RSSChina was not penitent. Italy sent China aid and the warm gesture was returned. China is also building good will for the BRI against NATO/EU/US geopolitics, and in the developing world. Why do you think Russia chose now to tank oil? CVid19 will have real geopolitical implications.
or agent provocateur
Ron Unz,
Each of your articles has strengthened the arguments. Also supportive is that China acted in exactly the manner one would expect for a bioweapon (not a highly toxic flu), particularly the construction of special permanent infectious disease hospitals in an amazingly short time. Russia followed suit.
It is almost as if they expected more new pandemics. Of course plausible deniability works both ways, and if your scenario is correct, retaliation seems likely – particularly since the US health care system has been revealed as singularly incapable of addressing a pandemic – i.e., economic damage is magnified due to structural incompetence and corruption.
Given the uncertainty of vaccines and variants, this fall would present an ideal opportunity.
I just guess that I will wait a bit longer, until I see the results of the Stage III trials in process, where three quarters of the U.S. population have been inoculated with the vaccines.That strategy - waiting - is eminently sensible, for those in a position to actually do so.Unfortunately, with the bulk of the political and corporate classes across the Western world having sold their souls to Satan and the Club of Rome, the option of waiting is becoming less available to the teeming masses of common folk as Klaus Schwab's Great Reset is forcefully rammed down our collective throats.For increasing numbers of beaten-down citizens, waiting is not so easy if you want to earn a living, pay your bills, keep a roof over your head or just get enough food to survive from one day to the next.Trust me, I know - we're seeing the World Economic Forum's touchy-feely goodness up close and personal down here in Melbourne, Victoria, where the health-giving benefits of the Corona Chan "vaccines" and never-ending "booster shots" are being imposed with an iron fist by full-term abortionist Dictator Dan (with the full collusion of the Australian Federal Government led by God-bothering closet Satanist PM Morrison) as he resurrects the Fourth Reich - Australian style!
https://www.rebelnews.com/kill_dans_billMaybe some of us can wait it out - to see just what the "vaccines" are really doing to the supposedly "vaccinated" - by hiding out in an attic somewhere for a few years.That seems less likely when we already have reports of the Australian Army now training to go door-to-door to drag people out into the streets to forcefully inject them with experimental gene therapies, and hunt down anyone who tries to escape...
https://www.bitchute.com/video/2Zug6773hwz2/Perhaps, given his cultural heritage and undisputed historical knowledge, Mr. Unz might be able to relate to these developments on a personal level.Replies: @ISL, @Ed Case, @Johnny Smoggins, @Kratoklastes, @Wizard of Oz, @John Hagan
Bernard and others, As LD noted, for many daily activities, proof of vaccination is not rigorously checked.
True. So far.Replies: @ISL
Bernard and others, As LD noted, for many daily activities, proof of vaccination is not rigorously checked.
True. So far.Replies: @ISL
Bernard and others, As LD noted, for many daily activities, proof of vaccination is not rigorously checked.
On the positive – the dysfunctionality that characterizes US society at all levels suggests likely will continue, and most likely will become even more dysfunctional.
That said, software to crack and make QR codes is not hard to find.
Because strike engenders counter-strike. Is your immune system ready?
what a well supported argument!
Replies: @ISL
"As Gerasimov told international interlocutors on the outbreak of the war, ‘I command the second most powerful Army in the world’. Separately Gerasimov told British counterparts that Russia had achieved conventional military parity with the US."
[...]
Looks like they drank the same Kool-Aid types like The Saker and Martyanov were dispensing to their hapless followers.
IMO Chinese military power overtook Russia's c.2010 and relative to the US, it was basically no contest since the USSR ended.
Karlin neglects typical readiness of NATO weapons, which are around 30% in the US, lower in Germany, plus the EU has underinvested for the last 6 years, and Russia and China have over-invested. As he notes, he has no military experience.
Interesting point and argument, which seems to be shared by NATO, since they recently significantly increased their rapid response forces from 13,000 troops in 2014, then 40,000 troops post-Crimea annexation, to a planned 300,000+ troops going forward.With Finland joining NATO, overall alliance readiness should also increase/improve even further, since Finland has one of the highest military readiness levels globally.However, maintaining high levels of military readiness is expensive, and I think that was the reason why NATO had opted for that lower military readiness route in the past. We had a lengthy discussion on this topic a few years back: Can Russia afford to be a great power? https://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-other-new-revolutionary-russian-weapons-systems-asats/?showcomments#comment-2418469I also discussed in a recent comments thread from this year, that both Russia's, but especially China's economic capacity and therefore their military threat/readiness levels are likely greatly exaggerated:
Karlin neglects typical readiness of NATO weapons, which are around 30% in the US, lower in Germany, plus the EU has underinvested for the last 6 years, and Russia and China have over-invested.
