The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewMike Whitney Archive
"The Withdrawal from Kiev Is Russian Escalation. It's the...Transformation from a Psychological Operation to a Textbook War"
Interview with Marko Marjanović, Editor of Anti-Empire
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Question 1– You think that the Russian Army was spread-too-thin to achieve its strategic objectives in Ukraine, and you point to the (Russian) army’s withdrawal around Kiev to make your point. (“Russia’s effort was very clearly too diluted over too many axes and sectors.”) But, now, you think that things have changed and Russia has started to make the correct military decisions. How have Russia’s plans changed and how will it​ affect upcoming clashes with the Ukrainian Army?

Marko Marjanović, Editor of Anti-Empire.com — It is undeniable that how the Russians were prosecuting the war at the start and how they are prosecuting it now is entirely different. Not just in the way they fight (small detachments vs combined arms) or advance (mad dash vs deliberate) but also on the map itself. Where before they were pouring forces into six different axes of advance they have now pulled back along many of them or even abandoned them entirely to focus on just the two Donbass axes.

There are two possibilities why that is so. One is that they always intended to start by doing A and then shift to B. The other is that they tried A, saw that it wasn’t working, and came up with B that would solve the problems of A.

I think the second is the correct explanation. They are trying something else now because what they tried first didn’t succeed. Yes, they had spread themselves too thin along too many axes. You could see that in the south for example where the relatively small force breaking out from Crimea then spread itself between storming Mariupol, trying to envelop Donbass from the south, and advancing across the Dnieper into southwestern Ukraine. I am not singling out the south because of its significance but because it was such a blatant example of overstretch. You have a force that already represents just 20% of the Russian maneuver strength in the theater and this force then additionally splits itself between three competing objectives. That’s crazy. It is also here that you saw the very first adjustments with much of the territory across the Dnieper abandoned to free up more units for Donbass.

The reason Donbass was crying out for units so badly was that so many were headed to Kiev. Russia has five Military Districts but the Northern one is based around the Northern Fleet so only four have large land forces. All the units from two of these Districts, the Eastern and Central, were tied up in the Kiev operation as well as the premier 1st Guards Tank Army of the Western District covering their southern flank around Sumy. Fully 50% of the Russian strength was in the drive on Kiev. Now, it is true that these forces tied down Ukrainian units that could conceivably be used elsewhere, but I do not think so little of Russian generals that I think they would have sent 50% of their force on a mission no more ambitious than to “tie down” enemy forces. Especially after seeing how insanely ambitious goals were assigned to the depleted southern forces. Also, since the Russian withdrawal from Kiev is now in full swing before Donbass has even been encircled it doesn’t look like Russian generals value “tying down” enemy forces all that much.

What the outcome of concentrating everything against the large Ukrainian army in Donbass will be I can not say, but I can give you some parameters. If the Russians are able to encircle it and capture thousands that will be a big victory for them. But if the Ukrainians can only be pushed out gradually and slowly that will be a victory for their side. An inconclusive outcome would be if the Ukrainians are able to flee and reposition as it would mean they had preserved their force but had not won time or inflicted attrition.

What I can tell you is what the consolidation means for Twitter and the footage coming out of the war. There will be no more videos of burned Russian supply convoys or of Russians catastrophically defeated because they were sent too far ahead in a too-small package.

The key takeaway is that until now the Russian military was failing because the military-political leadership was having it prosecute a bad and poorly prepared plan. It is only now that its plan is actually a good one that we will get to see how good or bad this military is at the tactical level. It may still fail but it now won’t be because of bad generalship.

Question 2– You say Russia kicked-off the fighting under the misguided belief that they could minimize the amount of damage and death but still prevail in the conflict. I find this analysis very persuasive, especially when you say: “The initial plan was focused on testing if the Ukrainian state could be made to unravel without having to go after its military and killing tens of thousands of Ukrainian servicemen.” That plan seems to have failed illustrated by the fact that the war continues to drag on with no end in sight. Now that Russia has changed its military approach, do you think they need to change their overall objectives as well? (Demiliterisation and DeNazification) These goals seem more aspirational than realistic, or do you disagree?

Marko Marjanović– A month into this war Russian-Ukrainian bloodshed on a large scale now seems normal to us, inevitable even, but we mustn’t lose sight of what the world was like before February 24. Just a month before, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs had declared the idea of a Russo-Ukrainian war “unacceptable” and a “medical diagnosis”. A war between these two intertwined peoples seemed unthinkable, including because Moscow kept insisting there was a taboo on fratricidal war between East Slavs.

We would err to dismiss this as entirely hypocritical and insincere. There are good reasons to believe this taboo was a real thing for Moscow and a real hang-up for the Russian leadership. In this context launching the “special military operation” as a full-on war with tens of thousands of dead Ukrainians already baked into the plan was something the Russian leadership couldn’t force itself to do. In such a context, to be able to make a move against Kiev at all you would almost have to talk yourself into believing there was at least a small chance that it could be done in a way that avoided any major fighting.

So, we can deem the initial plan misguided, but possibly for the Russian leadership it was the crutch they needed to embark on this enterprise at all. They could not justify full-on war to themselves from the get-go. To get over the hangup they needed to package the chance of war with the chance of success without major bloodshed. Incidentally, waging the kind of operation that might somehow shock the Ukrainian state into collapse demanded a totally different arrangement of forces than would a conventional military campaign. Whereas a by-the-books military campaign would have dictated focus on the enemy military, concentration of forces, and movement as a combined-arms mass, the needs of the psychological operation demanded prioritizing Kiev, a broad front, and lighting speed. So that is how the Russians started.

Now why they weren’t better prepared to more quickly and more skillfully switch from waging psychological shock to conducting a war if the need arose is a different question.

I don’t know what de-militarization or de-Nazification mean. I don’t know that Russia knows what they mean. I think these alleged demands are aired to give voice to Russian wrath. They are not practical demands for Ukraine to meet. They are slogans meant to ensure the war continues.

I see no evidence as of yet that Russia has given up on any war goals it entered into the war with. People do not understand that the withdrawal from Kiev is Russian escalation. It’s the final step in the transformation from waging a dreamy psychological operation to waging textbook war. So far when Russia has hit a wall in Ukraine it has always escalated to the next order of business. I don’t mean just in this war but looking at it holistically since 2014.

If the war stalls again Moscow will be at another crossroads. Whether to wind down the fighting or escalate again by placing the homefront on a war footing and issuing a call to arms.

I don’t know which of the two Putin would or will pick. I don’t know why he has been reluctant to mobilize the Russian society for the war so far. But I do think that if he does so the nature of his regime will have to change. There can be no more of this ‘enigmatic tsar’ business where he springs a massive “special military operation” as a surprise on the Russian public. It is a very monarchical, almost pre-modern way of doing things. A situation where the King’s wars are his own private affairs that he owes nobody an explanation for. But that also nobody not in his employ is called to sacrifice for. If the Russian volunteer and conscript will be asked to pull his chestnuts out of the fire, then the payback will have to be far greater transparency from now on.

Not having placed Russia on a war footing would seem to offer the option to Putin to trade away captured territory sans Donetsk and Lugansk for some weak assurances and declare victory. However, I think that would place his rule on rather shaky ground. The economic warfare that the Empire and its vassal swarm have unleashed has preempted that possibility. Putin has already lost the economics camp. Have so little to show for everything the war triggered or sped up, and he will have lost the patriotic camp as well.

I don’t think a peace treaty with Ukraine is possible. I think Putin made sure of that when he recognized Donetsk and Lugansk. At most there could be an armistice and a frozen conflict, which in practice would mean partition. Regime change would be preferable to Moscow as it would solve a lot of legal problems, but either outcome is acceptable to the patriot camp in Russia. Especially if the captured territory includes Odessa.

That leaves the problem of governing the captured territories. Where are the pro-Russians? Has the war soured them on Russia, or are they keeping their heads down because they don’t know if the Russian presence is permanent? However, I would caution against reading too much into the “pro-Russian” label. Just because you are a Ukrainian who finds that an Iron Curtain running between Ukraine and Russia is unnatural and a travesty does not mean that you favor an Iron Curtain running halfway across Ukraine splitting you off from your brethren on that side either. Put these “pro-Russian” Ukrainians under Moscow and they will be pro-Ukrainian Russians.

Ukrainians are also the reigning world champions in protest and unarmed insurrection. They are quite ungovernable. Even for Kiev. Additionally win or lose, this war will have provided them with a very useful national myth. In launching the “special military operation” Vladimir Putin has quite likely completed their national formation. Can Russia even run southern Ukraine without having its administrative buildings permanently besieged by unruly crowds?

After the American Civil War, the US successfully reintegrated the South after over 300,000 Southerners perished in a brutal war. However, the US was reintegrating the South into a project that was visibly on the up and up. Are we so sure that Russia is on the up and up? Economically it is not. I think many are naive about what Russia’s banishment from the global division of labor will mean for its living standards and productivity. Many are also too optimistic about how eager first-tier Chinese companies will be to cooperate with the Russians. How eager were Russian companies to work with sanctioned Iran? Quite possibly the Chinese will be no more eager to risk secondary sanctions than had been the Russians. Robbed of its economic prospects Russia could go back to being the austere militaristic Sparta it was from 1945 to 1991. That however is a project that Russians (of a more naive generation) already got fed up with once. Also, this time around there isn’t even the ideology of radical egalitarianism and the cult of the ordinary working man to tie it all together. What Southerners were being drafted into after 1865 is not similar to what the Ukrainians would be inducted to.

So then is everything already lost for Russia? No, I don’t think so. Not at all. If there is enough will, if there is enough endurance then anything is possible. The Empire has given Russia the green light to swallow Ukraine if it can, the rest is up to her. Perhaps Ukraine and Ukrainians can eventually be re-assimilated into an all-Russian nation after all. However, that is a project that is going to take decades. At 69 and probably without fully realizing it Vladimir Putin on February 24 opened an entirely new chapter in Russian history. One that he is not going to be around to see how it ends.

Source Notes:

1– Marko Marjanović, Editor of Anti-Empire.com

2– Special thanks to Riley Waggaman at Edward Slavsquat, Substack and his excellent post; “I am in awe of the sheer ruthlessness of Russia’s withdrawals”, Edward Slavsquat, Substack

 
Hide 289 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. stozi says: • Website

    fake slav fagged out by the empire of lies. an American serb recently visited me here in Lebanon and the experience was similar. cheap character, divorced from the mentality that let tiny Serbia defeat the Austro-Hungarian Empire in the early days of WWI. Having committed to this, for Russia, there is no backing down or half measures. This dude fails to understand that it was incumbent upon Russia to try the softly softly approach whether they had much faith in it or not, and that a long list of contingency plans was always there. That’s military planning 101, son. The economy will be fine, it’s more of a question how the financialized debt-ridden economies of the OECD will get by with their own sanctions rather than how Russia will. In terms of real economy, Russia has everything it could ask for, plus the support of or at least access to markets of the whole world outside the OECD. Demilitarization simply means destroying the military. Denazification simply means wiping out anti-Russian NATO-nurtured elements in Ukraine like Azov, Aidar, Right Sector, and the mentality that supports them. That may take decades. Doesn’t matter. East Germany was pacified, so Ukraine can be, and if that requires the end of the dollar as the global reserve currency and the collapse of the west, guess what, that may be the real goal all along.

  2. Notsofast says:

    let’s not lose sight of the reason this war is being waged. the brandon administration (and their c.i.a. handlers) seeing the u.s. economy being sucked into the 30 trillion dollar debt black hole, desperately needed a wag the dog war. the puppet zelensky was ordered to attack the donbass as a sure fire way of dragging the russians into a hot war. the ukranazis had amassed 150,000 troops in preparation for the assault. the russians correctly assessed the situation and decided to strike first, rather than allowing the ukrainians the upper hand in this unavoidable war.

    the war crimes carried out against the russian p.o.w.s and russian ukrainians has harden the russian people towards their ukrainian brethren that have been brainwashed to see themselves as a separate people. the demonization of all russian people by the u.s. and e.u. has further strengthen their resolve. no, there will be no quick and easy solution to this situation but in the long run russia and the russian people will be better off divesting themselves from a decaying west that will never accept them as equals.

  3. anon[267] • Disclaimer says:

    Why are you talking to this guy?

    In his cosmic strategical strategizing he’s clearly unaware of state of the art maneuver control. There’s no sign he noticed the evolution of attrition models from the strictly localized Lanchester model to later methods that consider variable, qualitative force ratios across a theater.

    He’s imposing timelines on the combatants and imputing some vague PR penalty.

    “Many are naive… Robbed of its economic prospects.” That’s just handwaving, unsupported assertions that suggest he has no idea of presumed distributional consequences or of the unprecedented procedural and institutional features of these sanctions.

    This guy is just full of shit.

  4. stop making excuses for Putin. He

    1) attacked during the wet season. Hitler, at least, had the brains to wait until late June.

    2) tried to get maximal results with minimum force. That worked, barely, in Syria. Not this time. This is the Fundamental Law of War: always use a sledgehammer to smash a walnut. That way, the walnut gets smashed and the you get the sledgehammer back intact.

    3) began to negotiate before winning decisive victory. In fact, no victories at all. This a clear demonstration that he lacks the will to win.

    “but now the Russians are getting it right”. Really? Based on lacklustre performance so far, most of the Ukes will pull out of the fabled “cauldron” before the Russians enclose it….if they ever do.

    Haxo’s only hope for Russia vs. Zionist globo-homo: around about 9 April, when Vlad the Incompetent thinks he’s going to celebrate the outcome of WW2, the Russian military overthrows Putin and his Jew-hobbled regime and installs a genuine Russian Nationalist.

  5. G Money says:

    This guy has the Russian plans? Wow, where did he find them. Whitney is interviewing circus clowns now.

    • Agree: follyofwar
    • Replies: @Face_The_Truth
  6. Anonymous[129] • Disclaimer says:

    The purpose of the war is almost certainly regime change for Ukraine. Changing the current anti-Russian regime with a pro-Russian or at least neutral one. If that is achieved, I think Russia will be in a stronger position geopolitically than before. It’s still a long way to go obviously, and Russia still has a ton of problems (demography being by far the biggest), but Russia’s geopolitical adversary is the West and the West is ideologically quite insane worshipping negroes and trannies. As long as Russia doesn’t lose its senses and succumb to similar madness it has good prospects.

    As for winning this war (I agree with Marjanovic that now it truly IS a war even if it didn’t look that way at the start) all I can say is, given the disparity in military strength, if Russia isn’t able to meet its military objectives, than it is simply too incompetent to remain a major world power and will have to settle for losing its sovereignty and becoming a junior partner to either the US or more likely China.

  7. anonymous[139] • Disclaimer says:

    This article will bring out all the armchair generals who’ll pontificate endlessly about what they think is going on, what should be done, etc. All based on nothing, no expertise, no background. In this haze of lies and misinformation we really don’t know what’s going on but that won’t prevent a lot of know-it-alls from pretending that they do. The Russians aren’t telling us what their plans are and for that matter neither are the Ukrainians.

  8. @Haxo Angmark

    The Ukes should have pulled out of the Donbass cauldron already, and would have if they had any strategic brains. But their fanatical Nazi ideology mirrors that of Hitler: not one inch of retreat, every Festung to be held to the last man etc. Abandonment of the Donbass is total political anathema to them; they would rather see the core of their army destroyed than accept cold military logic and retreat to more defensible lines beyond the Dnieper.
    And by the way, Russia’s Victory Day is not April 9. You are out by a month.

    • Agree: Notsofast
  9. America recovered so quickly from the Civil war because she threw open her doors to European entrepreneurial inventors and engineers. Russia should do the same. Europeans or Americans only. Had Lincoln lived out his allotted eighty years, he would have witnessed changes which were unfathomable to a boy born in 1809, so much happened in the 1880’s and 90’s. America became a technological dynamo. Russia, with her vast resources, could do the same.

    Keep the investors and rootless cosmopolitans out. Bring in the inventors and developers. Give them a free hand. Russia will be transformed. She will become a colossus. Her problems with sanctions etc. will fade in the rear view mirror and seem trivial.

    America did not begin to degrade and degenerate until she allowed all the immigrants from Poland and Russia to invade before, during and after WW2. Russia, now relieved of much of this anti-civilization, criminal element has an opportunity grow as never before. We just need to complete the swap in populations.

