USSR generals be guilty of using young man as cannon fodder?

    Remember, casualties were inflated, almost no one died in USSR during the war – it was all a lie made up by Communist propagandists. Do you see how stupid you are? What does MENSA mean anyway? That you are menstruating, or that you are post-menopausal depressed old rag?

  283. Ondrej says:
    @peterAUS

    Now, I know that “Russian school” has some……..misgivings……..about all above, especially that human touch, but there we are.

    Hmm, what Andrei Martyanov try to explain will probably never be understood in Western world due to preconceived ideas.

    Patton was just commander which Red Army had plenty. Compare him with some top Soviet Marshals is to compare different ranks and functions.

    As for human touch – what about Čujkov who was defending Stalingrad and faced probably more Wehrmacht troops than Patton… (but I am not expert)

    Čujkov is buried at request stated in his last will with his soldiers at Mamajev Kurgan, even he had right to be buried in Kremlin Wall …

    This is in case you ask for human touch and be close to battle in Russian way…

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasily_Chuikov

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  284. @Cyrano

    Remember, casualties were inflated, almost no one died in USSR during the war – it was all a lie made up by Communist propagandists.

    What exactly is wrong with you?

    You appear to be a Stalin-apologist and a cyber-bully.

    You just scream vile names at people and claim that anybody who doesn’t have the same opinion as you is an idiot.

    You literally propose than your reading and understanding of history is better than everybody else’s.

    Like, are you serious? Because this seems like evidence of an inferiority complex on your part in the face of a clear understanding of history that others here demonstrate.

    What are you trying to convince people of? That you are an inveterate a-hole?

    You repeatedly don’t directly respond to points or arguments with any counter-evidence or counter-arguments. You use this tactic, that Andrei Martyanov uses as well, of obfuscating and avoiding the point by throwing a blizzard of tangential material at other comments and then waving everybody away by calling them stupid.

    It doesn’t work.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  285. @peterAUS

    But, in Chechen wars and especially in the latest skirmish in Georgia, I think it didn’t. Especially in the latest. Didn’t the commander of Russian forces lead from the front (true, maybe just a bit too much from the front)?

    Well, if you think that you just opened America here (I know you were there in Chechnya) but let me break you some news–there were NO head-on (vstrechnye srazheniya) armored forces operations in Chechnya for a simple reason of Chechens not having any armored forces to start with. I deliberately asked you when was the last time you were in Russia–a question you continuously ignore. If you asked about General Khrulyov, yes he was in the column which moved into Tshinval. In related news, that is how Vatutin was killed by UPA (ambushed), Chernyakhovsky was killed by shell, but in related news, even Stalin several times visited front lines during the war. You also conveniently forgot in my quote this, I specifically bold it for you:

    both Command Posts and own Army Staffs

    Somehow you forgot about those proverbial front-line KPs. Remember documentaries of Great Patriotic War, remember famous shots of Zhukov (representative of Stavka no less) at one of those KPs, you know, including him looking up at fighters flying overhead. You know, Pete, you begin to strike me as an extremely “selective” in what you write. Does phrase “Roki Tunnel” tell you anything? You know, like a teeny-weeny factor in the deployment through a single point of the units of the 58th Army? No, no emotions, no recollections? Including Cheney’s office insisting on bombing that tunnel? Me stupid, thought that that was a defining factor–to get through the tunnel. But what do I know really.

    And, that is what made Patton really popular. He had that way of traveling in a jeep, just with a radioman and a couple of bodyguards, all over the front line. Up to a regiment commander.

    You better update your info on why Paul Fussel, a severely wounded veteran of US Army, a man who left arguably the best book in Anglophone world on WWII, called Patton a “master of chickenshit”, including his (Patton’s) idiotic order for his division and regimental commanders and I quote “to avoid being seen by GIs driving in the opposite direction of assault”. As many in the Third Army questioned it was, “how then, by flying?”.So, if you want to tell me fairy tales about Patton for the first time encountering real attrition (that is being met with actual resistance–you know like getting casualties, or having tanks lost) at the Bulge. Here is what serious military analysts write about him:

    Third Army’s slight advantage in inflicting casualties is not surprising when the terrain, weather, German capability, and Patton’s operational technique are considered. Moreover, it suggests there was nothing brilliant about his performance in the Bulge

    Advance and Destroy, Patton as Commander in the Bulge, JOHN NELSON RICKARD.

    https://www.amazon.com/Advance-Destroy-Commander-American-Warrior/dp/0813134552

    There are some serious Operations Research data there too, but I am sure you know it all and you most likely know about fire density (plotnost’ ognya) and fire impact (ognevoye vozdeistvie) better than me. The same as ratios of opposing forces and how force (Naryad Sil is calculated), you know that mambo-jumbo they teach in Academies, right?

    If you want to discuss with me his campaign in Lorraine, where he faced the whole 7 or 13 tanks and encountered VolksGrenadier Divisions well, you may get busy with this:

    “Few of the Germans defending Lorraine could be considered First-rate troops. Third Army encountered whole battalions made up of deaf men, others of cooks, and others consisting entirely of soldiers with stomach ulcers. The G2 also identified a new series of German formations designated voIksrenadier divisions). These hastily constituted divisions numbered only 10,000.”

    http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a211668.pdf

    Combat Study Institute no less. But it looks like you completely ignore the issue of opposing force here.