- https://www.unz.com/pescobar/putin-the-situation-is-to-a-certain-extent-revolutionary/?showcomments#comment-5632746
China’s military expenditure is about $300 billion or about 1.7% of their officially proclaimed, nominal GDP of about $18 trillion for 2021.If we assume that China’s true/real, nominal GDP is between $8-9 trillion (or about 40-50% of the officially reported figures), those $300 billion of Chinese defense/military spending would be about 3.75-3.3% of nominal GDP, which would be more realistic and more in line with Russia and the U.S.
link:
"See for yourself: (no need for translation other than “ВСУ” meaning “armed forces of the Ukraine”).
What this video shows are two attempts by the Ukrainian forces to attack: first LDNR forces and then the Wagner PMCs. What happens next is predictable: first, you see a small-arms exchange of fire, then the Russians use mortars. Russian very precise artillery strikes come next. Then full-scale MLRS attacks followed by even more strikes by a pair of Su-25 and one single Su-34. According to Russian sources, in this (very small) attack, all (most?) Ukrainians were killed while the Russians did not suffer any casualties. Notice that the Ukrainian soldiers, while definitely brave, have absolutely no support. Notice also the tiny size of the attacking force: the Ukrainians used to attack with several “brigades” (well, kind of), now they are down to squad/platoon level engagements!
And that kind of needless butchery happens every day, day after day after day after day"
Russian forces are not in trenches – they have mobility and air support. They also have unlimited artillery shells. They also have stand off missiles. They also have weapons that dont break down after firing for a day. And they do not rely on long logistics lines that can be bombed.
Interesting point and argument, which seems to be shared by NATO, since they recently significantly increased their rapid response forces from 13,000 troops in 2014, then 40,000 troops post-Crimea annexation, to a planned 300,000+ troops going forward.With Finland joining NATO, overall alliance readiness should also increase/improve even further, since Finland has one of the highest military readiness levels globally.However, maintaining high levels of military readiness is expensive, and I think that was the reason why NATO had opted for that lower military readiness route in the past. We had a lengthy discussion on this topic a few years back: Can Russia afford to be a great power? https://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-other-new-revolutionary-russian-weapons-systems-asats/?showcomments#comment-2418469I also discussed in a recent comments thread from this year, that both Russia's, but especially China's economic capacity and therefore their military threat/readiness levels are likely greatly exaggerated:
Karlin neglects typical readiness of NATO weapons, which are around 30% in the US, lower in Germany, plus the EU has underinvested for the last 6 years, and Russia and China have over-invested.
- https://www.unz.com/pescobar/putin-the-situation-is-to-a-certain-extent-revolutionary/?showcomments#comment-5632746
China’s military expenditure is about $300 billion or about 1.7% of their officially proclaimed, nominal GDP of about $18 trillion for 2021.If we assume that China’s true/real, nominal GDP is between $8-9 trillion (or about 40-50% of the officially reported figures), those $300 billion of Chinese defense/military spending would be about 3.75-3.3% of nominal GDP, which would be more realistic and more in line with Russia and the U.S.
Given that the US military increases every year and is the vast contributor to NATO (lets ignore Turkey as not western friendly), its hard to argue that the decision on lower readiness was to save money as opposed to funneling more cash into high profit wonderwaffen that do not work and boondoggles in Afghanistan where a gallon of gas costs $500 bucks. Readiness is not profitable. And that is why I do not believe it will change. Its still not profitable.
I prefer to compare economies by either steel manufacturing or power (terrawatts) used – IMO, other values are all propaganda from all countries – and worthless. Now you can argue that the US doesnt need to pour steel because it has twitter and facebook and google and prints trillions to give to Blackrock. But try firing them out of a howitzer.
FYI,Finland has 53rd strongest military but artillery capability sets them apart
But try firing them out of a howitzer.