    Americans who transplant to Russia will be happy because they are practical people and yearn to build and invent. With their manufacturing having been offshored to China, the American worker feels unneeded and despairs. Russia needs more people to fill her vast spaces and develop her vast resources.

    The United States is on a trajectory of irreversible decline. If the fate of the good people of Russian under the tyrannical yoke of alien Communists in the Soviet Union is any indicator, the Dark Ages in America may last nearly a century. Expect mass immiseration.

  10. Wokechoke says:

    If it’s a proxy war with NATO Putin will seek to turn off the gas for Germany. Expect food riots in France, Italy, Holland, Germany. Block food too. Alliance collapses with a couple of years of blockade. No Parisian wants to go poor for some bumpkin Slavchuk and his Jewish President.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Gerhard57NL
  11. Putin has already lost the economics camp. Have so little to show for everything the war triggered or sped up, and he will have lost the patriotic camp as well.

    Putin seems to be doing well economically: strong balance sheet, pensions paid on time, ruble strengthening, China much closer, and 6 billion people trading with him. He may even add valuable real estate to Russia’s bulging portfolio: the port of Mariupol.

    With 83% popular support, losing the patriotic camp is the last of his current worries.

    Ukraine’s army, with no reserves, no air support, and no resupply, is suffering massive attrition through sickness, injury, desertion, and emigration.

    I’d bet on a military collapse.

    • Agree: Bro43rd
  12. Marjanovic’s analysis contradicts those of the pundits I trust most, like the Saker, Gonzalo Lira, and Dmitry Orlov. Still, it’s good to have another viewpoint. At least he’s not buying the clearly false “Ukraine is winning” narrative pushed by the Globalist media corporations. And I think he’s better informed than Paul Craig Roberts, who seems prone to playing armchair general.

    • Agree: Bro43rd
  13. Anonymous[369] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wokechoke

    While I won’t do anything to contribute to it, or even wish it, I will become intoxicated with schadenfreude when Poland is brought to heel by Globohomoshlomo. They think they can be part of the GAE yet retain their own social and religious culture which is in direct conflict with 🏳️‍🌈 ⚧ ☪️ 🧕🏾 ✡️

    😂 Yeah, good luck with that, dumb Polacks.

  14. JR Foley says:
    @Haxo Angmark

    The ministry further noted that the images of the bodies on the streets emerged four days after the Russian troops left the city and immediately after the Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) and the Ukrainian media arrived at the scene. The bodies which have been videoed and photographed show no signs of rigor mortis or lividity, and the blood on the wounds is fresh.

    Hitler went in September–his best Generals wanted to depart in June —the stars were not in alignment for Adolf–hence delay and enter Russian during a wet September—ouch,

  15. @anon

    I somewhat agree while also stipulating that the discourse surrounding the war is saturated with ballyhoo from all sides – an accusation his comrade Edward Slavsquat is undoubtedly correct about. Any sober-minded discussion about actual military intentions behind the Russian army’s movement, errors of judgement enforced through the chain of command, impromptu decision making on the ground, etc. is drowned out by the worst grandstanding and contrarianism.

    However, Marjanovic and Slavsquat are really grasping at straws when it comes to condemning the updated Russian doctrines on maneuver warfare. The initial Russian blitz with multiple axes of penetration was a modern-day application of Deep Battle, not a mere psychological gambit – the point was to cripple the logistical capacity of the Ukranian army and establish beachheads far behind the putative frontlines to prevent UKR’s massive reserve brigades from grouping up. “Concentration of forces, and movement as a combined-arms mass” aka the conventional route would’ve taken too long and allowed the Ukrainians to actually employ their numerical advantage. You can tell Marjanovic is twisting himself into knots to simultaneously hold that Russian generals are too competent to waste troop numbers threatening Kiev but somehow they indulged in pie-in-the-sky fantasies of running over the country with a highly decentralized front. Hint, hint: Putin didn’t draw up the original plan.

    Execution was undoubtedly sloppy, probably because it was the first real-world instantiation against a real enemy force as opposed to training drills.

    • Replies: @Wokechoke
  16. Wokechoke says:
    @The Inimitable NEET

    Agreed. Some of the generals will be thinking, “mmmmm, I’m going to get to Be Zhukov or Bagration here, finally! A real war.” As you said Deep Battle.

  17. What a load of bullshit. The ruble has already sprung back, Putin’s approval rating among Russians is over 80%, thousands of Nazis corpses are piling up in Mariupol, tens of thousands of Ukie troops will either surrender or be killed in the Donbas in the coming weeks and the entire world has seen that their is no security for any country anywhere as long as the US dollar is the world reserve currency. The US is an ugly rabid beast that must be stopped.

    • Agree: RIchebourg
    • Disagree: TaterSalad
  18. I guy who hails from an “anti-empire” site is going to recognize the re-imperialization of Russia? It’s not that Marko is full of shit, he is fully blind to the reality of Putin that has been called by fate to update and modernize the Russian empire. Does Putin relish it? Of course he does. Peter the Great, Alexander I and II – what a company to be in, if he is succesful ;).

    • Disagree: TaterSalad
  19. Anonymous[172] • Disclaimer says:

    Many are also too optimistic about how eager first-tier Chinese companies will be to cooperate with the Russians. How eager were Russian companies to work with sanctioned Iran? Quite possibly the Chinese will be no more eager to risk secondary sanctions than had been the Russians.

    I disagree with most of this guy’s analysis but this particular take is so bad that I’m questioning his motives.

    – China has already stated on multiple occasions that they stand with Russia 100%. They literally accused the West of provoking this war and shrugged off all threats of (secondary) sanctions. Sanctions against Russia are already backfiring so badly that Slovakia announced yesterday that they’ll pay for their gas in Rubles. They folded after 2 days and they certainly won’t be the last. Meanwhile, this “Marko” character believes that the West can credibly threaten China on top of this clusterfuck with sanctions which would backfire on a level that’s downright stratospheric. LOL!

    – China and Russia need each other for naked survival – and they know it. I’m not even talking about the fact that Russia has energy and food – their nuclear arsenal gives both countries MAD capability against the West and that’s the only reason they’re still standing. Without it the Globohomo would have nuked them (or threatened them with nukes and then destroyed them if they surrendered) years ago. Why not? The goyim outcry would be managed with info-management , suppression and it wouldn’t even matter because there’d be no state actors or any kind of outside powers to challenge the One World Government NWO.

    That’s why most of the tech advancements we’ve seen in the last 3-4 decades have been in the surveillance/control field. Golobohomo actually believed that they’ve won this game back in the 80s and 90s so they moved in the direction of perfecting suppression of internal dissent (a.k.a. “terrorists”).

    And this is why China is racing to build its own MAD capability.

    • Replies: @TaterSalad
  20. The Evil farce of accusations of ‘genocide’ by the trans-human freak masquerading as Ukraine ‘President’ surely must tell Russia that the Ukrainian cancer of hatred MUST be excised. Partition is the ONLY successful outcome. Let the Nazis have Galicia and millions of small-arms courtesy of NATO, and see how the EU enjoys that. ‘Reports’ that the Russian FSB wants to kill -elensky simply tell me that -elensky’s final role, as ‘martyr’, is about to have its opening, and closing, night.

  21. Rahan says:
    @stozi

    This dude fails to understand that it was incumbent upon Russia to try the softly softly approach whether they had much faith in it or not, and that a long list of contingency plans was always there.

    This dude:

    possibly for the Russian leadership it was the crutch they needed to embark on this enterprise at all. They could not justify full-on war to themselves from the get-go. To get over the hangup they needed to package the chance of war with the chance of success without major bloodshed.

  22. Wielgus says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    My survey of the commentariat on the Russian Internet suggests widespread feeling that the conflict is not being pursued with sufficient energy.
    Anti-war protests in Russia seem to have collapsed, if The New York Times is any guide – partly due to state repression, but also because the West’s sanctions and cancel culture tend to strengthen the idea that all Russians are under attack, not just Putin.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  23. TJ62 says:
    @ThreeCranes

    The north may have recovered quickly but it was a little different story for the occupied southern states.

  24. SteveK9 says:

    Fantastic and insightful article. Everything here seems eminently logical. Maybe some of it is wrong, but there is a lot here to think about.

  25. Jon Chance says: • Website

    Anyone who’s sincere about seeking a peaceful and prosperous solution in Europe will advocate referenda in each and every province throughout the entire continent:

    a) Remain inside the EU-ECB-NATO-CCP New Soviet Empire.

    b) Join the Russian Federation.

    c) Declare independence and embrace the policy of political-economic-financial-military neutrality that made the Swiss Confederation into the most successful, productive, genuine, capitalist democratic republic for over 700 years:

    https://www.amazon.com/Breakdown-Nations-Leopold-Kohr/dp/085784430X

  26. @Notsofast

    Mr. Putin’s mistake was in waiting far too long to act. While he dithered and dithered, hoping that negotiations would work and a war could be avoided, the US imperialists kept supplying Ukraine with high tech weapons, making them a formidable foe. Putin did little while ethnic Russians were slaughtered in the Donbass for 8 long years. Why he allowed the Nuland-led Jewish globohomo plotters take control of the country in 2014, instead of crushing the coup in its infancy, remains a mystery to me.

  27. SteveK9 says:

    The trouble with the pro-Russia websites, like the Saker, and ‘Smoothie’ (the other Andrei) is they cannot tolerate anything other than Russia is perfect/wonderful/brilliant/mistake-free, etc. And, they have to go on and on and on about the absolute horribleness of the West (with the Saker it’s about 75% of the content). I agree with much of that, but they pound it into the ground with so much relentless emotion, after a while the feeling is ‘enough already’.

    Marko on the other hand seems to have some very rational ideas, and insight that is much better than these other guys. So, I really do not get the kind of venom he receives here. Unless these are people that salivate over the latest Russia/wonderful, West/Satanic diatribe? I am a great admirer of Putin, clearly the outstanding Statesman of his time, and truly an historic figure, but can one entertain the notion that some of his decisions don’t work out? The article actually gives a very good rationale for Russia’s plan A. It probably was worth trying, both from the point of view of possible success and domestic politics in Russia. There is also praise for the speed with which the plan was recognized to have failed and a new plan adopted. No idiotic ‘doubling down’, here. Plans fail, we have only to read the histories of wars throughout the ages, to see that. Smart people do not let themselves be ruled by emotion under those circumstances, the take a cold look at say, ‘we have to make a change’. I don’t favor killing the messenger, especially when the message seems correct.

    • Agree: Biff
  28. Anonymous[172] • Disclaimer says:

    Five stages of grief:

    1. Denial
    2. Anger
    3. Bargaining
    4. Depression
    5. Paying in Rubles

  29. Notsofast says:
    @follyofwar

    imo, he had to wait until he had positioned russia to be able to handle the predictable sanctions that the west would impose upon them. ukraine is the tip of the spear of a much larger economic war that russians and chinese have coordinated in response to the unending military and economic provocations orchestrated against them by the neocons and their e.u. vassels. in addition to this, their hypersonic missiles were still in the developmental stage in 2014 and i’m sure putin wanted to be able to have the upper hand technologically when confronting these blood thirsty murderous war criminals.

    this is not going to be a quick and easy and unfortunately a lot of innocent people are going die unnecessarily which is exactly what these neocon bastards had in mind from the beginning. the only front on which these criminals are winning is the propaganda war in the u.s. and e.u.

    imo putin has given up on working with these pathological liars and the new economic iron curtain serves his purposes of defending the russian people from globalist neocon madness purposely destroying western cultures.

    • Agree: RobinG, W
  30. @follyofwar

    This is of course precisely the lesson China is going to take away re: Taiwan –
    the more time you leave USrael for their machloikes, the bloodier it will get.

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  31. anonymous[153] • Disclaimer says:

    Facile argument that fails to make its case, that’s one thing. Another is what migh be termed the fundamental rumination error.

    Let’s say I find a crab louse. I pick it off, squish it between my fingernails, and drop it in the toilet. Maybe I check and look for other ones, or nits. Maybe I get some Quell, maybe, and put it on my balls.

    Are you going to endlessly fixate on whether I optimally mobilized my resources to get rid of the crab? Are you going to fight with lots of other internet assholes to prove who knows most about picking crabs off your pubes?

    No. (In most cases.) You are going to say, Ew, and get on with your life.

    This is, in effect, what Russia has done. It boned the US skank and got some crabs in its crotch. It picked them off. This was not hard. It’s over. Reducing the beltway and its C3I to smoldering Cherenkov-radiating ruins would be slightly more laborious and tedious, like maybe picking four crabs off.

    So the question is, now that the Langley regime is squashed and flushed like a pubic louse, what kind of country do we want to live in?

  32. @anonymous

    No kidding, those AC generals are out in force in the comments preceding yours. They exhibit the many reasons I’m glad Putin is so ably in charge and not these commenters. The world would be even worse off if these ass clowns ever got close to accidentally making a decision that mattered.

  33. @SteveK9

    It will prove to be a structural part of a grand diversion; keeping Ukrainian troops bogged down in the north and Odessa while cutting off any hope for resupply in the Donbass. Azov Battalion: no more as a unified force. Time, maneuverability, and arms and ammo lost. Let alone thousands of Ukrainian soldiers.
    Now comes the final push on what’s left of the home team’s army. Like clockwork.

  34. @SteveK9

    I’m not quite as sanguine in my evaluation. Beneath Marko’s underlying rhetoric and seemingly evenheaded assertions is a lot of circular reasoning. In particular, his advocacy of a conventional war ignores the obvious fact that Ukraine borders Russia and any deliberate moves that destabilize the government/economy/military/society will result in decades-long blowback. The U.S. could afford to ‘shock and awe’ Iraq or Libya back to the stone age because those theaters were an ocean away. Crushing the Ukrainian spirit via bombardment would make them more malleable to NATO influence in the long run, defeating the entire purpose of halting NATO’s territorial advancement to this point.

    It’s also clear he doesn’t understand why the Russians “overextended” during the first week. A basic precept of maneuver warfare, going to the Mongols, is to only concentrate forces when executing a deliberate assault; otherwise, you want to disrupt the enemy’s logistical capacity by penetrating their defenses so they can’t prioritize which front to address. I do hold that the first push was sloppy and sacrificed far more men than it needed to, but it accomplished all its intended tasks – prevent the massive pool of conscripted reserves from consolidating strength and identifying a proper front, knock out detection to ensure air supremacy, and decimate the C&C infrastructure so the Ukrainians can’t coordinate country-wide movements. The most sensible conjecture is that the Russian forces were going to switch back to conventional tactics anyway, especially since they don’t seem to care about conquering Ukraine in a traditional way.

    • Replies: @GMC
  35. Anon[159] • Disclaimer says:

    So… whether it was actually said or not, about Barbarossa…

    “We only have to kick down the door and the whole rotten structure will collapse!”

    It appears that the Russian General Staff believed the same thing about 2022 Ukraine.

    The correct plan was simple to see, and simpler to achieve…

    1. Massive Air Strikes on every Air Defense asset, aerodrome & airport to destroy Ukie Air.

    2. Massive Air Strikes on every fuel & weapons depot in Ukraine, Tank parks, etc.

    3. Massive Air Strikes on the Kharkov (Malyshev) Tank Zavod, and select other Military factories.

    4. Air Landing of two full Airborne Divisions West and East of Kiev, to take up blocking positions.

    5. Round the clock CAP over Kiev. interdict any Ukie forces trying to attack the Airborne troops.

    6. Two Tank Armies, in echelon, one from West and one East of Dnepr, heading south.

    7. One Combined Arms Army striking from Krim to Zaparozhye.

    8. One Combined Arms Army striking from Rostov to Dnepropetrovsk.

    9. Follow on Combined Arms Armies behind all four columns.

    10. Meeting at Cherkassy, cutting off all forces East of Dnepr, demand Surrender. If not, 11.

    11. Wait for UAF to try and retreat to Dnepr, destroy them between Poltava and Donetsk.

    The ground is sparsely populated east of Dnepr. Open steppe, and ideal ground for 400,000 Russians (8 Armies) to thoroughly trap and destroy the murderers of Donbass civilians… with DNR/LNR forces shoving them west into the fire zones of the liberating Russians.

    A tight cordon around Kiev would trap as many of the War Criminal Jews as possible for arrest.

    If the Ukrainian General Staff had seen that unfolding, we would see mass capitulation… even if Azov and others needed to be dug out later.

    Too bad Shoigu wasn’t smart enough to try it.