    A human touch…….Sharing a bit of danger, encouraging the troopers, speaking with them, LISTENING to them.

    Well, what do ya know, apart from KPs which I (re)mentioned above. Sure, it is a well established fact that Red Army’s battalion, regimental and division commanders, especially during defensive phase but in offensive too didn’t lead troops in the battle (sarcasm), but then again, stupid me, somehow I am constantly back to square one of that implementation of operations’ plans. I’ll be very blunt on your method of discussing things–I deliberately bolded in your quote–how about not pulling my finger? You can try this with some teenage amateur but “listening to them” that is what first-class Red Army military leaders were known for–from Chernyachovsky who was killed while inspecting preparation of the front for operations, which as you may have guessed included “listening to them”, to Tolbukhin known as a very kind man and very loved by subordinates, among many others. Remember, Suvorov “father to soldiers”, and I mean not the Rezun (aka “Suvorov”) whom you almost beginning to remind me about. I hope you understand the difference between WWII and Russo-Georgian War of 2008, in some very crucial aspects. How much that allowance should be made? A huge one, for starters, since scouting in 1944 and that of 2008 was drastically different. So, Pete, you decide how you want to debate here–by presenting concrete documented facts, numbers, etc. Or continue with you platitudes-ridden agenda of finding an excuse for whatever you are trying to find it. So far, and forgive me, you produce an impression of a person who is not up to the task with either with history or… well, fill in the blanks.

    BTW, that ‘far away’ (no personal touch thing) worked well in WW2 for Russians I guess. Cultural thing, probably.

    No, you are just BSing and you know this. But of course, Down Under you may still pass as an “expert”.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  286. @Ondrej

    Hmm, what Andrei Martyanov try to explain will probably never be understood in Western world due to preconceived ideas.

    He is supposedly Russian and a veteran of either first or second Chechnya campaign. I recon he lives Down Under.

    Čujkov is buried at request stated in his last will with his soldiers at Mamajev Kurgan, even he had right to be buried in Kremlin Wall …

    This is in case you ask for human touch and be close to battle in Russian way…

    You see, you are using facts and for some it is a very dangerous commodity.

    • Replies: @Ondrej
  287. peterAUS says:

    It doesn’t work.

    They believe it does.
    The preferred method of…..”debating”….in those circles.
    Get used to it, if you can. Sometimes some good info there.

  288. Cyrano says:
    @Johnny Rico

    Like, are you serious? Because this seems like evidence of an inferiority complex on your part in the face of a clear understanding of history that others here demonstrate.

    You and the jizzman have clear understanding of history? No, what is really wrong with you? Are you a comedian trying your new routine here or what? What clear understanding of history, man? Are you really that delusional? You can still almost pass as normal, but the jizzman looks like he has just recently escaped from some asylum. Give me a break.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  289. @Johnny Rico

    Andrei used to simply be a commenter on this site, commenting as SmoothieX12, if I remember correctly. Ron Unz actually does monitor this site more than one would think and it was he who recognised him as a person who knew a lot about his area of expertise, military matters, enough to subsequently invite him to submit articles which he has done and they have been generally very well received, so “overblown opinion of your own knowledge” isn’t quite cutting it.

    I would not expect to see your own invitation to contribute articles appearing at any time soon though, or mine for that matter.

  290. @Cyrano

    You’re Russian, aren’t you?

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  291. peterAUS says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Wow…….
    Man….how did you handle that staff work before? Or you are getting angrier with age?
    How about this: you write all as you speak to somebody. Then, you go through it and edit out all “angry” parts. Then, you do it again. And then post it.
    I mean, you aren’t talking down to a junior officer in your outfit, really.
    And, this is Western Web site. Guys reading this will get you better.

    Leading from the front, Georgia skirmish:

    If you asked about General Khrulyov, yes he was in the column which moved into Tshinval.

    So, we agree on that (minor detail here) I guess !?

    You know, Pete, you begin to strike me as an extremely “selective” in what you write.

    I don’t know. Could be.
    My point was/is that Patton was very good at moving around battlefield, being seen by troops, being able to assess situation faster than being holed up in a bunker/tent/shelter/trech/whatever, and being able to assert his will at schwerpunkt.
    A lot of other commanders in WW2 were not, and, IMHO, that made Patton operationally faster…..more efficient.

    Somehow you forgot about those proverbial front-line KPs

    Well, actually I didn’t. That’s my point, really. Patton was not using those Command Posts often. He was using his jeep and his feet. As Rommel was using his vehicle.

    You better update your info on why Paul Fussel, a severely wounded veteran of US Army, a man who left arguably the best book in Anglophone world on WWII, called Patton a “master of chickenshit”, including his (Patton’s) idiotic order for his division and regimental commanders and I quote “to avoid being seen by GIs driving in the opposite direction of assault”. As many in the Third Army questioned it was, “how then, by flying?”.

    Well, actually, I do agree with you here. “Blood and guts. His guts and our blood”.