Plus, NATO artillery is much more accurate and precise than Russian artillery, i.e. more economical and efficient... The Yanks bring economy and efficiency to the war table. On the other hand, records show that the Russian artillery is taking on average 120 each to hit and destroy a single target, which has at times brought their artillery expenditure up to 50-60,000 rounds daily in this conflict. - https://archive.ph/V4mr5
Finland has the consensus biggest artillery force in Europe with a whopping 1,500 pieces reported to be in operation in 2022, including 700 Howitzers, 700 heavy mortars and 100 multiple rocket launcher systems.
If one takes Karlin’s numbers as correct, and adds in 30% readiness, the US is NOT ahead of China or Russia. I was not trying to recalculate Karlin’s effort as that is a PhD thesis level effort, and almost certainly a waste of time given how everything is classified.
The same howitzers that need repairs after 12 hours of firing?
and
https://corporalfrisk.com/2018/11/24/the-long-and-the-short-of-finnish-guns/
suggests that maybe far less in Finland (assuming Turkey doesn’t torpedo their NATO app), and are they really going to be of use in Ukraine?
More accurate assumes GPS, which doesn’t work in Russian EW-controlled space.
And no one has a clue how many shells Russia needs to hit a target (are you on the Russian general staff?).
This has been the original point of my first comment in this thread and Anatoly Karlin's main argument, namely that the Russian general staff is clueless or "deluded" as he put it, and therefore should not be taken seriously:
And no one has a clue how many shells Russia needs to hit a target (are you on the Russian general staff?).
- https://archive.ph/0KALQ#selection-393.0-393.275
And if they were actually unironically thinking they were superior to China and at any kind of parity with the US in 2021 I would myself have called them deluded and questioned their connection with reality, it's totally absurd even just from GDP and R&D base considerations.
- https://archive.ph/6xhpJ#selection-1049.0-1057.11If Russian artillery fires up to 60,000 shells a day, and they would destroy a target with only 1 to 4 shells/rounds like it is the case for U.S. and NATO high-accuracy and -precision artillery, Russia would have easily and already won the war.This should be common sense!? Why do you think Putin declared mobilization for his "special military operation" after HIMARS started hitting Russian ammunition depots, and despite that Russia still had to retreat from Kherson, etc., if Russian artillery would be as accurate and precise as U.S. or NATO artillery, as it appears you and the Russian general staff claim and believe!?Replies: @emerging majority, @ISL
Based on these rough estimates, the Armed Forces of Russia use approximately 67,000 units of rocket and artillery ammunition per day. Approximately, this corresponds to data from the Ukrainian side, according to which Russian forces fire about 50,000–60,000 shells per day (NV.ua, June 14).
This has been the original point of my first comment in this thread and Anatoly Karlin's main argument, namely that the Russian general staff is clueless or "deluded" as he put it, and therefore should not be taken seriously:
And no one has a clue how many shells Russia needs to hit a target (are you on the Russian general staff?).
- https://archive.ph/0KALQ#selection-393.0-393.275
And if they were actually unironically thinking they were superior to China and at any kind of parity with the US in 2021 I would myself have called them deluded and questioned their connection with reality, it's totally absurd even just from GDP and R&D base considerations.
- https://archive.ph/6xhpJ#selection-1049.0-1057.11If Russian artillery fires up to 60,000 shells a day, and they would destroy a target with only 1 to 4 shells/rounds like it is the case for U.S. and NATO high-accuracy and -precision artillery, Russia would have easily and already won the war.This should be common sense!? Why do you think Putin declared mobilization for his "special military operation" after HIMARS started hitting Russian ammunition depots, and despite that Russia still had to retreat from Kherson, etc., if Russian artillery would be as accurate and precise as U.S. or NATO artillery, as it appears you and the Russian general staff claim and believe!?Replies: @emerging majority, @ISL
Based on these rough estimates, the Armed Forces of Russia use approximately 67,000 units of rocket and artillery ammunition per day. Approximately, this corresponds to data from the Ukrainian side, according to which Russian forces fire about 50,000–60,000 shells per day (NV.ua, June 14).
1. The Ukrainian forces are dug into concrete.
2. You ignored my point that NATO requires on GPS to hit targets which is suppressed by Russian EW
3. 10 ft of prestressed concrete will stop a nuke. Ukraine had 8 years to pour concrete.
Meanwhile, you are focusing on a minor issue (Russia ain’t running out of shells, the west is), whereas my point was the Karlin analysis. If you use NATO admitted readiness levels on his assessment, it no longer would conclude a US advantage.