    • Troll: Rabbitnexus
    • Replies: @Peter Rabbit
  36. If you think Russia went into Ukraine in crazy light tippy-toes mode, check out this historical parallel. In 1939 Stalin decided to invade Finland. With about 180 divisions in the Soviet army (IIRC), he assigned the job to the Leningrad Military District, which had 12 divisions. Because Russia, the Leningrad Military district assigned the job to just 6 divisions. These 6 divisions got chewed up and spit out by the hardy Finns who had recently defeated communists in a bitter civil war. The remnants of the invaders literally fled through the snowy northern woods in the famous Winter War.
    But in the spring the Russians came back in much greater numbers and demolished Finn defenses in heavy strongpoints. Of course, they didn’t absorb Finland. Many believe this is due to the fierce Finn defense.
    Nowadays the Russians are the good guys (IMO) but some things don’t change. I think they set too few troops to do too big a job. I expect we’ll see huge reinforcements added. I’ve no doubt Russia will soundly defeat the Ukrainian army, Nazi political officers and all.
    But congrats to the CIA (sarc). By installing Nazi poli officers in all units with authority to shoot unenthusiastic troops, you’ve managed to fertilize the land with much more East Slav blood than otherwise.

  37. @follyofwar

    Life is a tradeoff. We see the downside of having waited, we don’t see the downside of having invaded in 2014. Maybe the General staff didn’t feel they had enough missiles, ammunition, money, training etc. And maybe they were right, we’ll never know.
    BTW, when Russia reconstituted the 1st Guards Tank army, around 2020-ish I think, that’s when you knew they were getting serious.
    As for Ukraine, the tactic of infiltrating all of society with Nazi fanatics has had impressive results.

    • Agree: W
  38. TRM says:

    I don’t think you can count out the idea that the plan was:
    A) Force all Ukraine forces into cities isolating them
    B) Take a land bridge from Russia to Crimea
    C) Move north and eliminate the Donbas cauldron
    D) Take east of the river and Odessa

    The Russians had to solidify the south to prevent attacks from the Azov Sea area on their forces to the north and the Kerch Strait bridge. Don’t want to lose that. Now that Mariupol has been mostly subdued on to part “C”.

  39. I know nothing, but Scott Ritter who had a career in the US Marines and spent much time in Russia has a different view. He thinks the attack toward Kiev was a feint to force Ukraine to move its strategic reserve up north. The Russians will now surround their main force facing the Donbass. He says the Ukrainians are out of fuel and ammo and can only fight where they are while the Russians chop them up.

    We don’t know but will find out this month. Russia has four times the population of Ukraine and ten times its economic power. Who will win? Do the math. Note that most of the Russian army has not been tasked with fighting Ukraine.

    • Thanks: Agent76
    • Replies: @Mefobills
    , @Kiza
  40. @Haxo Angmark

    “maximal” is not a word

    • Replies: @Ray Caruso
  41. RobinG says:
    @Notsofast

    Caption reads (in Indonesian), “267 Ukrainian Marines Surrender to Russia، Well Treated by Chechen Soldiers.” And they got a talking-to from a famous sharp-shooter. Let the re-education begin, lol.

    • Thanks: Rabbitnexus, Agent76
  42. Seraphim says:

    There is a third possibility. The ‘Kiev operation’ was a massive deception, a feint which pinned down troops which should have reinforce the defense in Donbass, possibly to repel or in any case slow down the advance and concentration of Russian troops for the principal operation, liberation of Donbass, establishment of direct communication with Crimea, isolation of the best of Ukrainian armies in the ‘cauldron’ and capitulation (or complete destruction) after they would be completely deprived of vehicles, fuel, ammunition. And then unconditional surrender of the Zhidobandera government. Actually what Putin said from the start.

  43. Anon[227] • Disclaimer says:
    @stozi

    You make more sense than this “expert”, who should read Larry Johnson, John Helmer and Andrei Martyanov, real experts. The changing tempo of the operation does not mean mistakes or failures; it’s part of the overall plan. Read the three guys above, and learn what’s really going on.

    • Agree: Rabbitnexus
    • Replies: @sally
  44. Anon[227] • Disclaimer says:
    @anon

    Whitney does this often. Wrong information gets wrong conclusion. Same with “Sweden’s common sense approach to Covid-19”, then the corpses starting piling up and Mr Whitney went very quiet. Useless reporter. No insights, little knowledge. Don’t quit the day job.

    • Thanks: Sarah
    • Replies: @WJ
  45. What the outcome of concentrating everything against the large Ukrainian army in Donbass will be I can not say, but I can give you some parameters. If the Russians are able to encircle it and capture thousands that will be a big victory for them. But if the Ukrainians can only be pushed out gradually and slowly that will be a victory for their side.

    There may be a germ of truth here, and both the final outcome and how rapidly that comes will depend on how deeply the Ukranians are dug in. Some bloggers speak of the coming battle being the “largest since World War 2”, and it seems to me it’s one the Russians must win.

    After the American Civil War, the US successfully reintegrated the South after over 300,000 Southerners perished in a brutal war. However, the US was reintegrating the South into a project that was visibly on the up and up.

    The author has a very different notion than myself as to what happened after the US Civil War. Andrew Johnson isn’t the second or third worst US president without reason, and that reason is on account of the way he virtually encouraged the South to spit in the Union’s eye regarding the freed black slaves. For the next hundred years after the War a reign of terror covered the South, and the Southern Terrorists defeated the Union in the second round of the Civil War, the part called Reconstruction.

    I suspect the author is misreading Russian intentions, and believe they ought to be taken at their word with regard to the “demilitarizing” and “denazification”. Their trying to “take” more than a very few strategic parts of Ukraine would be insane in my view.

    • Agree: simple mind
  46. Eudion2 says:

    You don’t know what ‘de-nazification’ means? It means getting rid of the Nazis in Ukraine. How is this a mystery? They wave swastika flags and pose with photos of Hitler. They kind of stand out.

    • Replies: @schnelladine
    , @Curmudgeon
  47. bert33 says:

    The sooner zelensky hands himself over to the russian authorities the sooner we’ll have a better understanding of jut exactly WTF has been going on in that country the last 8 years or so. Time to hang it up before more of his citizens get killed. Will he do the right thing or has too much time gone by at this point?

    • Replies: @Fred777
    , @Decoy
    , @Dirk Gently
  48. joe2.5 says:

    That guy has no friggin idea of anything if he doesn’t realize what denazification means to the Russians and is even clueless about the war of movement.
    Usual Whitney beside-the-pointness.

  49. “There are two possibilities why that is so. One is that they always intended to start by doing A and then shift to B. The other is that they tried A, saw that it wasn’t working, and came up with B that would solve the problems of A.”
    “I think the second is the correct explanation.”

    Well Marko, you are wrong. Evidenced by the fact that as I explained elsewhere, many Russian forces are stationed outside of cities and have parked there for weeks. Ready to go but doing nothing. Why would that be?

    I tend to agree with Scott Ritter that the Russians have purposely placed them in strategic positions to bluff the Ukrainians into thinking that they were going to attack and therefore commit Ukrainian forces to defence of those positions.

    However, I also think that once the Donbass has been freed of the punishers, the Russians will then have the option of going west, already being in position to advance or they could consider withdrawing. The option will be to go west as gains have already been achieved.

    Notice that the withdrawal of Russian forces has been from around Kiev, no where else. End game being that they don’t want Kiev and that leads me to conclude an offensive on Odessa and perhaps Dnipropetrovsk. That there is your end game and a new state.

    Of course, all of that would count for nought if the west intervenes militarily then it is on for young and old.

    • Replies: @Dirk Gently
  50. peterAUS says:

    Mr Marjanovic is correct in stating that “Phase 2″/destruction of Ukrainian army (group) in LDNR region makes all the sense.

    The problem isn’t the (revised) RF plan. It’s the execution (pun intended) of it.

    Russian armed forces showed such lack of performance, so far, that I believe they aren’t capable of closing the cauldron, let alone destroying the forces within.

    There are some critical fundamentals Russian armed forces simply don’t have. I wrote about it before here, won’t repeat it.
    Ukrainians actually do have those fundamentals better. Well, it’s actually NATO/Ukrainians.

    What Rusophiles don’t get, yet, is that this Russian army isn’t the Soviet army, in sense they don’t have that quantity anymore. Plus, they are incapable of taking loses as before.
    And, in spite of overall modernization since 2008, for several reasons (corruption one of them) they haven’t been able to create competent professional military capable of sophisticated combined arms operations against European type opponent.

    This is what will happen in weeks to come:
    Russians will complete the redeployment for this “phase” and start pushing. It will be both SLOW and costly. Keyword “slow”.
    They’ll keep hammering wider areas with missiles.
    And…they’ll have increasing pressure on frontlines everywhere else. With loses.

    The cabal in Kremlin has a problem.

  51. @anonymous

    Ah! The armchair general of the armchair generals. Who the hell are you to decide whether other commenters are up to the task of ellaborating on the situation. Some of the “armchair generals” have very definate and purposeful ideas on what is happening and are well placed to expouse them.

  52. Russia is already moving back in on Kiew.

  53. @Anonymous

    Best laugh I’ve had all war.

    It sums up both the “Ze testicular piano artist” and no balls NATO.
    As an ex Army “non” General, I do know “no war” is over in a 24 hour US news cycle.
    However the real “out come,” of this war has indeed been decided in the first 24 hours.
    US dollar gets Covid , 10 EU government’s to be destroyed from lamp posts as the little children cry over empty tummies. As enraged mothers and manic dads roam the cobbled streets.
    Social and political collapse coming to America, soft cock UK and Europe.

    Paying Rubles indeedie. ( Pakistan has just been threaten with a colour revolution.)
    Read the Old Testament. End of days and a new beginning.

    Putin will be long retired, happy and lighting a candle in some church, somewhere, surrounded by snow and silence.

  54. The key takeaway is that until now the Russian military was failing because the military-political leadership was having it prosecute a bad and poorly prepared plan.

    Not only was the plan bad, the probabilistic premises for it were unrealistic. It was already clear to outside observers such as myself, that what has now been acknowledged by Marjanović was already unmistakably evident after the first four days of Russia’s aggressive attack. This begs the unanswered question: Why did they then continue to fail for an entire month beyond that?

    The comment archives show that I had already alluded to the failure of the bad plan back in February:

    February 28, 2022 at 4:51 pm GMT

    …has gotten bogged down in some spots, the presumptive lack of motivation by soldiers is surely a key factor.

    In an exchange with a deluded cultist, who, along with others, came up with ridiculous explanations for not recognizing the Russian failure, I re-emphasized this basic understanding a week later.

    March 7, 2022 at 7:30 pm GMT

    Logistical support has been failing; soldiers didn’t bring along sufficient food because the attack was intended to be quick. Instead they got bogged down due to strong resistance. Civilians are being made to bear the brunt. The Russian-speaking Ukrainians are certainly not welcoming them with flowers.

    Based on an honest assessment, one could rationally conclude that Russia will likely fail yet again. It is not just about planning, logistics, tactics, equipment, and communications, but also training, experience and motivation. In all these aspects the Russian military has been over-rated. This will be difficult for cultists to swallow.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  55. But, what about NATO?

  56. @stozi

    Couldn’t agree more and I’m Serb. Sometimes the “educated” Serbs’ pretension combined with their fickleness really make me cringe.

  57. French Legion in Mariupol

    • Thanks: Agent76
  58. Ghali says:

    Unfortunately, Marjanović have swallowed too much CNN and NYT propaganda. Russia’s initial aim was achieved last week which was the destruction of the US-trained Ukrainian army and the liberation of the entire Donbass region. The ongoing operation is a mopping up operation.

  59. Another word salad from the East European bloodlands.

  60. Anonymous[119] • Disclaimer says:

    We have several views of the situation here.

    All of them suggest strong odds for a Russian Federation (RF) victory, with the first stage of the military operation being either a psychological “shock and awe” operation that failed, or an unusually strong reconnaissance in force intended to unmask Ukraine military assets so that these assets could be destroyed, or quite possibly both simultaneously. All of them suggested a second phase in which RF wins the Eastern (industrialized) part of Ukraine, which is largely Russian speaking and which could presumably transform RF resources into useful goods, for sale internationally or use in RF.

    If RF fails at the second phase without recourse to tactical nuclear weapons, then RF gets the 1990s again, with a possible loss of perhaps (!!!) 10% of RF’s population due to privation. US dominance of Europe continues for perhaps another 1 to 2 decades, assuming no major upheavals in the continental USA. Such a major upheaval could be the 2024 election, or perhaps the 2022 election if former President Trump is arrested and the US southern border is opened still further (both steps are currently Democratic party objectives as of this writing, 2022-04-05).
    After the 1 to 2 decades, the US cities can no longer be supported, and the US upheaval can no longer be avoided. The US finally abandons Europe, which re-organizes itself.

    If RF succeeds in the second phase, or if either RF or NATO or both have recourse to tactical nuclear weapons, we get the same result: the US will be responsible for forcing an avoidable and sizeable loss on Europe.
    If RF wins, then the EU/NATO countries will see that the US cannot enforce its will on Europe, and cannot provide access to RF raw materials. EU/NATO will then start to act independently and try to regain access to RF raw materials.
    If a tactical nuclear weapon is used in the Ukraine conflict by either side, EU/NATO will realize that once a nuclear weapon has been used once, it will surely be used again in some future conflict**. Europe is just too small for nuclear weapons use, and the Europeans know it. In this scenario, blame for first nuclear use would have fallen on the US for initiating and sustaining a prolonged diplomatic/covert offensive against RF, and Europe would regard the US as an existential threat. Separation from the US would be slow, but sure. RF’s treatment in this scenario would depend strictly on RF internal viability and military defense capability — that is, on whether RF could prevent looting of its resources by EU / NATO countries.

    And, again, close integration of the Peoples’ Republic of China (PRC) and RF is less likely than EU/NATO nation and RF simply because (a) shipping massive resources overland to China would be over twice as expensive as shipping them to Europe, and (b) Russia / China civilizational differences are significant. PRC would regard RF as perhaps the equivalent of a Chinese province — important, but also subordinate to the needs of the PRC central administration. RF would not respond well to being assigned a subordinate status, and would eventually break the alliance. PRC is incapable of invading RF, and vice-versa, and so the alliance would not be re-formed.

    The US becomes an Oceanic power reliying on some version of AUKUS while EU/NATO and RF and PRC are re-organizing themselves, or perhaps US declines into just another third world country and nobody polices the sea lanes, which become hazardous to use, shutting down most world trade. In any event, US (and the rest of the world) finds megacities impossible to maintain, and finds some way (which I cannot imagine, though I’ve tried) to shut them down.***

    And that’s my attempt at “thinking past the next hill”. I find it interesting that the same equilibrium state develops after all outcomes except for one not considered — a central war / MAD exchange. That would be a singularity, no prediction save the obvious being possible or even worthwhile, at least for me.

    ** Historical analogy: Supposedly the USSR had some 500 targets for tactical nuclear weapons in Western Germany, targets to be used if the Fulda Gap invasion had ever been started. There wouldn’t have been much left of Western Germany had those 500 targets been bombed. After a nuclear “first use”, similar nuclear saturation bombing would be justified by precedent.

    *** Historical analogy: The abandonment of Rome after its aqueducts were destroyed during an invasion by the Byzantine Belisarius in the time of Justinian’s reign. As far as I can tell, the genetic traces of the late Roman urban population simply vanished while the rural population’s traces continued, but I may well be wrong about this.
    There are other similar cases. There was once a city-building civilization in Arabia, one which depended upon dams and cisterns. As rainfall decreased, labor to maintain the water delivering system decreased also. In at least one case, the city was abandoned after its primary cistern ruptured. Apparently there just weren’t enough people to fix it, or at least not enough reserves to feed/water the population while the cistern refilled.
    Analogous case: massive and distributed failure of the electrical grid in a First World megacity, with associated transformer destruction, resulting from failure to recapitalize.
    You can patch only so long, then you start getting large cascade failures. There would be consequent damage to other utility systems from civil disturbances and simple neglect of unused and heavily patched equipment during attempts at restoring the electrical grid. Should such a maintenance deficit failure occur during a time interval of monetary failure and high resentment of urban support levies by the hinterlands (which would be seeing their own electrical distribution failures), it is difficult to see how the First World megacity could regain the utilities needed to be fully populated, or for that matter why anybody would want it to. Those First World megacities are Hell to live in, even now (2022-04).