    The next part is about: how would Patton fare if facing what Soviets were facing?
    Well…..a very good question, really. There are tons of “debates” on the Internet about it and we really don’t need to do it here.
    My….feeling…(wasn’t much thinking about it): hard to say, with Western Allies material advantage over Germans. I guess logistics and air-power would mean a lot there. So, can’t have a decent opinion about it.

    “listening to them” that is what first-class Red Army military leaders were known for–from Chernyachovsky who was killed while inspecting preparation of the front for operations, which as you may have guessed included “listening to them”, to Tolbukhin known as a very kind man and very loved by subordinates, among many others.

    Well….how about you post a bit more detail about it?
    We know that Patton was driving around in a jeep during battle. Once he was in front of a leading regiment, actually crossed a river before them. Maybe not smart, but, luck is also what makes a good general great (Napoleon Bonaparte — ‘I know he’s a good general, but is he lucky?).
    That was a part of his charisma. Part of his inspiration, not only to his troops, but armed forces in general and US society in general.
    Importance of that charisma, belief in a leader, can’t be overstated here.

    I actually don’t get what’s your beef here?
    That Patton had some great and some not so great qualities?
    That Russians had harder times fighting with Nazis? Suffered more?
    Or “Who was better, Soviets or Allies”…..well….don’t know, don’t care really.
    That Soviets had more relaxed attitude towards casualties? Yes, I believe that. Why was that, a couple of things:existential fight for survival and untrained people on the “positive” side; common disregard for a little man by Communists on the ‘negative”. Or aristocrats before.
    Or oligarchs now.

    I do stand by my position that Western armed forces have had better record in “personal touch” than Soviets/Russians. From division up.
    And, yes, I do believe it is a cultural thing.

    Besides, I am not an expert. If I were I wouldn’t be posting here. But, I guess I know something. As for experts, title/rank/whatever doesn’t work for me. Seen plenty idiots, generals and PhDs.
    And plenty of them now advising our leaders. No, I am definitely like them for sure.

  292. peterAUS says:
    @peterAUS

    Now….there is one element which is interesting.
    Or at least I found it interesting and, perhaps, thought provoking.

    Casualties.
    Or, in simple words: how many lives is a mission worth?

    I believe it’s one of those questions nobody wants to think, let alone talk about.

    Don’t even know will I be able to present my “case” here.

    Let’s go to the lowest level.

    A platoon is tasked to establish an observation point where artillery fire for a battalion assault would be observed from.
    Without the OP the assault would fail, with, most likely, heavy casualties.
    Time is important, of course.

    So, a pointman.
    If he does his job right, it will be safe…….for him….but slow….for the platoon.
    It will be, most likely, just one ambush along the way, unlikely two. Probably just a couple of guys.
    So…..we push the pointman do go fast………he will “eat a bullet”….we’ll push, maybe even destroy the ambush and move on. Complete our mission.
    Cost: one man.

    Acceptable?

    For the leading company of the battalion, unfortunately, yes. “Him vs 20 of us”.
    For the battalion C.O. yes……….same logic.

    For the pointman…………

    What I am trying to say it was thinking, by Patton, at the time.
    At least from reading his writings.

    We do this fast; it WILL take casualties. Faster we do, less costly it will be overall.
    Thousand men fast…vs 5000 slower.

    That applied to all WW2 leadership at the time.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  293. Cyrano says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    You got me, man. I’ve been trying to disguise the “fact”, but you are too smart for me.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  294. Ondrej says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Maybe it is – at the end – really cultural and language based problem…

  295. Cyrano says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    By creating and believing in stereotypes about other nations, you justify the stereotypes that others believe in regarding your nation – which are not pretty. You see, I was right all along. You are a moron.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  296. @Beefcake the Mighty

    Be grateful. Just imagine what he would be like without the internet.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  297. @Cyrano

    Stereotypes usually have some truth to them, that’s why they persist. What stereotypes are you referring to? You know for sure I’m American? You’re referring to the mindless cheerleading and empty, unfounded pride Americans unquestionably have re. their history of military imperialism? Since I’ve made repeatedly clear that I despise the American empire and acknowledge the Soviet (not Russian) effort and sacrifice in WW2 (in this thread and elsewhere here) it says a lot about your inability to think straight on this issue that you group me in there. Which was exactly my observation about Russians.

    But, I really don’t give two shits what you think about me. You can go back to walking around with a chip on your shoulder about something Patton said 70 years ago and wait for the opportunity to bark at people you think are Americans for not appreciating how much cannon fodder the Soviets provided in WW2. (Keep bitching about what the Poles do with monuments in their country, if you can find the time.)

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  298. @peterAUS

    So, we agree on that (minor detail here) I guess !?

    Agree on what? That it is normal to get one example without main considerations for:

    1. Terrain;
    2. What happens with staffs and COs on the march of the:

    a) regiment;
    b) brigade;
    c) division etc.

    Man….how did you handle that staff work before?

    By means of calling bullshit what it is. I recon you already started to “correct” your statements with this small “insignificant” factor of accounting for actual opposing force. You know those small operational coefficients on which the whole existence of any formation in war hinges.

    The next part is about: how would Patton fare if facing what Soviets were facing?
    Well…..a very good question, really. There are tons of “debates” on the Internet about it and we really don’t need to do it here.