I agreed with your point on readiness levels, and so does/did NATO, as I pointed out, by dramatically increasing their rapid response forces recently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_Response_Force#2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine
Meanwhile, you are focusing on a minor issue (Russia ain’t running out of shells, the west is), whereas my point was the Karlin analysis. If you use NATO admitted readiness levels on his assessment, it no longer would conclude a US advantage.
- https://archive.ph/aiXKe#selection-1009.248-1009.396
Russia is firing more than 60,000 shells per day — 10 times more than the Ukrainians, Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Malyar told The Washington Post.
- https://archive.ph/tjcFS#selection-1451.0-1451.125
Currently, Ukrainian forces are firing 2,000 to 4,000 artillery shells a day, a number frequently outmatched by the Russians.
- https://archive.ph/2dCbI#selection-2387.0-2387.129
Between inconsistencies in data and constant improvements in military technology, ranking military powers is extremely difficult.
Perhaps there are parts of the deal that are not being reported in the media
Assange is an Australian citizen currently being held illegally in an English prison, having committed no crime here other than breaching his bail conditions to claim asylum in a foreign embassy. He is not the property of the United States government to trade for anything and I can think of no reason why the Russians might want him.
For Christ's sake, Putin's actions have put the world very close to a nuclear disaster, only a complete idiot would call that the 'responsible thing to do'.Putin tried to negotiate, and when he didn't get what he wanted he launched a war that has already cost tens of thousands of lives, accomplished nothing positive, and has put the world on the brink of Armageddon.Maybe it wasn't such a wise idea after all.It is a replay of the lead up to WW II. Hitler tried to negotiate for a year, and when he didn't get what he wanted, which was modest indeed, the control of Danzig, he invaded. As the ultimate result Germany was destroyed. I think Hitler's actions were justifiable, maybe even 'right', but they led to complete disaster and he should have realized that possibility and weighed it against the potential gain, i.e. control of Danzig.Neither Hitler or Putin realized that they were fighting worldwide Jewry and that Jewry controls the west and is totally unscrupulous and will pay any price in western destruction, they even regard that as a plus .... watch this vid of rabbi after rabbi predicting the desired destruction of the west ... https://www.bitchute.com/video/EwWm3VkdoCJ0/I don't believe anyone knows what will happen, or even has a convincing argument for any potential outcome. There is no off ramp in site. Hopefully one will materialize, but I don't see it.Replies: @Munga Bulga, @meamjojo, @Unintended Consequence, @guibus, @anonymous, @OrangeSmoke, @MarkU, @ISL
Fortunately, Putin responded in the way that best ensured the safety and security of his own government, his own country, and his own people. We would expect any responsible leader to do the same.
I suppose you are ignorant of the cuban missile crisis. Just saying maybe learn a little history.
YEs and no. The constitution makes no pandemic exception, but unconstitutional laws can be on the books long enough to force vaxx all. Legality is not really a useful standard
Are you really arguing that US covid policy was moral? Ask the million dead Iraqi’s about morality! There is no monopoly on amorality by China.
follow the money, dude
What I would give to see a reporter ask Blinken who he works for. Who he really works for.
The Brzezinski 2017 article has not aged well, except that the US has chosen the worst of all the options he outlines – he completely mis-underestimated the arc of Russia (as seen in the table), and it was already clear in 2017 that Russian weapons and EW were advancing while the US was bogged down in developing armor against IEDs.
Fact-free assertions do not make an argument. But if it makes you happy, Eric, sleep well (and pray the pentagon doesn’t make decisions based on your opinion or we are all ashes.
OTH facts on the ground, shortages of Western hardware (12 to 1 advantage in shells), and impossible replacement times say differently.
link please for the armor movement!
The plasma sheath at hypersonic speeds prevents radar or data links (or so it is believed) – Russia may have solved the latter – optical targeting is a possibility.
Fart of the deal. Brilliant.
But he would get a nice funeral in the US (but no media attention), and the big question would be how many bullets did the police riddle the body with.
Serious analysis knows that Nations do not have friends, They have interests. Funny, I thought the US current projection was that China was using BRICS. Or that the Indians were using BRICs to stay on the fence and further their interests. Hmmmm. Project much.
there is this thing called google. Perhaps you have heard of it?
gold maintains value in times of trouble