  61. Russians also pulled back from the outskirts of Tbilisi during the war in Georgia so this is nothing new. After taking whatever it takes from the Ukraine, Russia can still enforce de-militarisation permanently on the rest of he Ukraine by enforcing a no-flight zone for any but Russian aircraft and bombing from afar any deliveries of military weapons and any attempts to re-establish the military, something similar to what the US and it allies did in Iraq between the two Gulf wars. And Zelensky can end up like Saakashvili going somewhere into exile and becoming a governor of some region or a mayor of a city in a foreign country, Israel perhaps.

  62. OMG ! Mr Mike Whitney, what are you doing? Interviewing a clairvoyant and serving this as considerable strategic insight ? And also Mr. Unz gives this a pass? I hope this is not the beginning of a shift that unz.com will now start publicizing opinions and fantasies instead of analysis based on facts?. I am shocked to read this kind of stuff on unz.com. No words for it. I hope it is just a one-off mistake. But nevertheless if this can pass on unz it has put me, as a daily unz.com reader, on alert.

  63. With the truly Evil and deranged lies of ‘Russian genocide’ being loyally regurgitated by Western MSM vermin, despite their plain fraudulence, and the immense significance of Ukronazi death-squad butchers to a global CIA project to create hard Right militias for terror purposes ie a global Operation Phoenix or Condor being not just ignored but furiously denied, the Russian campaign MUST end with partition, and the liquidation of every Nazi who does not surrender.
    Those that do, must stand trial, and spend years in prison, and the evidence of their crimes and US and UK etc links, widely publicised. Rump, Galician, Banderastan can rot and turn into a cancer on the EU. Then the Western MSM must face justice.

  64. @Wielgus

    If your country has numerous traitors in its midst, on the payroll of your implacable enemy, the USA, and its stooges, the greatest force for Evil in history, and which is intent on destroying you, you do not in the end tolerate them. That is not ‘repression’-that is hygiene.

  65. Half of this seems like it was written by an alien who just arrived on earth a week ago.

    Half of it right, but evidently by repeating what some others have already said and the other half, a strange mix of guesswork and projection. Which seems oblivious of the negating facts already in the public realm for the assumptions leading to some wacky new angle.

  66. @stozi

    Exactly. Russia was so well prepared that they have actually benefitted from the Western reaction and the long expressed desire, by many, of seeing an end to the petro-dollar is now at hand. Deliciously, by their own hand. The standard of planning between Russia and China, as opposed to the gaggle of fucktards with which we’re saddled in the US led West, leaves the impression this is a fixed fight from the outset.

  67. gotmituns says:

    Two “experts”/BS artists who never were soldiers talking about strategy and warfare – Oh yeah, that’ll work.

  68. @ThreeCranes

    Russia should do the same. Europeans or Americans only

    There is a lot of anecdotal evidence that those White people who flee the creeping invasion of immigrants, do not change their policies (which allowed such immigration in their original lands) even when they migrate to other areas.

    What portion of the Europeans and Americans is woke is not known; at this stage, if Russia imports them, woke people will also migrate there!

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
  69. @peterAUS

    Your concern trolling is not appreciated here. You’re missing on purpose the stated political goal of minimizing the casualties among the unarmed Ukr. citizens. Thus, the slower approach and the much larger casualties among the Russian troops. In fact, the # of dead non-combatants is very low, much lower than what the US did in Iraq, for example.

    You also suck at disseminating the MSM talking points. The “cabal” in Kremlin already has EU and US by the short and curlies in the energy sector. Just wait when the fertilizer crisis hits.

  70. @stozi

    You are correct, see my Newslinks, Rumble the Duran and Scott Ritter. Or see below.
    https://rumble.com/vzn4yg-the-first-casualty-of-war-is-truth-live-wscott-ritter.html

  71. Wielgus says:

    Russian claim to have encircled Ukrainian National Battalions in the Avdeyevka sector and that they are working on eliminating them. It also says Russian ground attack aircraft are pummelling the Ukrainians pretty freely.

    • Replies: @Wokechoke
  72. Fred777 says:
    @bert33

    Is Zelensky even in Ukraine?

  73. Wielgus says:

    Russian claim that French Foreign Legionnaires are trapped in Mariupol. Items of uniform and insignia are put on display.

  74. Anon[977] • Disclaimer says:
    @stozi

    The film King Petar the First does explain a bit of of the Serbian Character

    Tamo Daleko

  75. Wielgus says:

    colonelcassad.livejournal.com – Russian website – Yandex translation edited with my notes

    “God and victory are with us”
    (Peremoha, the Ukrainian word for victory, is used in the title)

    April 4 (2022) 21:59

    The largest one-time surrender since the beginning of OURS (my note – probably the beginning of the operation).
    In Mariupol, 264 enemy soldiers and officers from the 501st separate battalion of the AFU Marines (part of the 36th Marine Brigade) surrendered.
    The motto of the 501st battalion is “God and victory are with us.”
    (Photo shows a large number of soldiers gathered in a building)

  76. martin_2 says:

    Surely the fact that the Russians have changed their plans, redirected their forces, or whatever, is not necessarily a sign of ineptitude. They could not know how the Ukrainians would react to the invasion. Perhaps they thought that if their cities were surrounded then the Ukrainians would capitulate quickly and full scale war could be avoided. But in this respect they were disappointed.

    • Replies: @Wokechoke
  77. Anon[122] • Disclaimer says:

    This guy is an stupid but he does make some points right or half right at least.

    First things first It’s true that Russia apparently underestimated the motivation and integrity of Ukrainian Armed Forces whom lost priorly almost half its service members to Pro Russian sides in defections bringing along their heavy equipment and vehicles. Russia at the start of special operations believe they can make similar unmotivated members to defect to their sides once the heads of the radical groups isolated unable to coerce them to fight. It has happened during 2014-2015 conflicts but it’s wishful thinking it would happen again in the span of 7 years afforded for them to organize practically brand new armed forces free of influence from the past organizations.

    Secondly Russian blitz into Kiev did exactly what they’re meant to do. It is now are pulling back up to mop up Donbass front which will free their main forces to directly advances to Kiev. It’s exactly what diversionary units did after defeat in details of Ukrainian forces in Donbass, Mariupol.
    Now that the main army are freed after Donbass it can directly advance into Kiev to fight them in equal numbers.
    Frankly I’d really like to know where this guy comes up with 50% numbers of his.

    The third and last is this dumb statement

    “I think many are naive about what Russia’s banishment from the global division of labor will mean for its living standards and productivity. Many are also too optimistic about how eager first-tier Chinese companies will be to cooperate with the Russians. How eager were Russian companies to work with sanctioned Iran? Quite possibly the Chinese will be no more eager to risk secondary sanctions than had been the Russians. Robbed of its economic prospects Russia could go back to being the austere militaristic Sparta it was from 1945 to 1991.” How many times we had to remind these idiots that times have vastly passed and different than what 30 years worth of historical accounts that more or less misinterpreted in large parts by USA anglo monoculture?

    Today’s it wasn’t USSR with dead weight ingrates it’s only Russia who have practically full control of their own resources for her own people’s benefits, it wasn’t poor and militarily weaker China that can’t contest USA in the naval engagement, it wasn’t the USA or the West that carry with them higher quality human resources, social stability, or economic robustness.

  78. GMC says:
    @The Inimitable NEET

    Good point, and Russia is fighting in their front yard, which means it has the luxury of using land, sea and air armaments at will. In fact, they could take all summer to accomplsh 75% of their objectives, as long as they continue to control / use those “luxuries”.

  79. WJ says:
    @Anon

    Swedish corpses piling up? They had a lower per capita Covid death than 56 other countries, including almost of all of Europe.

    • Agree: Curmudgeon, Decoy
    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
  80. Wokechoke says:
    @Wielgus

    Looks like the Ukraine frontline between Donetsk and Horlivka is completely smashed. New York and Avdeyevka are the last exurbs before there’s open country and road junctions that support Kramatorsk.

  81. Wokechoke says:
    @martin_2

    There’s a large number of armoured and mechanised assets the Ukrainians have to keep in the north now. The fortified frontline around Donetsk is disintegrating by all accounts. Those Ukrainian units can’t just enter the line in Donbas without interdiction from Russian air strikes all along the roads from Kiev to Donetsk. On top of that there’s a whole other line the Armour needs to protect from Dneiper river bank to Donetsk city. It’s a front the Ukie staff never anticipated they’d need to defend.

  82. In operation Bagration in June 1944, the Russians used a combined arms attack to demolish Hitler’s finest in 2 months. The entire German Army group centre was wiped out. 78 years later the US still have not been able to integrate their Army, Air Force, Navy and Marines to that type of close coordination.

    Yet, there is a tendency to rate the Russian General staff as idiots when in fact the people doing the rating ie Miley, Austin and their associates are themselves dummies.

    The US manner of making war is vastly different and inefficient. Russia wants to take these urban centres without levelling them. Remember, Putin’s plan is to live with these people apart from the fact that he would have to spend money to repair unnecessary destruction.

    The Russian General staff have preplanned for every contingency even for the Azov Battalions retreating into the cities and hiding behind the civilian population. Putin will get what he wants in an elegant way in spite of all the military equipment the west has been pumping into the area. Besides, most of this has been or will be captured and stockpiled or sold. US taxpayers should take solace in the fact that while we cringe at inflation and gas prices, our taxes are helping the Russian economy and hence the Russian population itself.

    There is a human tendency among dummies to assume everyone else is stupid, a dangerous assumption in the best of circumstances. However with the fools we have in DC and our illustrious and fearless Leader Corn Poop, this state of mind is extremely dangerous and could lead up to more serious conflict.

    The US has engaged in this delusional thinking before,many times, and what have been the results ??

  83. Non, l’attaque à Kiev est une feinte car

    – pour conquérir un territoire, il faut prendre les villes et les Russes ne l’ont pas fait
    – pour faire tomber le roi Z, il faut prendre la capitale et les Russes ne l’ont pas fait

    En revanche il fallait :

    – désorganiser le pouvoir central pour fixer la réserve et désorganiser le pays, ça les Russes l’ont fait.
    – offrir à Kiev une possibilité de paix anticipée sans combattre (très important) ce qu’ils n’ont pas fait et cela montre que l’appareil d’état est déjà solidement muselé et verrouillé par le parti dur anti-russe, les “néonazis”. Au contraire, ils ont distribué des armes dans la population de L’Ukraine, une très, très grave erreur car la partie occidentale de l’Ukraine va se balkaniser.

    Pourquoi prendre le roi Z ? Z est Juif et il mène des néonazis à la défaite donc quoi de pire pour lui ? Le roi Z va tomber mais ce ne sera pas la faute des Russes, le coup poignard dans le dos viendra de son propre camp. Les Juifs courront tous se ranger derrière la Russie pour échapper à la colère du vaincu tatoué de croix gammées, or les Juifs sont la puissance de l’argent et de l’économie, un atout pour rebâtir le pays.

    La véritable guerre qui consiste à capturer l’armée du Dombass et accumuler les preuves de l’ingérence occidentale n’est pas seulement militaire, il faut être justifié à chaque étape pour la transformer en victoire. Il faut savoir offrir, renoncer si l’autre refuse, ne pas être trop gourmand, avancer pas à pas , rester justifié en toute circonstance c’est à dire rester juste et honorable sans se faire marcher sur les pompes, endurer les mensonges et les démonter en résistant aux provocations, ce n’est qu’à ces conditions, qu’au final, la victoire sera bénéfique et que la guerre du Dombass sera définitivement clôturée. Les occidentaux géreront eux mêmes la merde qu’ils auront semée dans une Ukraine de l’ouest à la dérive. Biden n’est une crapule arriviste et son bilan lui ressemblera.

  84. Decoy says:
    @bert33

    “Will Zelinsky do the right thing” or has too much time gone by? We’re at the later point on this matter. Zelinsky thinks of himself as Winston Churchill. For a comparison, Joe Biden still thinks that Hunter is the smartest guy he’s ever known.

  85. @Eudion2

    They wave swastika flags and pose with photos of Hitler.

    You say that like it’s a bad thing.

    • Replies: @Herald
  86. Rooster14 says:
    @ThreeCranes

    I mostly agree with your synopsis, except for the part of importing only from America and Europe. I think we’re roughly on the same page, but I would say import exclusively White people; no doubt many of which would come from Europe or America. I believe Russia has already extended an invitation to White South Africans, they should further extend the invitation to all persecuted White people from all over the world. By offering free or partially subsidized fertile land, and opportunities to live in a country that does not despise them, I think Russia would be surprised by the amount of smart and hard working people that would flow to them.

    • Agree: Fred777
    • Replies: @Mefobills
  87. @Godfree Roberts

    I never agree with you about China but I am in total concordance regarding your assessment vis a vis Russia. Mazel Tov!

  88. @nokangaroos

    I just watched a long interview with Scott Ritter on the Duran. Though it was all about how Russia is kicking Ukrainian ass, Ritter said it is certain that China will take back Taiwan, probably sooner than later. When they do so, Ritter says the US has zero chance of doing anything to stop it. The Pentagon knows this. Only neocons in the State Dept. and idiot politicians in both parties still believe that the US has Full Spectrum Dominance. They’re living in fantasy land and are long overdue for a comeuppance.

    • Agree: nokangaroos, RIchebourg
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  89. Bits of this are OK. The Russians went in with Plan A, but it didn’t work – so Plan B was adopted. And there will be Plan C after that. And Plan D all the way to Plan Z. And bits of this are nonsense. e.g. Taking Kiev was never really an option the moment the city didn’t break out the white flags.

    Ukraine was a trap set for Russia by the US neocons. But they have been outgamed by the Chinese and Russians. They thought they’d trapped a bear but it’s actually a family of porcupines. Now the Empire of Lies has to deal with a thousand quills.

    Putin can keep the war going as long as he likes. And if NATO wants to make something of it, he has his A Team in reserve. Meanwhile the EU is being economically crushed (the citizens won’t like that when they finally work out that there is no real reason for it other than neocon hubris in Washington). And there is plenty more mischief waiting in the wings for the Empire – including the Middle East and East Asia.

    • Replies: @CMC
  90. armdkny says:

    LOL!! a Ridiculous assessment of the situation. So the Russian lines are over stretched? Versus whom? Ukrainian soldiers with AK-47’s and anti tank missiles?. The Ukrainian Armed forces were finished the first 72 hours. Air defense, Com, radar, air force, navy, warehouses, depots, oil refineries, etc. Phase one of the operation was to destroy the above, spread out Ukraines ground forces by occupying swath of territory in the north and south.

    The russian’s have now thrown another carrot stick to Kiev and have retreated back to the Byelorus border and east to Kharkov. Massive Russian convoy videos are surfacing, retreating North and east. Phase two will commence, the complete occupation of eastern ukraine from Kharkhov down to the black Sea and possibly further west towards Odessa. This is what the Russians want militarily. We know what they want diplomatically.

    To think the russians had not thought this thru is asinine to say the least.

    Spread thin, overstretched? Comical.

  91. Waste of time. Ended up hurriedly skimming through and mad at myself for even doing that.

  92. @peterAUS

    Scott Ritter, Saker, Martynov, and Gonzalo Lira (apparently still behind Ukrainian lines) are very upbeat that Russia has already won the war. Let’s see how it develops or rather how each side will spin it. Perhaps eventually there will be some final situation that cannot be objectively denied by observers.

    • Replies: @Humbert Humbert
  93. @Wielgus

    That is a shame, Foreign Legionnaires fighting for a country other than France. Maybe they’re deserters who would face prosecution if ever caught in France but I guess they won’t have to worry about that as they’ll be dead.

    Today there are corridors open for all Ukrainian and foreign fighters, Nazis or not, to leave Mariuopol, apparently brokered by Turkey. How is that going? Any takers?

    And what is it with these western Nazis and fascists going to fight for Ukraine against Russia? I thought they were more concerned about getting rid of immigrants, blacks, Muslims, Jews, gays in their own countries instead. I guess I was wrong and they are just unofficial armies of their own states to use in foreign wars while denying responsibility for the war crimes they commit.

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  94. Marjanovic is an intellectual dwarf whose strategic credentials are a mystery to me but I’ll wager he has less military experience than I do, and all I have is five years in the air force….as a dentist.

  95. CMC says:
    @Cornelius Pipe

    Putin can keep the war going as long as he likes.