    Evidently he didn’t fare that well when facing a rundown grossly inferior force of volksgrenadier divisions and panzer divisions which were more like panzer battalions.

    Maybe not smart, but, luck is also what makes a good general great (Napoleon Bonaparte — ‘I know he’s a good general, but is he lucky?). That was a part of his charisma. Part of his inspiration, not only to his troops, but armed forces in general and US society in general. Importance of that charisma, belief in a leader, can’t be overstated here.

    Again, platitude in place of actual realities of combat in WWII.

    Well….how about you post a bit more detail about it?

    No, I am not writing here a dissertation on politcal-upbringing (politiko-vospitatelnaya rabota) work among personnel. I just called out what you posted previously.

    I do stand by my position that Western armed forces have had better record in “personal touch” than Soviets/Russians. From division up. And, yes, I do believe it is a cultural thing.

    Then you really need to get a primer of Paul Fussel of whom I mentioned many times here.

    https://www.amazon.com/Wartime-Understanding-Behavior-Second-World/dp/0195065778/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

    I cannot constantly repeat my responses to the same question of:

    The next part is about: how would Patton fare if facing what Soviets were facing?
    Well…..a very good question, really.

    I have an answer. When my book publishes I’ll send you a copy. Meanwhile you may expand your horizons by reading:

    Advance and Destroy, Patton as Commander in the Bulge, JOHN NELSON RICKARD.

    https://www.amazon.com/Advance-Destroy-Commander-American-Warrior/dp/0813134552

    Gives a good operational insight, it also implicitly shows a colossal differences between Eastern and Western Fronts.

    Seen plenty idiots, generals and PhDs.

    Same here. It is just that Western part of this equation is really down right scary precisely because of lack of any situational awareness of the outside world. I guess it is a cultural thing.

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
  299. @peterAUS

    We do this fast; it WILL take casualties. Faster we do, less costly it will be overall.
    Thousand men fast…vs 5000 slower. That applied to all WW2 leadership at the time.

    You just basically re-quoted the excerpt from the book by Rickard. Meanwhile, I never encountered the war without casualties and high-risk actions. Famous BSer Victor Rezun, however, once asked his British bosses a question, here I quote Patrick Armstrong:

    a Soviet defector, wrote that he used to pose a problem to NATO officers. You have four battalions, three attacking and one in reserve; the battalion on the left has broken through easily, the one in the middle can break through with a little more effort, the one on the right is stopped. Which one do you reinforce with your reserve battalion? He claimed that no NATO officer ever gave the correct answer. Which was, forget the middle and right battalions, reinforce success; the fourth battalion goes to help the lefthand one and, furthermore, you take away the artillery support from the other two and give it to the battalion on the left. Soviet war-fighting doctrine divided their forces into echelons, or waves. In the case above, not only would the fourth battalion go to support the lefthand battalion but the followup regiments would be sent there too. Breakthroughs are reinforced and exploited with stunning speed and force. General von Mellenthin speaks of this in his book Panzer Battles when he says that any Soviet river crossing must be attacked immediately with whatever the defender has; any delay brings more and more Soviet soldiers swimming, wading or floating across. They reinforce success no matter what. The third point was the tremendous amount of high explosives that Soviet artillery could drop on a position. In this respect, the BM-21 Grad was a particular standout, but they had plenty of guns as well.

    So, Patton didn’t discover anything new. In fact, and that is the problem–he is secondary and derivative in every of “his” ideas. But, I am sure he had a “human touch” as you insist here–a rather dubious statement against the empirical evidence to the contrary. Speed (time) is a strategic factor. You asked about Zeelow Heights earlier–I posted for you a scan from Krivosheev. I circled in red a percentage figure but it is NOT the most important operational number there when related to Zeelow. This number(s) is not circled. Since I am spending too much time responding to what basically boils down to a shaky or overly generalized issues, I would (hope dies last) expect from you an answer to a very simple question–what is the most important number in Krivosheev’s table as related to Zeelow Heights.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  300. @Andrei Martyanov

    And, of course, the Red Army might have had more experienced and talented generals if Stalin hadn’t purged and executed them all before the war.

    Awkward.

    But I’m just speculating.

    “The purge of the Red Army and Military Maritime Fleet removed three of five marshals (then equivalent to five-star generals), 13 of 15 army commanders (then equivalent to three- and four-star generals), eight of nine admirals (the purge fell heavily on the Navy, who were suspected of exploiting their opportunities for foreign contacts), 50 of 57 army corps commanders, 154 out of 186 division commanders, 16 of 16 army commissars, and 25 of 28 army corps commissars.”
    -wikipedia

    • Replies: @Ondrej
  301. Ondrej says:
    @Johnny Rico

    Again with this myth of purges.. if you use google translate there you can read bios of Red Army Generals Jewish ethnicity or roots.. who received their rank before 1946.

    http://www.jewmil.com/biografii/itemlist/category/29-poluchivshie-zvanie-do-1946

    you can compare this with list of oppressed commanders (but many of the are not related to events before war)

    http://www.jewmil.com/biografii/itemlist/category/154-repressirovannye-voenachalniki

    but it would give you idea and you could learn that life is more difficult – see following example