    I think this is a good point. What’s to prevent the Russians in eastern Ukraine from being like the British in Northern Ireland from ~’75 – the Good Friday agreement? There for like a generation or two? And the whole time the Russians will be there honestly, openly, officially, whereas the Ukraine nationalists Azovs western proxies or whatever will be funded secretly, off the books, whatever. So who would be the baddies in that scenario?

    Meanwhile the EU is being economically crushed

    This is really the rub. If you believe the US/EU/Western capitalist oligarchy globohomo disney can’t can’t system is falling apart —or just plain wrong here and on a lot of other things —which I do, than naturally —whether it’s wishful thinking or not— you’re gonna project russian victory here.

    • Replies: @PetrOldSack
  96. Mefobills says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    He thinks the attack toward Kiev was a feint to force Ukraine to move its strategic reserve up north.

    Not only does he think it was a feint, but that it will be studied by military historians in future as a brilliant strategy.

    He said he used the same strategy with Marines in Iraq, and was able to freeze in place a large Iraq force.

    Today’s armchair generals have forgotten about maneuver warfare. Also, the Russians don’t get two shits about Kiev, their stated objectives are what they have stated.

    Globo Homo types are liars to their core, so they think everybody else is a liar by way of projection.

  97. @Miha

    GTFO, you midwit bot citing MSM, nobody gives a care what propaganda outlets have to say about anything.

  98. Mefobills says:
    @Rooster14

    but I would say import exclusively White people; no doubt many of which would come from Europe or America.

    Negro reproduction rate in the Americas matched or exceeded that of Whites, even with white immigration.

    R breeders do it because it is fun, and the future will take care of itself. Life is cheap.

  99. @Commentator Mike

    Chiming about the finishing. The metric which is a good proxy IMHO is the amount of losses per day for the Ukranian forces. Assuming, the only battle is for Donbass, continuing with about 500 per day extrapolated from the first month (~14-15k losses for VSU according to RF DoD), it will take them between 80 to 160 days to systematically destroy all of VSU in Donbass (40-80k estimate at the moment remaining). Obviously, the moment the losses pass some threshold, the whole army will collapse so between month to two sounds very realistic to finish the Eastern Front, just in time for 9th of May, I hope.

  100. Agent76 says:

    March 28, 2022 Opinion : Academic Terrorism: How think tanks stoked Ukraine crisis?

    Reputed foreign policy think tanks, lavishly funded by security establishments and military-industrial complex, are the real terrorist organizations that have a long and checkered history of cheerleading Western nations into pursuing militarist and belligerent state policies, clandestinely orchestrating proxy wars, publicly pleading for imposing no-fly zones and mounting purported “humanitarian interventions,” oftentimes on the ostensible pretext of so-called “responsibility to protect” and upholding capitalist and neocolonial exploitation in the garb of promoting bourgeois democracy in the developing world.

    https://muslimmirror.com/eng/opinion-academic-terrorism-how-think-tanks-stoked-ukraine-crisis/

    Mar 31, 2022 Zelenskyy rejects Russia’s ‘flowery words,’ thanks Biden for aid

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he doesn’t trust Russia’s “flowery words” at peace talks in Turkey because bombing continues around Kyiv.

  101. sally says:
    @Anon

    u can add the voice of a real military expert with experience in the theater if u listen to https://rumble.com/vzn4yg-the-first-casualty-of-war-is-truth-live-wscott-ritter.html

    Russia has defeated Ukraine militarily. There seems to be little doubt about it.. even today Zelensky seeks negotiations with Russia with offers which seem to comport with many of Russia’s concerns.

    Russia’s concerns, as I understand them, seem to be: No NATO membership for Ukraine, Ukraine to remain an independent non EU state, Ukraine to remove any and all NAZI or militarized elements from the political sphere, Ukraine to have no military, Russia to veto certain types of law or decisions made by Ukraine, Russia language to be legitimate throughout Ukraine. Ukraine commitment to allow self determination vote to be given to all provinces in Ukraine so the occupants of the states can self determine if Russia or Ukraine should be their government, elections to be held to appoint a new government.
    Responding to Putins call for negotiation may have resulted in a better outcome?

    The loss is worse though, IMO. Global sanctions were applied against Russia. That caused the Russian establishment to find a way to limit the impact of the sanctions against Russia, and that effort discovered a way independent currency could be valued in International Trades. The Russian solution actually makes possible, IMO, for each nation state, to use its own currency in any international trade.

    As I understand it, Russia established the value of its currency by pegging its value not by reference to gold but by reference to quantities of commodities [QOC] which measures capable to be divided into 16ths (the commodity quantum) so as to make the value convenient for gold dealers. 16/16ths of that QOC value was set equal to 1 oz of gold and the value of the Ruble was pegged to the number of Rubles Russia says equates to the QOC. If anything QOC valuation is a game changer because it is a new idea that denies nation states currency autonomy. I believe this will lead to everyone’s currency trades adopting the QOC. value system.

    I be interested to hear what others think will happen as the QOC system comes into play?

    • Agree: CelestiaQuesta
  102. jluker says:

    Mr. Whitney should get his facts straight.
    “After the American Civil War, the US successfully reintegrated the South after over 300,000 Southerners perished in a brutal war. However, the US was reintegrating the South into a project that was visibly on the up and up. ”

    There was no reintegration of the sovereign Confederate States. Union troops of which there were only 14,000 in 1867 were withdrawn by 1877 by agreement. A forced union is no union. The other so-called States are mere provinces ruled over by municipal corporations. Only the 14 sovereign Southern States are in fact sovereign and independent. The rest of the continent were consolidated. There is no union, just an association of actual Southern States and provinces.

    The Republic and Constitution of 1787 were dissolved. The central government insolvent. All of the Southern States have Constitutions subsequent to 1880. Those are brand new polities.

    Whatever example you want to use for “integration,” it certainly doesn’t pertain to the Confederate States of America, which is the only lawfully ordained national Constitution on this continent.

  103. @Commentator Mike

    Legionnaires swear to the Legion, not to France; word is some have gotten
    leave “to look after their families” translate: We cannot allow you to fight
    (wink, wink).
    Those “western Nazis” I will believe when I see them.

  104. Herald says:
    @schnelladine

    You say that like it’s a bad thing.

    Silly Billy.

  105. @Eudion2

    Gee, why would people wave flags and pose with a picture of the leader of a “regime” that helped their people rid the land of (((Russians))) who had starved to death millions of their families, friends, and neighbours?

  106. Russia’s withdrawal from Kyiv is simply an admission that Putin was getting nothing but a meat grinder in the Kyiv region and that he is working to regroup and push the main effort to the southeast. It’s an ad hoc plan ‘b’ for a poorly equipped, and trained Army that has acted more like Keystone Cops than anything else.

    • Agree: peterAUS
    • Troll: Boo
  107. @WJ

    Not only that, most of it was at the front end and dealing with nursing homes, for which they acknowledged they had made mistakes, and corrected.

  108. Just like Covid-19 was preparation of society for the war situation so the purpose of this Russian operation IS to draw NATO in and escalate and expand the conflict beyond the Ukraine. Russians are really dealing with Ukrainians with kid’s gloves as they are fellow Slavs and their crimes pale in comparison to the crimes of NATO to whom no mercy will be shown. NATO needs to be punished for its innumerable crimes in many countries and Russians will have no compunction when dealing with NATO unlike in their softy and slowly treatment of Ukrainians. Drawing NATO in would mean drawing some NATO countries in as some may refuse to participate and this could lead to the breakup of NATO which would be the ultimate goal of Russia. But we’ll see, some of those belligerent Westerners may have got cold feet and this may not proceed as intended.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  109. Truthor says:

    Two current articles pointing to increasing problems with Putin’s War.

    Three Small Signs of Big Problems Ahead for Moscow
    https://windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com/2022/04/three-small-signs-of-big-problems-ahead.html

    Disobedience in Russian Army Likely to Increase if War in Ukraine Continues, Potentially Sparking a Revolution in Russia, Sokolov Says
    https://windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com/2022/04/disobedience-in-russian-army-likely-to.html

    • Replies: @Thirdtwin
  110. @CMC

    Forcing immigration upon WE, especially the con-Z-umer motivated, welfare salivating Ukrainians, is a win for the global Finance Cabal in the long term. (More room to drain Ukraine, and have the left-behinds complacent and in happy expectancy of smurf size money transfers from the expatriates. This buys goodwill, politicians, keeps the happy breeding up. This strategy is a proven one.

  111. I’m not a war battle tactician yet, but when you’re Russia and up against GlobalHomoZioBIGsRxMIC3BLM PIGs, the only solution I can imagine is a few nukes up their ZioNazi azzes and all this hate Russia Russia Russia theatrics bs would have stopped faster than a speeding poleez car on a donut run.
    I mean seriously, why have nukes if you can’t use them. Like hellooooo, whatever……

    • Replies: @MotGOD
  112. peterAUS says:
    @Been_there_done_that

    …..Russia will likely fail yet again. It is not just about planning, logistics, tactics, equipment, and communications, but also training, experience and motivation. In all these aspects the Russian military has been over-rated….

    .
    Yep. Grossly, by looking at this debacle.

    Maybe interesting:

    and

    except his angle about Putin’s personality and such, IMHO.

    • LOL: Kiza
    • Troll: Boo, RIchebourg
    • Replies: @WJ
  113. MotGOD says:

    Clutching at straws!

    (Russian losing is winning!)

    Don’t try to sell Russian incompetence for Russian restraint.

    Non-existent Russian restraint as they’ve been slaughtering civilians from the start (robbing, raping, torturing and executing too).

    Having never faced and never been forced to face their lies and heinous crimes during and after World War Jew point Two they never cleansed their souls and so repeat their evil.

    Yeah yeah it’s all a lie, yeah I know, I know, “Russian Good!”, “Uki Bad, real Bad!”, but let me reveal the inevitable future evolution of the Russian fan-boy club:

    1. The rape, robbery, torture, and executions didn’t happen.
    2. Okay, but the Russians didn’t do it.
    3. Okay, but it was justified or at least understandable (those “Ebil Not-sees” deserved it!).
    4. Change subject.

    Optional step 5. No, I was never really a Russian fan boy!

    Why not get off the Russia bus now before it takes you all the way to hell?

    – Meanwhile enjoy your share of moral ownership in Russian war crimes (past and present)!
    — MotGOD (the mighty yet much maligned, lol)

    • Troll: Boo
    • Replies: @Kurt Knispel
  114. MotGOD says:
    @CelestiaQuesta

    Two reasons, one bad, one necessary:

    Bad: To do nuclear terrorism as you advocate and Russia threatens.

    Necessary: To absolutely exterminate nuclear terrorists if they dare.

    There you go.

    Not that hard to understand after all.

    • Troll: Boo
  115. @Wielgus

    Mossad and IDF are clever enough to not leave any physical evidence of their contributions to the war, they have Ziolensky and his US funded ZioNazi armies to cover that.
    I would think US/NATO special forces using Ukrainian uniform patches have also been assisting, how else do you reconcile the utter incompetent shitshow taking place.
    This is a perfect storm of Clown World Big Top actors playing out sandbox tantrum fantasies.

    Next up, it’s Late Night with Trannys, starring Big Pixie Wakanda Dykes.

    • Disagree: Boo
    • Replies: @Boo
  116. Boo says:

    You managed to copy and paste a lot of MSM talking points. Congratulations for being ignored as a troll!

  117. Well Mike, your post smells of Western influence or personal pessimism. I don’t buy it at all. You totally discount Russia’s serious attempt to keep to a minimum damage to civilian infrastructure. Russia’s leading military strategists may have underestimated how the Western Media would spin Russia’s SMO, but with a little time that can be overcome.
    We’re so used to the US/ NATO’s indiscrement bombing and destruction of cities, (Belgrade, Baghdad,, Tripoli etc.) with zero regard for civilian lives, that we expect every other military power to act in the same manner, and the failure to act in kind is seen as weakness in a losing effort.
    Russua could have easily flattened Kiev, or any contentious city, but they haven’t. Give them credit for that. Sit back, open another beer, then in 14 days revisit your thoughts.

  118. Every world leader pushed the killer vaxx. Scientists looked at Russian Sputnik vaxx and China Sinovax. Both have the same poison as all the others.
    5 African leaders rejected the vaxx, all five are dead. Leader of Haiti said “no vaxx” he is dead too.
    Russia put in facial recognition in schools during Covid and all sorts of other freedom loss measures.
    Now they want to starve us to death.
    This has to happen because (((they))) must be here alone to face the wrath of God.
    So it was written, so it will be.

    • Replies: @Francis Miville
  119. Agent76 says:

    April 5, 2022 Ukraine and the Empire of Lies

    Russia is determined to destroy Ukraine, mass murder its civilians, assassinate its president, and gobble up the entire country like its communist predecessor.

    We hear this every day.

    Putin is Hitler and the Russians are barbarians looking to re-establish the Soviet Union’s hold over Eastern European territory.

    Nothing could be further from the truth.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-empire-lies/5776497

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  120. Boo says:
    @CelestiaQuesta

    Wish it was as simple as you’re presenting the situation. 30k ukies dead, another 1.5k-2k Russians dead. And these are just the military numbers. nobody knows the non-military # of deaths. It’s not a fucking joke…

  121. Wielgus says:

    Vzglyad Russian website – Yandex translation edited
    It will become easier to liberate Ukrainian cities from the AFU
    Timur Sherzad
    is a journalist
    April 5, 2022, 17:44
    Urban combat, unlike battles in the open field, takes place according to different laws. There are basements in the city that largely protect the defenders from artillery fire. There are high–rise buildings – on their roofs you can place far-seeing observers, or even remotely controlled cameras, and adjust the fire.

    [MORE]

    The city is inevitably destroyed in the course of hostilities – it turns into a hodgepodge of construction debris, in which it is easier to hide troops and move quietly. In a large city, there are sewer systems that can be used to move covertly and strike from unexpected sides. You can hide in a dilapidated house and ambush with a light anti-tank weapon, strike and quickly retreat, using the difficult terrain around as shelters.

    In short, a skilled and knowledgeable opponent in the city will always have a way to resist you. And for you, storming the city turns into problems and a waste of time. The price of error increases significantly – the risk of one-time large losses in urban development is higher, your troops are crowded in a relatively small area, which increases their vulnerability. Therefore, the first thing you should part with is the idea that it will be easy. Absolutely not. But will it be so terrible for the advancing troops, as it is often depicted on the Internet today, remembering Grozny? Extremely doubtful. And here’s why.

    Garrison quality

    When these lines are written, the units of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and the DPR grouping finish squeezing Mariupol. Inside the cauldron are the best Ukrainian units. But in the end, Mariupol will be squeezed, the cauldron is closed, and its contents will be “cooked” in it. And then the balance of power will be completely different. It will become even worse for the AFU and the National Battalion forces with the ratio of the quality of these forces. Ukraine will irretrievably lose its best troops, and Russia and the republics of Donbass will be able to use their invaluable experience in battles against much less shelled and victorious formations.

    Today, Ukraine is trying to hold on to cities and towns. This is easily explained: the difference in firepower between the armed forces of the two countries is such that, if the Ukrainians go out into the field, they will be swept away in the blink of an eye. The chaos of the urban battle, its transition to completely different distances – all this to some extent equalises the chances. To some extent, but not absolutely. The thing is that in order to realize the advantages of defense in the city, it is necessary to have a large, motivated and skillful garrison. It will not be able to be born out of the blue. We need high-quality human material, which you won’t get in a month or two of training. And the larger the city, the more demanding it is to the garrison: in order to inflict losses on the enemy and make him “get stuck”, it is necessary to tightly occupy the entire defended city with its fighters.

    Photo: Maxim Blinov/RIA Novosti
    How the situation ends when the city is large and potentially problematic for the enemy, but the garrison is small, we know very well from the Great Patriotic War. Medium-sized Poznan, occupied by a fascist garrison of high quality and corresponding to the size of the city, cost the Red Army a lot of blood and a month of fighting. The German capital, Berlin, looked much more serious than Poznan. The size, the political significance, even Hitler remaining there–everything seemed to promise the hardest months of fighting. But the Germans failed to arrange Stalingrad for the Russians on their own land – an elegant manouevre of four tank armies at once cut off the German infantry from Berlin. And it was necessary to form the defence of the city from just anyone. Airlifted sailors, firefighters, policemen, a handful of really good infantry and Volkssturm, roughly corresponding to the current Ukrainian air defence.

    As a result, huge Berlin did not last two weeks. The Germans simply did not have enough high–quality fighters to tightly occupy all the quarters with them – the most convenient building or group of buildings was chosen, and only they were controlled. It was much easier to cut such loose defences into pieces and finish off isolated pockets of resistance one by one, concentrating maximum firepower on them.

    Cut off from supply

    In addition, the stormed city must have a supply line with the main forces, which the attacking forces will not be able to cut. This is the only way to keep the city for a long time. The Russian armed forces have the full range of forces and means to prevent such a situation.

    The Ukrainian military infrastructure is being hit by high-precision weapons on a daily basis. Judging by the briefings of the Ministry of Defence, the enemy’s aviation and air defence have already been suppressed, and it is clear that the emphasis of strikes is shifting to fuel depots. The Ukrainian armed forces are being immobilised – they are being made obviously incapable of manoeuvre war, which means they are passive. When this work is completed, it will be impossible to prevent the complete encirclement of the cities before their assault. This means that enemy troops will not be able to be supplied. And if they can still take food from the population, then there will be a serious problem with ammunition. Every shot for the AFU will be worth its weight in gold, and the Russian troops will be able to shoot much more generously – they will always bring more. This will significantly weaken the strength of the enemy’s resistance – it will become easier to take control of the city.

    This is not to mention the fact that the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation have much more advanced means – from high–precision weapons, the accuracy of which varies within a few metres, to a much more modern fleet of equipment – what are the actions of night attack helicopters, the successes of which the Ministry of Defence reports every day. All this makes it possible to take cities without even creating a zone of continuous destruction there. In the same Mariupol, although it looks very badly damaged in the footage, a lot of things have survived.

    The unfolding confrontation will not be simple and quick. Underestimating the enemy and the upcoming trials is dangerous. But it is also harmful to overestimate, to freeze in front of impending difficulties. The fighters at the front are doing everything they can to get the country a victory, and we should keep a balanced and calm view of what is happening. And to spread and maintain it among friends, because peace and order in the rear is also a resource that will necessarily affect the course of hostilities.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @Dirk Gently
  122. This dude sets off my bullshit detector.. too much emotional language and a lot of hyperbolus words. Though it could be from not being a native English speaker. He comes across like a MSM reporter.

  123. @Wielgus

    This makes sense as Scott Ritter talked about a French presence in Mariupol. He thought the helicopter attempted rescue was a desperate move to get rid of French intel agents. Foreign Legion makes even more sense.

    • Agree: Notsofast
  124. Thirdtwin says:
    @Truthor

    So Paul Goble says to watch the Russian underwear and elevators. Got it.

    “…he served in various capacities in the U.S. State Department, the Central Intelligence Agency and the International Broadcasting Bureau as well as at the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace…”

    https://www.iwp.edu/faculty/paul-a-goble/

  125. Kiza says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    Carlton, I like your videos and writings. However, here you are both right and wrong. This is not a war between Ukraine and Russia then between Jewish controlled NATO and Russia. It is a war to bring down the Russian state and then pillage the Russian resources. Jewish NATO does not want to occupy Russia, it wants to continue its exploitation of the 90’s, as for example by the international Jewish mafioso Bill Browder. His Magnitsky Act was the first shot of the current Ukraine War.

    Yes, most of the Russian army, the better and the best units are sitting in reserve, for the exact reason mentioned above – to be ready for the direct confrontation with NATO.

    Finally, Scott Ritter is excellent in his analysis, as you say. This character Marjanovic is self-promoting rubbish and possibly agent of the globalist mafia.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  126. Anonymous[328] • Disclaimer says:
    @follyofwar

    You are right as far as you go. Think it through, however. Suppose the People’s Republic of China (PRC) tries to take Taiwan, and the US Navy (USN) actually responds. The result is a bloodbath for USN, whether PRC wins or not. USN can no longer play Coast Guard for the World (not enough ships left), sea lanes become too dangerous for present levels of trade, and PRC is cut off from the raw materials that feed PRC industry. USA will henceforth pursue an Oceanic policy, and PRC will remain cut off.
    PRC can counter this to some extent by using land transport, but with the Himalayan Plateau to its West, it is in a poor position to do so. PRC standard of living, and quite likely PRC population levels, will fall. The present PRC government is already becoming more authoritarian in order to retain control of PRC population, and will have to become more authoritarian, and more inward looking, should its sea lanes be cut off.

    There is another aspect: Taiwan (home of the famous “ON” corporation, sorry, cheap pun) is a cultural museum of Chinese society. It is the last survival of Chinese society before Western Communism imposed a (pardon the expression) revolutionary French society, Napoleonic War era, on China’s mainland. This is important because the PRC population suffers from anomie, as do most populations in the present French Revolution descended societies, and needs pre-Western social models if it is to survive as a cohesive society in the long term. While the West did considerable good pre-1914, introducing industrial techniques and organizational methods that eliminated much official predation of local populations, its attempt to extend Western social models to all societies on Earth appears to have failed. Cultural diffusion has often worked out well, but it works best by emulation rather than imposition. The Middle East and North African coastal societies can be thought of as a reaction to the Alexandrian an Roman attempts to impose Hellenism in these regions. When the Romans weakened under the attrition imposed by urban plagues, the core regions of Islam utterly rejected all Hellenistic forms, including Christianity. It never accepted them back, even from the Crusader kingdoms or the Christian occupation of the 1800s and 1900s, both of which brought prosperity previously unknown since Classical times. Man does not live by bread alone, as they say, and bread was not a sufficient bribe for accepting Hellenism or its descendants.

    Multi-cultural and cross-cultural societies are currently being rejected by all countries worldwide, including Western countries. For an early report on this, see van Creveld’s _The Fate of the State_. For a more recent example of this rejection in a Western state, try the comments in unz.com. It seems that people do best in their own country and society.

    So I’m left with the Delphi oracle’s statement, slightly modified: “If PRC invades Taiwan, a mighty empire will fall”. In more detail, PRC society will be stressed back to era of warring kingdoms and its only model of Chinese living will have been destroyed. Frankly, I would not wish this for the Chinese. They have a great (if conceited) civilization, and a new dark age after its recent wonderous accomplishments would be a catastrophe for everybody, worldwide.

    • LOL: Notsofast
    • Replies: @Joe Wong
    , @Seraphim
    , @Anonymous
  127. peterAUS says:
    @Wielgus

    Ah…MOUT, from a Russian perspective.

    ….But in the end, Mariupol will be squeezed, the cauldron is closed, and its contents will be “cooked” in it. And then the balance of power will be completely different….

    No it will not. Actually……while that was going on (plus a lot of other mistakes….) Ukrainians have been strengthening their defenses everywhere. Besides, the troops that have been (and still are, and still will be….) fighting in Mariupol are also being worn out. I really doubt they’ll be effectively used anywhere else in this conflict, at least for a month after Mariupol is taken.
    The latest…ahm..success.. in that fight for Russians is they cut the city, finally, into three pockets. Each pocket full of multistory buildings and deep cellars…….make of that what you will.
    So, the balance of power will be even worse for Russians.

    Ukraine will irretrievably lose its best troops, and Russia and the republics of Donbass will be able to use their invaluable experience in battles against much less shelled and victorious formations.

    Oh boy.
    The best troops are in LDNR region. The second best are in Kiev region.
    Invalu….they gained zero experience in effective MOUT in this ongoing debacle in Mariupol. Zero.

    The thing is that in order to realize the advantages of defense in the city, it is necessary to have a large, motivated and skillful garrison.

    Not large. MOTIVATED and skillful. Not much skill required to stop Russian infantry there.

    …which you won’t get in a month or two of training….

    Wrong.
    With PROPER training one can get an effective urban defense force, against these Russians we’ve seen, in a week. Tops.

    …it is necessary to tightly occupy the entire defended city with its fighters…

    That’s how Russian…expert….understands MOUT ?!No wonder they are stuck.
    Makes sense; the last example he builds from is Berlin ’45. Oh boy….

    The Ukrainian armed forces are being immobilised – they are being made obviously incapable of manoeuvre war, which means they are passive.

    Yeah……
    Especially around Kiev and Kharkov. And in resupplying/reinforcing the group in LDNR region.
    This level of wishful thinking is starting to feel desperate.

    As this:

    ….the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation have much more advanced means – from high–precision weapons, the accuracy of which varies within a few metres, to a much more modern fleet of equipment – what are the actions of night attack helicopters, the successes of which the Ministry of Defence reports every day….

    The cabal in Kremlin definitely has a problem here.

    • Agree: TaterSalad
    • Replies: @Dirk Gently
  128. @peterAUS

    And, in spite of overall modernization since 2008, for several reasons (corruption one of them) they haven’t been able to create competent professional military capable of sophisticated combined arms operations against European type opponent.

    You certainly know you are in complete opposition to what Scott Ritter says (namely in the video of comment #40) about:
    – “the russians are professional, professional, professional…” (17m25s of that video).
    – Nato and US haven’t been training properly since 20-30 years ago, and consequently are very ill-prepared for any real battle.
    – the russians learned some things with the recent chechen wars (on MOUT) and in Syria.

    Would you share with us any documents, articles, studies, etc, backing up your statements ?

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @TaterSalad
  129. peterAUS says:
    @DevilAdvocate

    ..You certainly know you are in complete opposition to what Scott Ritter says…

    I do.

    Would you share with us any documents, articles, studies, etc, backing up your statements ?

    No.

    I am here to read, and sometimes try to have a conversation with, people I think know what they are talking about, which could deepen my understanding about all this. Just that.
    Anyone is free to think and/or feel whatever he/she wants.

    While I respect your wish to understand all this and, rare today, civil approach to communication, well, doesn’t work that way (documents, articles, studies, etc. only). Requires real life experience.
    You’ll have to choose your authorities.
    Good luck.

  130. @anonymous

    The Russians plan on winning and the Ukrainians really have no plans as they are pawns to their masters and are not even unified so any talk of Ukrainian’s plans should be in quotes. Individually I assume it runs along the lines of somehow manage to survive or figure out how to desert.

  131. While I respect your wish to understand all this and, rare today, civil approach to communication, well, doesn’t work that way (documents, articles, studies, etc. only). Requires real life experience.

    Thanks.
    Well, any real life experience sharing would be quite appreciated too… specifically to illustrate that point of “russian army incompetence and corruption”.
    I know we’ve discussed this before, and commented over some videos, and I could see your points.
    But still, I get puzzled at the way other people, who supposedly are “in” the knowledge of these matters, like Martyanov, Scott Ritter, etc, saying something completely opposed to what you say.
    In your view, they aren’t seeing what you see, or they’re not telling the whole truth ?

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  132. @Kiza

    I agree the Russian military isn’t putting much of an effort into this operation in the Ukraine and the Ukraine isn’t really their enemy. The real target is NATO, and the aim is to defeat NATO economically and then militarily and break it up. Then the members of former NATO countries will have nothing left but their hate and they can burn with it in their helplessness. Or burn in hell if they don’t face up to the reality of the New World order where they will be minor players ignored by the rest of the world, the majority international community, which is rising and will be rising from strength to strength as Russia and China turn more to them away from the nasty hateful West. As African, Arab , Asian and Latin and South American nations try to establish order and stability in their countries they will be opening their prisons and mental asylums and driving the inmates to the EU, US, Canada, Australia in greater tidal waves of refugees made up of the worst scum and filth of their societies to corrode Western society from the inside as it slips further into recession and crisis. This is hybrid warfare on all levels and the criminal inmates of jails in the Third world are, and will be, used to spread chaos on the streets of Western metropolitan areas. And any anti-Russian East European countries will also be targeted as demonstrated by the recent Polish border crisis. On the other hand, Russia friendly countries which have built defences against this element of hybrid warfare, like Hungary, will be spared.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  133. Joe Wong says:

    The interview is weird, it supposes to discuss the pros and cons of Russian military strategies and its evolution as war goes on, but it ends up bashing Russian and Putin, and predicts the Russian can not escape their dismal prospect in the hands Empire of Lies and its lackeys.

    The writing is typical Empire of Lies and British propaganda style, a lot of bashing and nay-saying for the most part of the article and ends in a short mention of possible of hope to make the writing appear objective and balanced.

    I would agree with the first commenter stozi’s assessment that Marko Marjanović is a fake slav fagged out by the empire of lies for disinformation war against Russian and Putin.

  134. @stozi

    The economy will be fine, it’s more of a question how the financialized debt-ridden economies of the OECD will get by with their own sanctions rather than how Russia will.

    The Russian economy will not be fine.

    You can’t just kick out US/German/British companies and then replace them with local equivalents overnight.

    Putin’s currency extortion scheme isn’t going to fix their underlying problems. Meanwhile Germany and other countries will now be investing billions to help reduce their dependency on Russian gas and oil. Great job Putin, you trashed your economy and motivated your neighbors to find permanent alternatives to your natural resources.

    The 72 hour mop up operation is not going as planned.

    This was a stupid war and defenders of Putin like Larry and Anglin will look like complete idiots when it is over.

    Russian officers will come forward and talk about what actually occurred. Putin defenders here will be on record making ridiculous allegations like the destruction of Mariupol was all a surgical strike or that reports of rape are all fake. Yes of course because in past wars Russian soldiers were complete gentlemen to women in occupied territories.

    Putin hasn’t even provided a consistent explanation for the war. But I guess that goes with the benefit of controlling the press and the internet. You just lock people up if they ask pesky questions like what exactly is the goal.

    Larry and Anglin should probably come up with new online personas. Their credibility is at zero and will soon head into negative territory.

    • Troll: Notsofast
  135. peterAUS says:
    @DevilAdvocate

    Well…well….you ARE some sort of exception for sure on the Internet in general and this online pub in particular. In disagreement, and still civil.
    You ARE here to learn something and not just for “online therapy”.
    Rare and dying breed………
    Compliments, anyway.

    I get puzzled at the way other people, who supposedly are “in” the knowledge of these matters, like Martyanov, Scott Ritter, etc, saying something completely opposed to what you say.

    Why?
    People disagree on a lot of things. Is there a God…haha?

    YOU simply have to choose. Actually, no; you have to pick up. From some 2 %; from some 98%. And anything in between.

    I watch the former; he has decent, how to put it, theoretical, input. Like “we” have this awesome weapon.
    True. “We” need 10000 of those, though, but have only 1000. Why? They are stored badly, so, most likely only half will work. Why? Because of bureaucracy, when “we” need them those who do need them will get 100.
    In practical terms it means that the latest, and very good Russian aircraft, is being used as Stuka bomber from WW2.
    It means that Russian infantry don’t have optical sights on their small arms.
    Etc…….etc….it’s a LONG list.

    He has zero input about training of tactical units. And THAT is how I see military. To each his own.

    As for the latter he, simply, doesn’t understand Russian top military echelon’s mindset. Its ruthlessness to own troops and callous approach to soldier’s life. Make of that what you will.

    ….they aren’t seeing what you see, or they’re not telling the whole truth ?….

    The former.

    Here is a homework for you, if you will:
    Find out how a Russian BTG prepared for this conflict. COMPARE that with how a similar outfit gets prepared for similar mission in NATO.
    The former won’t be easy. Why?
    The later is very easy. Why?

    I asked, in one my previous posts here that about Russian preparation. NOBODY has been able/willing to answer simple questions:
    -How much time the BTG had for the preparation?
    -Did all them get into one place?
    -Did they TRAIN there?
    What kind of training they did?
    -Have all elements gone through fitness and expertise testing?
    -Have they zeroed their weapons before start of the mission?
    -Did they get all the maps, charts, about the area they’ll be deployed?
    -Did the command element have some doubts about their mission? Kit? Did they raise that with the “top”?
    Etc..etc….

    Hehe……..now…when was the last time you’ve seen these/similar questions being discussed by those experts you mentioned?

    Makes you think?

    • Replies: @DevilAdvocate
  136. @Commentator Mike

    I agree the Russian military isn’t putting much of an effort into this operation in the Ukraine and the Ukraine isn’t really their enemy. The real target is NATO, and the aim is to defeat NATO economically and then militarily and break it up.

    So you think the best move towards getting rid of NATO is invading your neighbor and assuring nearby countries that they made the right decision by joining it?