    (be careful I did not check machine translation

    http://www.jewmil.com/biografii/item/272-aleksandrov-aleksandr-petrovich

    In April — October 1937 — the Civil war in Spain, the adviser to the commander of the fleet of the Republican Navy. Upon returning Home in December, 1937, dismissed from the service. In February 1938 repressed. In February 1940, rehabilitated and restored in the personnel of the Navy.
    From June 1940 — commander of the Novorossiysk naval base of black sea fleet.
    During the great Patriotic war in July — October 1941, commander of the Azov flotilla, which took part in the defense of the Crimea. In October 1941 removed from his post as commander for violation of military discipline while conducting combat operations aimed at the disposal of the Command and control of the Navy. In November 1941, captain 1-St rank Alexandrov arrested.On 3 December 1941 he was dismissed from the Navy. In January 1942, according to the results of the investigation released and appointed head of the Department of the Historical Department of the Chief of naval staff. From July — December 1942, the chief of staff of the Leningrad naval base. Participated in the preparation and landing in the Ust-Tosno (August 1942), in an offensive operation with the forcing of the Neva at the Neva Dubrovka (September 1942). From December 1942 until February 1944 the chief of staff of Ladoga flotilla.In may 1943 awarded the order of red banner for the personal, leading the troops crossing the Neva river the Neva operational group,showing courage. From February 1944 the commander of the naval base in Luga. June 1944 — the commander of the Leningrad naval base.In July 1944, the captain of the first rank Alexandrov was awarded the order of Patriotic war 1-St degree for the strengthening of the headquarters of the Ladoga military flotilla and the operational implementation of the tasks set for it by trawling the fairways and the Neva Bay,which allowed to perform a task fleet deployment.

    More about purges: (comparing Soviet and yes U.S army purges)

  302. annamaria says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    You still did not get it – this conversation with Martyanov is about human dignity.
    Dignity:
    “1. bearing, conduct, or speech indicative of self-respect or appreciation of the formality or gravity of an occasion or situation.
    2. nobility or elevation of character; worthiness: the dignity of sentiments.
    3. a sign or token of respect”
    Please, ponder. It seems that you are a teenage girl who still needs to learn a thing or two about the history of the 20th-century and about dignity, like the ability of humans to remember and honor the fallen soldiers.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  303. @Cyrano

    The soviet propagandist historical report stating the Russians somehow managed to manufacture 75 000 tanks, if taken out of the “Newsspeak” mode and translated into actual fact, indicates they were probably lucky enough to put together 750 said combat vehicles, which spread over a front-line scenario still amounts to a formidable force to reckon with.

    The Russians set all new records with their dishonest, perverse, bizarre reporting of the events of WW2, and anyone who lends one ounce of credence to ANY of the Russian propaganda of that era is beyond help.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro jazz musician.

    PS to Cyrano, in the US we have a special term for jerks like yourself, that being Jive-ass.

  304. Cyrano says:
    @Johnny Rico

    Don’t try to imagine. You are too stupid. Your imagination will fail you.

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
  305. Cyrano says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    You are trying to offend the Russians by believing that they are like me – or at least like the person that I present myself as to be on the internet – lots of anger, which is not pretty, but stupidity always makes me angry.

    Maybe in the final analysis my anger can also be interpreted as stupidity, and I can live with that. But you assumptions that you found a proof of what the Russians are really like by assuming that someone that you don’t like is a Russian is hilarious.

    And by the way, I take that as a compliment – someone calling me a Russian – I know that wasn’t the intention, the intention was to offend the Russians, not to compliment me and I feel bad if I had unintentionally brought some bad reputation on the Russians – whom I admire, but I can’t be faulted for someone’s stupidity for assuming something that I never intended to insinuate.

    I think also based on your comment that you are miss-referencing me with someone else’s comments, but that understandable for someone with confused mind. You don’t know nothing about the Russians or their history or Eastern Europe and until you put your thoughts together, you have no business spreading your wisdom here.

  306. like the ability of humans to remember and honor the fallen soldiers.

    This may sound paradoxical but small historic fact. US Navy’s DE 413 USS Samuel B. Roberts. Small destroyer escort (only 1 350 tons of displacement) does an act of exceptional heroism rarely encountered in history–fought as a battleship against overwhelming odds in the Battle Off Samar, as part of Taffy III group against actual 23-ship Imperial Japanese Navy’s task force, including attacking heavy cruiser Chokai, torpedoed it, then with remaining 127-mm gun set ablaze the bridge of another heavy-cruiser Chikuma and was sunk literally in the blaze of glory. Heroism of the crew and her CO Copland are remarkable. Do you know what this heroic ship and his crew “earned” in pop culture? Here it is:

    The television show Star Trek Deep Space 9 featured a starship named “Samuel B. Roberts” in the 1999 episode “What You Leave Behind”. The Miranda-class cruiser appears briefly as a background ship during the final battle of the Dominion War.[citation needed]
    The ship has been subject of scale model kits:

    1/700 scale plastic model kit, by PitRoad / Skywave.[4]
    1/16″ scale wood model kit by BlueJacket Shipcrafters, Inc.[5]

    No song, no movie, which this feat of heroism absolutely deserves but no, nothing, really. Why? I don’t know. I have my suspicions but how can one not immortalize this is incomprehensible. Russians certainly did that to a much earlier ship Cruiser Varyag (and cannon-boat Koreetz) in Russo-Japanese War. In fact, small Samuel Roberts in some sense parallels Varyag. But Russians have movies, song (written by German astonished by Russian heroism), which is now official march of Soviet/Russian Navy, books, memorials, you name it. Yet, Samuel Roberts remains known only to a few buffs of the history of Pacific War. Is it because she sunk and only part of her crew survived? Possibly. There was no happy-end for her.

    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
  307. peterAUS says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    You have four battalions, three attacking and one in reserve; the battalion on the left has broken through easily, the one in the middle can break through with a little more effort, the one on the right is stopped. Which one do you reinforce with your reserve battalion? He claimed that no NATO officer ever gave the correct answer.

    Imagine that.

    Have you read

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Not-Mentioned-Despatches-History-Mythology/dp/0718830164

    As for that “human touch” in Western armies, well:
    Patton got relieved from his command after slapping a soldier.
    with

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shtrafbat

    Remind us, please, again, how many of such units were in US and UK military in WW2.

    I think we could all benefit if not disputing the facts but trying to understand “why”.
    I pointed before on some possible reasons for that “why” and one of reasons is, IMHO, overall attitude of ruling elites in Russian society towards “holoi poloi”.
    The attitude that is pervasive even today.

    • Replies: @ondrej
    , @Andrei Martyanov
  308. @Andrei Martyanov

    ” Germans astonished by Russian heroism”

    Okay we give in : you Russians are and have been the most heroic, bravest, most innovative, creative, intellectual, imaginative, superior humans on earth.

    Now just one certain thing puzzles myself and that being : The Russians have being imitating and copying American Jazz music for many decades, there is even a thriving Jazz scene in Russia, so just why are they attempting to recreate the very same music idiom which has it’s home in the USA, instead of creating their own brand of “Jazz”, which of course would be compelled to take on a new name, seeing as “Jazz” is the American version of this music language, period.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army Vet, and pro jazz musician.

  309. @Cyrano

    What you apparently are not noticing, my Dear Cyrano, is that for a guy who is so stupid and lacking so much historical insight, I sure do seem to ask the right questions here and push the right buttons to get YOUR blood flowing.

    Here’s another one.

    See if you can wrap your head around this.

    Do you really believe Stalin and the Red Army were ever even capable of mounting an operation of the magnitude and complexity of Operation Overlord?

    And also, The Russians made terms with the Germans in 1917 – why wouldn’t they have in 1944 or 1945 if things had gone in that direction?

    You are slow. I just dance around you. Fly like a butterfly, sting like a bee.

  310. ondrej says:
    @peterAUS

    Strafbat..

    In western culture is worth to make movie and be proud of..

    The Dirty Dozen

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061578/

    but on Eastern front it means to be ashamed.

    it seems to be like double standards to me…

    and yes whole population when goes to army changes magically to some saints – even former troublemakers – so there are no reasons to punish them and by some accident you need to punish someone put him in nice jail supply with food and rest, while rest of country is fighting for survival.

    Maybe you see some logic in this, – me not.

  311. @peterAUS

    IMHO, overall attitude of ruling elites in Russian society towards “holoi poloi”.
    The attitude that is pervasive even today.

    I repeat the question:

    1. When were you last time in Russia. Evidently, that you also have no concept at all of modern Russian Armed Forces–it shines through practically in your every post. It would take me about an hour to show that you do not know what you are talking about.

    2. Pontificating about hoi poloi from Down Under, which was and is a staunch supporter of an atrocity in the Middle East which saw millions innocent people killed, maimed, displaced–are you for real?

    Remind us, please, again, how many of such units were in US and UK military in WW2.

    None. Except, of course, execution of private Slovik. Read Fussel about what was happening on the eve of D-Day. You know what? I think you have no clue and, in fact, most likely is a made up internet persona, an avatar–I know many Afghan War and Chechen Campaigns (both) veterans, some of them are my class-mates and all of them know what density of fire is. You obviously also missed on Simonov, both novel and the movie. Any person who ever experienced professionally and even in the lowest (platoon up) tactical command dangers of operational zone or combat will have no difficulty understanding the difference between Manstein’s Tank Armies circa 1942 and volksgrenadier divisions circa the end of 1944. FYI, google Wehrmacht’s penal units. Evidently you also never heard of Panzer Group Pfifer simply running out of fuel in Ardennes.

    I think we could all benefit if not disputing the facts but trying to understand “why”.

    Again, if you do not know (which you don’t evidently) what was Wehrmacht on offensive in 1941 and 1942, at the peak of its power and form, you may focus your attention to Western Europe in 1940 and count how many weeks it lasted against it. I don’t need to “try understand anything”, I already know it and know it for a fact. You are here not for “understanding”, as I already said, most likely you are here to BS. Per Falklands, I am not even going to discuss this with you since demoralization of Argentina’s contingent there was a well known fact in 1982 and there are other, purely naval issues, which even with Argentina having only 5 Exosets , free falling bombs and second generation of aircraft, still being able to make it blade-running for RN. Should Argentinean Air Force have managed to repeat what it did to HMS Sir Galahad and in general capitalize on British awkward approach to amphibious landings–the situation might have been very different.