    Let’s review a few facts that are rarely discussed on Unz and never on state censored Russian television:

    1. Ukraine does not qualify for NATO.
    2. Ukraine is not invited into NATO
    3. Ukraine has not applied for NATO
    4. NATO has stated that they are not interested in Ukraine because of border instability
    5. Putin did not make a list of demands before invading nor did he demand that they stay out of NATO. In fact he refused to talk to Zelenskyy.
    6. Putin has given 3 different explanations for the war (NATO, neo-nazis in government, Donbas)
    7. Russia agreed to recognize the borders of Ukraine which included the Crimea in 1994

    Even more hilarious is that some of you still think that worldwide Jewry is somehow losing in this war.

    Well guess where Israel gets its oil? Yes Russia and it will be even cheaper once Putin’s currency scheme falls apart. So the Jews end up with cheap oil and raw diamonds and get to play both sides. Israel will have record economic growth thanks to cheap Russian resources and not one thing about Western media will change. Now someone please call me a JEW for pointing out this unwanted reality. Unlike Putin I’ve never celebrated a Jewish holiday or put on a skull cap. Nor have I been to Israel nor do I sell the Jews oil.

    • Troll: Kiza, Spanky
    • Replies: @Seraphim
  137. Joe Wong says:
    @Anonymous

    After the US and PRC have confrontation over Taiwan, you said US had no ship left to play Coast Guard for the world, and the US’ industries have been hollowed out, the American cannot build ships anymore, where are the ships for the US to pursue an Oceanic policy come from? If the US cannot play coast guard anymore, how can the sea lanes dangerous to PRC anymore? Man, you are talking riddles, full of contradictions and hallucination.

  138. @Anonymous

    China can not build shit unless they steal the prints from the USA.

    • Replies: @Dirk Gently
  139. @DevilAdvocate

    The Russian Army looks to me like a bunch of dis organized lunatics with no sense of military command. They even were caught leaving their own soldiers behind on retreat.

    • Replies: @Dirk Gently
  140. @sally

    The US\$ will form the largest proportion of the currency basket, along with the Euro, RMB, Yen, etc., but currencies are only half the basket. Commodities will form the other half. See my discussion of it here: https://www.unz.com/article/dollars-end/

  141. @Boo

    Listen up boo boo, (that rhymes with Doo Doo), is that why you’re full of it?
    100,000 people have died from drugs overdose mostly from fentanyl in the US alone, do you think I give a rats azz about ZioNazi’s and Ruskies killing each other 5000 miles away?
    Niggaz Pleez, drink some fentanyl and go the way of the Doo Doo bird.

    Drug Overdose Deaths in the U.S. Top 100,000 Annually

    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/nchs_press_releases/2021/20211117.htm

  142. elmagnosr says:

    Six-star Armchair General, bloviating. Or Freud interpreting dreams again? Putin and Russia’s military planners should give him a call to find out what their next steps should be.

  143. @peterAUS

    Well…well….you ARE some sort of exception for sure on the Internet in general and this online pub in particular. In disagreement, and still civil.
    You ARE here to learn something and not just for “online therapy”.

    Thank you again. Despite many outraged reactions to your statements, from the part of other members, I always felt you had valuable points to make, even if our general view is not the same.
    And I don’t see the point of coming here if not to learn something I don’t know, to enlarge and complete previous perspectives. But quite often I just see people reiterating ad infinitum their established views, and almost impermeable to anything that contradicts them…

    Why?
    People disagree on a lot of things. Is there a God…haha?
    YOU simply have to choose. Actually, no; you have to pick up. From some 2 %; from some 98%. And anything in between.

    Percentages do not matter. What matters, IMO, is how new data supports or contradicts what I knew up to that point. If new coming things start shaking my previously carefully built “knowledge house”, so be it. Let’s see if I can adapt it, if not, let’s demolish it and start a new better one.
    But, for accepting those changes, I have first to understand what these new informations mean. It’s not just a question of arbitrary picking one side.

    As for the latter he, simply, doesn’t understand Russian top military echelon’s mindset. Its ruthlessness to own troops and callous approach to soldier’s life. Make of that what you will.

    I understand. But aren’t we trying to see their way of being through our western mindset ?
    Maybe for us, what is callousness and ruthlessness, might be just appropriate for a russian/slavic mind, and the most effective way.
    For example, people of southern Europe have a very different way to approach social and professional relationships from people of northern Europe. If you try to use one’s format in the other’s context, you are bound to failure.

    Find out how a Russian BTG prepared for this conflict. COMPARE that with how a similar outfit gets prepared for similar mission in NATO.
    The former won’t be easy. Why?
    The later is very easy. Why?

    I don’t know if I can retrieve that kind of information.
    But I have just finished seeing the long Ritter/Duran interview, and he pointed that present day Nato troops have very bad preparation and training, if any, to engage in an actual war. And that’s one of the reasons Nato has its hands tied, not being able to really intervene in this war. Despite not lacking in willing and pushing…
    Scott also pointed that nevertheless Ukrainian army is (was) very well equiped, well trained and well led. You might make the point here this was due to Nato training and outfitting…

    Hehe……..now…when was the last time you’ve seen these/similar questions being discussed by those experts you mentioned?

    They all seem valid points. But I wonder how can we check and confirm that kind of information… Unless you are a ranked officer inside the armies in question.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  144. WJ says:
    @peterAUS

    The Russian military perhaps is over-rated but they did a fine job in Syria. If not for Russia the insane lunatics of AQ and ISIS, all initially supported , armed and funded, by the USG , would have been conducting a genocide there. For that reason alone, I lean towards Russia in this c0nflict.

    Over-rated doesn’t mean they won’t crush the Ukrainian military. That’s happening as we speak but any losses are touted as un-expected and as huge setbacks. The US MSM is beyond redemption on this and other issues

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  145. peterAUS says:
    @DevilAdvocate

    … aren’t we trying to see their way of being through our western mindset ?..

    We see their performance. That’s all which matters.

    ….what is callousness and ruthlessness, might be just appropriate for a russian/slavic mind, and the most effective way….

    Most eff…? Let’s agree to disagree.

    …he pointed that present day Nato troops have very bad preparation and training, if any, to engage in an actual war.

    He’s wrong.

    And that’s one of the reasons Nato has its hands tied, not being able to really intervene in this war.

    The ONLY reason is almost certainty of M.A.D.

    You might make the point here this was due to Nato training and outfitting…

    I shall.

    But I wonder how can we check and confirm that kind of information… Unless you are a ranked officer inside the armies in question.

    It’s ALL in public sphere. For NATO, anyway.
    You just need to find it.

    • Replies: @Sepp
    , @Dirk Gently
  146. peterAUS says:
    @WJ

    Over-rated doesn’t mean they won’t crush the Ukrainian military.

    They will not.

    That’s happening as we speak …

    It isn’t. We have a strategic stalemate. A war of attrition. Keyword “attrition”.

    From now on it’s all about the ability/inability of warring parties (NATO/RF) to endure, economically/socially, this conflict.

    Most people here believe RF has upper hand there.
    I don’t share that belief.

    Time will tell. Rather soon; measured in months.

    • Replies: @Dirk Gently
  147. At the outset President Putin stated, “The Nazis will be defeated/destroyed. Everything has been planned…” (paraphrasing)

  148. Kiza says:

    Many monkeys here do not get it that Russia is readying itself for the war with NATO. Also, Russia does not have a client Saudi regime to pay for getting rid of Israel’s enemy Saddam Husain and his military (and millions of civilians). \$10B from the Saudis just for the first attack on Iraq.

    Ukraine was meant to be the NATO staging ground for both tactical ethnic cleansing of Donbas & Luhansk and for the strategic placement of US nuclear missiles in Eastern Ukraine, 350 miles from Moscow.

    What the Russian are really doing and what every monkey commenter here should understand is that Russia has superior stand-off weapons, which they are battle testing in Ukraine for the battle against the West. Will they be ready with a nuclear powered cruise missile in time, the Burevestnik (the storm bringer)?

    Since Ukraine military with its integrated Nazis has been lavishly trained to NATO standards, this war is a dress-rehearsal for the main show coming up.

    Let us see if that US general, who used to train Al Quaida and ISIS in Syria, was really caught in Mariupol. If true, would that not justify to the monkeys here that this is a Russian dress-rehearsal for war against NATO?

    • Agree: Commentator Mike
  149. Seraphim says:
    @Anonymous

    Have you ever been to China?
    Do you realize that ‘land transport’ goes around the Himalayian Plateau?

  150. Sepp says:

    Ukraine = Khazaria 2.0. From the dancing pedo-drag queen’s own mouth:

    Haaretz: Zelenskyy Says Post-war Ukraine Will Emulate Israel, Won’t Be ‘Liberal, European’

    Ukraine will become a “‘big Israel’ with its own face,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy declared on Tuesday, indicating that his country intends to emulate the Israeli security state in the wake of Russia’s invasion.

    “Ukraine will definitely not be what we wanted it to be from the beginning. It is impossible. Absolutely liberal, European – it will not be like that. It [Ukraine] will definitely come from the strength of every house, every building, every person,” Zelenskyy told members of the Ukrainian media during a briefing.

    Of course the newspapers of the Khazarian occupation in Palestine have been telling us for years that the Khazarians are planning to reconquer Crimea and the Black Sea coast for Khazaria, so this comes as no surprise:

    Leaked report: Israel acknowledges Jews in fact Khazars; Secret plan for reverse migration to Ukraine

    Only yesterday came news that Syrian rebels plan to give Israel the Golan Heights in exchange for creation of a no-fly zone against the Assad regime. In an even bolder move, it is now revealed, Israel will withdraw its settlers from communities beyond the settlement blocs—and relocate them at least temporarily to Ukraine. Ukraine made this arrangement on the basis of historic ties and in exchange for desperately needed military assistance against Russia.

    Zelinsky’s confession explains why Ukraine continually refused to make any serious attempt to find a peaceful resolution to the issue of Donetsk, Lugangsk and Crimea. The Khazars want a war of goy genocide and most of all ethnic cleansing. This also explains the scorched earth policies of the Ukrainian Army and its terrorist policies towards the ethnic Russians.

  151. Seraphim says:
    @John Johnson

    There is no need for shabbos goys to wear a skull cap when shilling for ‘them’. It sounds more ‘convincing’. Actually convincing people that all this circus is about ‘them’.

  152. Sepp says:
    @peterAUS

    We see their performance. That’s all which matters.

    LOL. No, PeterAUS. You only read and watch the propaganda put out by Nato and Ukraine that supports your opinions. It is known as Confirmation Bias, and you are an acute sufferer. Likely it is the result of some brain damages that resulted from your participation in a Nato war of aggression, or perhaps it just just oozes out of the demented brain of a war monger who has inflicted so much pain and suffering on innocent people.

  153. Seraphim says:
    @Agent76

    You are wrong. Russians do not want to re-establish the USSR, but the Russian Empire. Their policy was always ‘the regathering of the Russian Lands’.

  154. Wargnozo: We found another green beret of a French legionnaire in Mariupol

  155. Sepp says:
    @peterAUS

    Russian armed forces showed such lack of performance, so far, that I believe they aren’t capable of closing the cauldron, let alone destroying the forces within.

    Earth to War-Whore PeterAUS: Those “forces” have already been destroyed.

    The only way the Khazarian army can maintain its genocide of European Christians if is ZOG-Nato keeps providing it with new death machines. That is why Nato keeps sending billions of free goodies. This is just like Lend Lease from 1941-1945. Khazaria will never be asked to repay the billions.

    For confirmation of the amount of hardware being pumped into this war, just look at all the “Ukrainian” UAV losses compared to the amount they had before the Khazarian civil war started.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  156. @stozi

    requires the end of the dollar as the global reserve currency and the collapse of the west

    Mate, stick to computer games. This sort of thing is way above your pay grade.

  157. Wielgus says:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNYfnWjhdzE&ab_channel=%D0%AD%D0%9A%D0%A1%D0%A2%D0%A0%D0%95%D0%9D%D0%9D%D0%AB%D0%95%D0%9D%D0%9E%D0%92%D0%9E%D0%A1%D0%A2%D0%98
    Russian YT channel claiming about 20 NATO officers are trapped in Mariupol. Yesterday it was “unconfirmed” but they seem more confident about the assertion now. As the Ukrainian defence perimeter shrinks, I reckon we will soon find out. Those near-suicidal helicopter flights to try and evacuate people from Mariupol may be explained by their presence.
    The Russians now hold hundreds of Ukrainian POWs in the Mariupol area and it is possible that this is the source of tip-offs.

    • Replies: @Sepp
  158. @Wokechoke

    The Netherlands is in the Top 5 of the world’s food exporters, and there are no empty shelves here. Only now, after nearly two months into the Ukraine events, the first price increases are popping up, and they are not nearly as steep as the fuel price rises. That may change, of course, but there is no reason for panic as yet.

  159. @Sepp

    I doubt those figures are correct and are probably overestimates for both sides. There are still Ukrainian helicopters and UAVs popping up so it can’t be 100%. And how could the Ukraine have lost more helicopters than it had originally before the war? There’s no way they could have produced as many as they had since the start of the hostilities or even imported that many.

    • Replies: @j2
  160. j2 says:
    @Commentator Mike

    You are right, CommentatorMike. This is from Tass and relatively recent March 25
    “Ukraine also lost a significant portion of its combat vehicles: 65.7% of all tanks and armored vehicles, 42.8% of all field artillery and mortars”
    so, Russians, usually doubling enemy losses and halving own, does not give so large losses to Ukraine.
    The “experts”who made the table do also not consider that the Russian numbers should be for the troops they have in Ukraine. Russia cannot use more than half of its power in Ukraine as it also has to defend the country. Thus, Russia had about 2000 tanks and 300 fighter jets for this war. The Russian total of 9000 tanks and 700 fighter jets is not a number they can use here.

    • Thanks: Commentator Mike
    • Replies: @Sepp
    , @Sepp
    , @Sepp
  161. Sepp says:
    @j2

    j2 is baaack! The problem here is that Nato, and especially the Polish war mongers, are frantically resupplying Ukraine with all the ex-Warsaw pact hardware from Czech repubulic, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Bulgaria and Romania. On top of that, the US even sent some AA missiles that they had stolen from the Warsaw Pact in the 1990’s in order to copy their superior technology.

    Below we see tanks and bmp’s that have already arrived in “Ukraine” from the Czech Republic, which were sent on orders from their Khazarian overlords

    As long as your beloved Nato is resupplying “Ukraine” even faster than Roosevelt resupplied Staling in 1942, then your claims of low Ukrainian losses stink like Judeo-USSR propaganda about Red Army losses in June, 1941.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
    , @j2
  162. Sepp says:
    @j2

    Reuters confirms the desperate effort to resupply “Ukraine” after her devastating losses:

    Czech Republic sends tanks, infantry fighting vehicles to Ukraine

    The Czech Republic has sent T-72 tanks and BVP-1 infantry fighting vehicles to Ukraine, a Czech defence source told Reuters on Tuesday, confirming a local media report.

    When dealing with the Khazarian mafia, we have to understand that when they finally admit to their lies, the magnitute is reduced by a factor of 10, if not 100, the same degree to which they have rehypothicated gold.

  163. Sepp says:
    @Wielgus

    Wouldn’t it be great to see a special Nuremburg Tribinal just for Nato war crimes? Watching Stoltenberger confess to crimes he DID authorize and commit after having his testicles crushed would be a sight for sore eyes. I nominate Mariupol as the location for this tribunal.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  164. @G Money

    Mike Whitney has now become a circus-clown!

    Mike Whitney used to write very good, decisive articles on so-called CoVID-19 virus infections as well as useless and worthless so-called mRNA “Vaccines” promoted by American-European governments.

    Now, Mike Whitney stopped writing about CoVID-19 infections as well as useless and worthless so-called mRNA “Vaccines”.

    Useless and worthless so-called mRNA “Vaccines” neither prevent transmission, nor prevent sufferings and deaths from CoVID-19 infections in vulnerable individuals.

    “The mRNA vaccination is a real mystery, and there HAS to be a reason behind using it instead of the traditional ‘Dead Host’ vaccination.”

    To me and to my friends and colleagues, Mike Whitney was an important source of authentic information on CoVID-19 virus infections as well as useless and worthless so-called mRNA “Vaccines” as Mike Whitney was 100% correct on the subject area from the very beginning.

    But, no more now as Mike Whitney does not write anything anymore about American charlatan Dr. Anthony Fauceka.

    Mike Whitney has now become a circus-clown!