    Let me reiterate again, you are completely detached from any of modern Russia’s realities, civilian or otherwise, and you have no clue about Russia’s Armed Forces–you are simply sinking on even basic staff, strategy and operational issues. Not a single substantive comment except sappy sentimental BS. Such as your example with Khrulyov abundantly demonstrated. Want to learn about Chechnya (where you supposedly have been) read late General Troshev’s memoirs, he sure as hell way more qualified than you to pass judgements. Again, if you do not understand the difference between realities of Eastern and Western Fronts than I doubt you ever served. If you served and you “consult”, say Australian institutions, there is no surprise then that they have no clue and we have today in the world what we have. You “culture” shtick is rather tiresome and you obviously never read as it is supposed to be read War And Peace.

    As for that “human touch” in Western armies, well: Patton got relieved from his command after slapping a soldier.

    For what, from the top of my head, three days?

    P.S. I don’t think so that you are Russian.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @Johnny Rico
  312. peterAUS says:
    @ondrej

    You serious ?

    Hollywood movie vs reality.

    it seems to be like double standards to me…

    Maybe you see some logic in this, – me not.

    How about you don’t do that anymore? Please.
    Don’t make people here snicker.
    Embarrassing really.

    ondrej….reminds of Andrey.

    You are doing disservice to both your side/people and readers here.
    Just don’t do that.

  313. @ondrej

    but on Eastern front it means to be ashamed.

    Paul Fussel recites astonishing numbers of desertions on the eve of D-Day. As he states, all prisons in Great Britain were packed with deserters, often two person cells being filled with up to twelve deserters. But don’t worry it is all cool. A “cultural thing”. You see, it is like a bomb, if it is a “democratic” one it hurts less than “totalitarian” one. I guess our common friend here should come up with new field manual which would necessitate a reciting of Bill of Rights or even Magna Carta when blowing another wedding in Afghanistan by J-DAM.

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
  314. peterAUS says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Man….please…….

    Calm the fuck down.
    Not healthy at your age.

    Besides, you do know a lot of things.
    And, my impression is (true, not a very good judge of character) that you are actually not a bad guy.
    A bit wild, but, O.K. in my book.

    So…please…..when you write things here try to get into other guy’s mindset; try to understand him.
    Use your staff experience as when dealing with the “Enemy” part of the METT-T.

    Then, when you write all that, edit it.
    Go through the text several times if necessary and edit out all personal information, angry parts and such.
    Put some paragraphs in that stream of consciousness.
    And then post it.

    I just got an impression that we have a miscommunication here. Not a disagreement which I was/is/shall be expecting, but just ….weird miscommunication.

    Now, I am not going to refute all your post because it just doesn’t make much sense.
    Just this, though:

    Again, if you do not understand the difference between realities of Eastern and Western Fronts than I doubt you ever served

    I mean……what’s the connection even if I don’t?
    I could’ve been a major (example…don’t jump on it) in Portuguese army. Never much interested in that WW2 topic, slept on classes, barely passed the paper.

    P.S. I don’t think so that you are Russian.

    Is that bad?

    I could be an Estonian, couldn’t I?
    Would’ve known a lot about the topic, wouldn’t I?
    Maybe even worked a lot with your types, a?
    Actually, you could even remind me of a professor of mine ages ago. Not you, mind you, but the type. We liked the guy. Wild but cool. During lectures. not on exams. Anyway….

    You think that the Australian government would hire my expertise? Nahh….

    Please, again…just tone this shit down.
    We’ll all like it more.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  315. @Andrei Martyanov

    The Russians killed 2,000,000 Afghan civilians in addition to 90,000 Mujahideen.

    No?

    That’s a lot more than just weddings.

  316. @Andrei Martyanov

    “… General Troshev’s memoirs, he sure as hell way more qualified than you to pass judgements.”

    Explain this. You are now advocating war crimes?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/1308872/Email-from-Russia.html

    That article doesn’t give one much confidence in the Russian military. Maybe I missed something.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  317. @annamaria

    Perhaps I am, but I do know that the Poles (foolish though they may be to accept American guarantees) deserve dignity too, and they don’t deserve to be subordinated to people who have an emotional obsession with the war and have a very different perspective on the aftermath.

  318. peterAUS says:
    @Johnny Rico

    Well…well…..

    Plenty….plenty to criticize about The First Chechen War, from the top of Russian political leadership to Grachev and his staff. Most of Russian senior leadership actually.

    But……that Telegraph character is, well, just a smug arsehole.

    US, Chinese , British and, maybe, Japanese armed forces (only capable of that at the time, in that order) would’ve probably inflicted the same level of destruction and civilian casualties.

    Just no way around it.

    The defender was just very good and exceptionally ruthless.

    Except in professional circles, West in general simply has wrong picture about that war in general and Grozny in particular.
    No intention on my part to challenge that.

    But, if that was just a nudge to unleash Russian counter in debate here……brace yourself.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  319. peterAUS says:
    @peterAUS

    Marcus Warren in Moscow, exclusively for news.telegraph.co.uk

    Arsehole.

    The author chronicles one of the fiercest battles for control of a world city in decades ñ with hardly a mention of the people who lived there. He even includes a tally of dead and wounded on both sides devoid of any reference to civilian casualties, of which there must have been thousands, at least as many as the military’s losses.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Saint-L%C3%B4

    American bombardments caused heavy damage (up to 95% of the city was destroyed) and a high number of casualties, which resulted in the martyr city being called “The Capital of Ruins”

    Casualties and losses
    3,000

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Aachen

    Casualties and losses
    5,000 casualties[1] 5,000 casualties
    5,600 prisoners[1

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Inchon

    Casualties and losses
    Land:
    US: 222 killed
    800 wounded
    Sea:
    2 killed
    9 wounded
    2 cruisers damaged
    3 destroyers damaged
    1 armed sampan damaged
    1 LST lost and 3 damaged
    Air:
    1 aircraft destroyed Land:
    1,350 killed
    1 fortress damaged
    Sea:
    1 patrol boat sunk
    Air:
    1 aircraft destroyed

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Pyongyang_(1950)

    Nothing………

    Etc……etc……etc…..

    Smug…stupid…arsehole…….

  320. @peterAUS

    And, my impression is (true, not a very good judge of character) that you are actually not a bad guy.

    And that relates to combined arms operations of WWII exactly how? For all I care, I could be a complete ass-hole, or at least perceived as such, and it doesn’t bother me in the least. I prefer to work with facts, albeit even facts are not knowledge–they have a long way to go before they become one.

  321. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @annamaria

    Graves aren’t “to” people, they’re “of” people. Desecrating a grave would be a crime against humanity.

    If, however, the U.S. had put up some sort of monument to itself in Paris or Berlin, I cannot but think either country would be within its rights to destroy it.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  322. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    We don’t really have that many WWII monuments in the US.

    Here’s a list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:World_War_II_memorials_in_the_United_States .

    The giant National Memorial is a monstrosity; it looks awful and frankly I don’t much care whether it mentions Russians or not because it is really only supposed to commemorate American war dead. I wish they’d figured some other way of doing so.

    Likewise we don’t have a victory cult of the proportions you did after the war. Thanks for putting us in your monuments, it’s rather nice. I’m also glad that you see fit to commemorate even your enemies, as with the Blue Division memorial in St. Petersburg.

  323. @Anon

    Yes. The Poles have no intention of disturbing cemeteries containing Red Army dead.

  324. poop says:
    @Authenticjazzman

    Wow authenticjazzman. You sure are smart.

    So, can your 150+ IQ and “Mensa” qualifications explain to us how Germany defeated the USSR in WWII since the Soviets accrued significantly more casualties than did the Germans? Or the DPKR and China were annihilated by the US and South Korea in the early 1950′s based upon attrition rates?

    The world thirsts for your knowledge, scholarly genius! Enlighten us. We are all so stupid as to assume the US lost in Vietnam. Maybe we need intellectuals like you to redefine “lost” and “won” for us in order to be permitted to sip at the font of knowledge from which you spew.

    Also, jazz is music for the senile elderly and douchebags. My inferior brain recommends that you don’t advertise the fact that you propagate this musical abomination as a credential to your obviously superior online intellect. I’m sure the other “Mensa” members who frequent internet message boards and comments sections would agree.

  325. ” also Jazz is music for the senile elderly and douchbags”

    Look Buddy Jazz music is loved and appreciated around the entire globe, with Jazz scenes in the most remote areas. : Russia, Japan, etc.
    In the US there are Jazz studies offered at hundreds of colleges and universities, and the enrollment, by young college kids is tremendous.
    You have no clue as to what you are blathering about, and such a remark is so absurd and off the wall, that you cannot be taken serious.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army Vet, and pro jazz performer.

  326. Jazz is fine but Blues rules and has always been the far greater influence.

    You cannot be taken seriously is the expression, not serious. For a supposed “Mensa” qualified person you appear to lack the required brain wattage to be an actual Mensa member, perhaps that explains your use of quotation marks.

    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
  327. @NoseytheDuke

    ” Jazz is fine but blues rules”

    If you had any knowledge of this subject you would know that Jazz evolved out of Blues, and Jazz is actually the same concept as Blues using much more sophisticated chordal structures such as present within the tunes of the “Great American Songbook”.
    The magnificent Charlie Parker was in essence a Blues player who lended his Bluesy style to his solos on standard show tunes.

    “Serious” : “Seriously” : The English language is bursting with contradictions and there are no actual natural laws concerning Grammar, Spelling etc, rather the arbitrary “Rules” of English have been established by “Authorities” who determined what is “Right” or “Wrong”.

    “For a supposed Mensa member you appear to lack the required brain wattage to be an actual Mensa member”.

    So why don’t you just contact them and inform them that according to your criteria, I am not qualified as a member, and perhaps they will demand that I return my gold-embossed Membership Certificate, which I have held for over forty year years.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army Vet, and pro Jazz artist.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All The Saker Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Hundreds of POWs may have been left to die in Vietnam, abandoned by their government—and our media.
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.