    [MORE]

    ===========================================
    ===========================================

    ‘Finian Cunningham
    March 23, 2022

    The Pentagon has admitted it is providing the Ukrainian military with “actionable intelligence” in combat operations against Russian forces.

    The admission came last week during congressional testimony by Ronald Moultrie, the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security. He was speaking to the House Armed Services Committee, proudly telling Congress members how the Pentagon was helping the Ukrainian military fight Russian forces: “We are making a difference in accurate, actionable, and timely intel.”

    That indicates the Americans are involved in providing information to the Ukrainians for lethal targeting of Russian troops.

    It is an incredibly sensitive admission. Only two weeks before Moultrie’s testimony, a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee had reportedly sought to downplay any such informational exchange between American and Ukrainian forces. “We are providing some intelligence” to Ukraine, but we’re “not providing the kind of real-time targeting,” said Representative Adam Smith who chairs the committee. The downplaying is understandable because such intelligence-sharing implies that the U.S. is a direct participant in the conflict.

    One possible area where the Pentagon is “making a difference” is the reported high number of senior Russian commanders who have been killed on the battlefield. Since the Russian intervention in Ukraine on February 24, it is claimed in Western media reports that up to six top-ranking officers have been killed.

    The latest reported victim was the deputy commander of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, Andrey Paliy. The governor of Sevastopol, Crimea, was quoted by Reuters as acknowledging the death of the naval chief on Sunday. He was apparently killed during the battle for the port city of Mariupol.’

    ===========================================
    ===========================================

    ‘PUTIN:

    “I am now instructing our 4 combat regions that if USA and NATO dare to provoke us (around the Black Sea) and try to hit us with even ONE guided missile then you must hit them back as hard as possible.

    Hit them fiercely until they kneel down for mercy.

    If they retaliate, I command you to use nuclear weapons to hit their countries.

    No need to think about the consequences.

    I will be solely responsible.

    Your duty is just to hit them hard until they kneel down begging for mercy.

    Once the war has started I expect you to subdue Europe within 5 days.

    No need to think… just take over the 8 capitals of Europe.

    From now on our Air, Land and Navy armed forces are on full alert.

    I want the world to know who is the leader of the world.

    What is USA… I am telling them they will be trembling in front of us.

    They have been belittling and making fun of many countries, but don’t they dare to try us.

    Go to hell.

    My view is that if the Russians have to live under USA’s mercy then what good is there left in this world!!!”

    [This link https://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67828 is blocked in the USA, FRANCE, HUNGARY, SERBIA, MOLDOVA, SWITZERLAND, and SINGAPORE. Heck, even the RUSSIAN language website is blocked.]’

    ===========================================
    ===========================================

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  165. Sepp says:
    @j2

    Finland checks into the Nato globo-homo Roach motel:

    Finland can join NATO without referendum – president
    LOL. This is like Maastricht. No referendum is needed to for Finland to join the globo-homo suicide parade. Roaches like Finland can check in, but they can never check out. That doesn’t bother j2 as long as Russia gets punished.

    The president of Finland, which borders Russia, has claimed that the widespread support for NATO membership expressed in recent opinion polls could pave the way for joining the US-led military bloc without a referendum. The attitude of the Finns towards NATO membership took a U-turn following Moscow’s attack on Ukraine.

    “NATO needs to know that there is popular support. We already have that, in my view,” Sauli Niinisto told Yle on Wednesday.

    He added that, given the favorable polls, the country would not need a referendum on joining the bloc if it receives supermajority support in parliament.

    ROFL. A supermajority of j2’s beloved WEF future global leaders in the Finnish Parliament will insure that Finland and the Finnish people disappear from humanity forever. But it will be worth it to j2 and all the other globo-homo Finn’s as long as Putin gets punished, and of course as long as Gaia is saved from global warming too. Long live Greta Thunberg. Long live Sanna Marin. Long live god’s chosen supremacists. Die white Finns, die. The sooner the better.

  166. anon[167] • Disclaimer says:

    Oh , a pro-Biden and por- Ukrainian article…

    It’s good to have diverse opinions. Even though they remain opinions and mistaken ones at that.

    LOL : “Robbed of its economic prospects Russia”…

    Russia, since being under sanctions from the western puppet regimes has been able to become self-sufficient and to create strong economic relations with 3 quarter of the world (yes, the USA and their European lackeys are a tiny minority losing everyday what is left of their economic and soft powers).

    “Robbed of its economic prospects Russia”… Lol

    Russia is destroying the current dollar domination order and is creating a multipolar world for good.

    Who exactly is ‘outisde of the community of nations’, those 4/5 billions people working with Russia or the few hundred millions who are soon going to starve because of their criminal puppet regimes decisions?

    Russia and others might be in the process of destroying the globalist scum put in place by the jews since too long: the EU, IMF, ‘world bank’ and other jew instruments of oppression, war, destruction, debt, enslavement…

    Russia, contrary to what some beleive has alos the high moral ground and might be on its way to destroy war criminals like Nato.

    American people are famous for their ignorance and lack of depth. Something inherited from the English probably. Arrogance.

    Let it be known, this week-end in Berlin massive convoys took place to support Russia, thousands of cars, trucks in the German capital drove with Russian flags and symbols.
    In marseille, France, 2 weeks ago, demonstrations against Nato took place.
    France: A poll found that 52% of the population suppoorts Russia and don’t believe the lies of their corrupt media and govt.
    Hungary: Vitor orban has been reelected with a stunning victory. he is pro- Putin and anti EU
    Serbia: The same exact same happened, Vucic, reelected, another Russian ally.

    If Russia, while it changes the world can also destroy the totalitarian shithole called the “EU”, then hundred of millions of Europeans will thank him for that!

  167. @MotGOD

    Something like that out of the mouth of an American shows a giga absence of self reflection.
    In my sums no one has damaged and is damaging the German people aus much as “Americans”.
    Russia never tried to destroy the Germans as a people.
    The “Americans” are hellbent on making the worst out of us, so that they can turn around and proclaim: see – we told you, the Germans are bad garbage.

    You are basically spreading propaganda of the Jewnighted States of Israhell. Poor is, that you are probably volunteering without pay.

    Ukraine is not America. Europe is not America. Take care of America if want to do something for Germany. I suppose you are taking care (of the Jewnighted States of Israhell).

  168. @Sepp

    Are you sure all that hardware is actually being delivered? Surely those trains carrying the tanks could be easily identified, located and bombed as soon as they cross the border. It’s not like you can hide all that especially after you’ve advertised it to the world and posted images.

    • Replies: @Sepp
  169. Sepp says:
    @Commentator Mike

    LOL. This perfectly illustrates the problem with the fact-checker mind controlled confirmation bias bloviating sodomites. If Reuters claims Russia “massacred” 6 million Ukrainian civilians at “Butcha”, that is iron clad proof of war crimes and immediate justification for more sanctions and more death weapons for Khazarian thugs. If Reuters, and others, document yet another transfer of offensive weaponry to the Khazarian death squads in Kiev, all of a sudden their credibility is called into question.

    Dailymail even provides the map:

    But still we cannot be certain that this isn’t Russian “disinformation”.

    Who cares if Yahoo and WSJ confirm. It must be disinformation.

    https://news.yahoo.com/czech-republic-sends-tanks-ukraine-122439816.html?

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-quietly-receives-tanks-from-czech-republic-to-support-war-effort-11649160666

  170. EG says:
    @stozi

    East Germany was decimated, crushed, flattened, wiped out, and shamed by the whole Western world. Ukraine is financed, supported, armed, and adored by the whole Western world. Germans are intelligent, pragmatic, and used to Western values so they understood what it takes to rise from the dead. Ukrainians are fanatical, backward, Eastern, and don’t mind dying for the cause because death in glory may be better than life in the corrupt hellhole of a country. The Russians are well aware of that and I doubt they will want to muzzle the whole country. Most likely just the eastern part.

  171. @anon

    Absolutely; your word in God’s ear!

  172. @anon

    I downloaded the French IFOP poll. Nowhere does it ask the question “do you support Russia in its invasion of The Ukraine?”. So your assertion that 52% of the French population supports Russia in its invasion of The Ukraine is false. What the poll actually says is considerably different than your assertions: only 22% of the French polled believe that the Russian invasion is justified by the risks that would be incurred by Russia if The Ukraine joined NATO.

  173. @Old Brown Fool

    I think the woke will take a pass because the prospect of real, honest, hard work would hold no attraction for them.

    As an undergrad, a Yugoslavian (back then) professor of mine once told me, “Even America, with all her technological know how, would have a difficult time extracting the natural wealth of the Soviet Union.”

    “Why is that?”

    “Because so much of it is in Siberia and dealing with things like annual ground heave due to permafrost melting seasonally requires so much expenditure on repairing infrastructure that profits are chewed up.”

    But that was before the Alaskan pipeline demonstrated that Americans could do the job.

    “Because most of the pipeline was built above permafrost, each of the pipes holding up the raised sections of pipeline contained a sealed tube of ammonia. As the permafrost below the pipeline warms, the ammonia absorbs the heat and rises to a radiator on top of each stanchion. The ammonia is cooled by the outside air, condenses, and falls back to the bottom of the tube, where the process repeats.” Wiki

  174. peterAUS says:

    Not bad:

    • Thanks: Sarah
    • Replies: @Sepp
  175. Sepp says:
    @peterAUS

    “How do we explain that the Ukrainians have won”. What a load of bullcrap propaganda. This blubbering idiot starts out by stating the Russia wanted to conquer and absorb Ukraine.

    This was not an attack of Russia against Ukraine, it was a defensive operation by Russia against a decades long hybrid war being conducted against it by Nato. It started with the breakup of Yugoslavia, and started heating up when Nato violated the terms of the armistice and started annexing all of Eastern Europe.

    This news report gives a far better picture of what is going on and what is at stake:

    Total News Blackout: US General Captured Leading Azov Nazis in Mariupol (confirmations coming in)

    Our sources on the ground report that the last two helicopters trying to evacuate foreign VIPs from Mariupol were shot down this morning. They were sent on a suicide mission to collect Lt.General Coultier, who was, we are told, hiding in a huge industrial complex with some Special Forces staffers and about 30 Ukrainian Army, not Azov, soldiers.

    Of course there are other reports of French officers being involved:

    There was a bio-warfare research/dispersal facility in Mariupol. Russia moved lightning quick on Feb 24. to reign in the bio-warfare war facilites strewn all across Khazarian Ukraine. Russia attacked a far larger, well dug-in, layered Ukrainian defense with a smaller ill prepared force. Why would they do that. One easy answer is to eliminate a bio-warfare threat by Nato, US, and the Khazarian Mafia. All of these organizations have used these weapons in the past.

    Plus we also know that Ukraine was busy working with Turkey to bio-weaponize Bayrakter drones:

    Ukraine asks Turkey if Bayraktar UAV can ‘spray 20L of aerosol’

    We know that not only were Nato/US completely sure that Russia would attack, but also that even in the face of all this evidence that the relentlessly provoked Russia while laying down never ending propaganda smoke screens for what was really going on. We also know that up to the last minute Turkey was delivering bayraktars to Ukraine, possibly even weaponized to deliver bio-warfare agents.

    So in light of this information, one must not only conclude that this Russian special operation was never meant as a war of conquest of Ukraine, but one must also conclude that by taking down the bio-labs and eliminating the offensive Nato bio-warfare operations in Mariupol that the Russian operation has been a stunning success.

    Nato propaganda trolls like PeterAUS and this other Aussie dolt are trying to spin this special operation in 1000 different ways. It is just more typical Nato FUD.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  176. Anonymous[385] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Reply to https://www.unz.com/mwhitney/the-withdrawal-from-kiev-is-russian-escalation-its-the-transformation-from-a-psychological-operation-to-a-textbook-war/#comment-5275916 and https://www.unz.com/mwhitney/the-withdrawal-from-kiev-is-russian-escalation-its-the-transformation-from-a-psychological-operation-to-a-textbook-war/#comment-5275916 .

    1. Q: Overland routes from China to other countries?
    A: Not for bulk cargo. Think it through. Transport must be cheap to be used. The Himalayan plateau makes land transport of bulk goods feasible only to China’s North and South. Geographically, China can, only support the bulk of its current population that is near water transport – seacoast and river valleys, on more or less flat land that is well supplied with navigable rivers.

    This is not unusual. Populations near water cost less to supply, so their industries have lower costs for labor and raw materials.

    If China wants to trade with Russia in the face of US interdiction, it’s choices would be to trade overland, using rail transport North, then rails transport West in Winter (if the Arctic Sea lane is used), or rail transport North, then sea transport West (if the Northern route really does become feasible) would be possible only during the Summer shipping season, using ships that would be idle for about half the year while their ports are frozen.

    Such transport is expensive, and so is limited to high-cost goods. Bulk goods, such as fertilizer, coal, unrefined ores, and usually bulk grains would be cheaper to use locally to make lower mass goods that can be sold locally or in nearby markets, such as Europe, the Mediterranean, or even any coast interdicted not blockaded by the US.

    IF China wants to trade with India, it must use sea transport. Land transport capacity doesn’t exist now, would have to go around Vietnam and if constructed would have to go through several other countries that are suspicious of China for historical reasons. Overland transport would thus be quite expensive. India trade becomes impossible given US interdiction.

    2. Q: Ever been to China?
    A I’ve never been to China, in part because I have no business there, and in part because I just might have trouble getting back out.

    3. Q: If USN badly mauled in Taiwan affair, how does US interdict China trade and then become an Oceanic power?
    A: You are ignoring time scale and the effect of greatly diminished trade. Again, think it through. If the US loses most of USN’s strike potential, then US and UN would drop back to a trade interdiction model, enforced by nuclear submarine** for defended shipping lanes and remaining light USN craft for undefended shipping lanes. Commercial shipping insurance would not be offered for sale under such conditions. China would be suddenly cut off from its raw material, and would become preoccupied with reorganizing itself to save what it could of its population and industry. The US, also deprived of its trade routes, would maintain its trade embargo, but otherwise do much the same as China, and so would the rest of the world. During this interval, no nation could support mechanized warfare, nor would nuclear weapons be able to restore the world’s trade network. It’s always easier to destroy than build.
    The US would not have the strike force to save, say, S. Korea, which N. Korea would probably take (or maybe the other way around), but interdicting trade routes doesn’t take much naval power. Presumably, Japan remains just out of China’s military reach; getting an invasion force from the nearest part of China to Japan in the face of strong submarine resistance would simply require too many resources for a China with insufficient trade.
    Uninsured shipping losses would restrict shipping to only very high value / low bulk cargoes. By the time the US becomes unable to interdict shipping due to internal troubles, piracy, confiscation of cargoes by desperate governments, and loss of port facilities and fuel will still make shipping too dangerous for all but smugglers/pirates.
    This situation eventually ends, as at least some nations re-build industry on a much smaller scale from what has been lost. The US, at this point, has used its continental resources to build its industry somewhat before most or all other regions, industry that will later be used to re-build the US fleet.
    After everybody gets reorganized and re-industrialized, China and Russia/Western Europe will find that they both want Siberia’s resources, and today’s hibernating Siberian conflicts will wake up. While Russia/Western Europe and China spend resources on countering each other, the US will have the time and lack of adjacent land threats needed to build up a strike force fleet again, almost certainly using different strike vessels than the ones lost during the Taiwan affair. If nothing else, the Taiwan lost ships would have become obsolete by the time the US could rebuild. The US becomes an Oceanic power again, China and Russia/Western Europe become land powers that oppose each other, and we’re in the Oceania / EastAsia / WestAsia world of Orwell.
    4. A possible alternative is the “you can’t win ‘em all” alternative: It assumes that easy resources have already been extracted, that the tools needed to mine the present resources are allowed to deteriorate to uselessness during reorganization after a Taiwan invasion debacle, and that AD 2000 level industry does not re-establish itself for one or more centuries.
    5. And yet another alternative is that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) declares Taiwan to be protected territory, a valuable heritage site for historic Chinese culture that no country can invade without incurring the PRC’s wrath,, and cultivates good relations with an honored living museum. Saves face all around (Taiwan’s worth is acknowledged, but PRC is the modern society, not Taiwan. Taiwan would have something like the status of Athens in the early Roman Empire), and prevents alternatives (3) and (4). Not likely, but it has the best payoff.

    6. Thanks for the questions. The Taiwan invasion scenario above is a significant retrogression in human history, comparable to the Asia-wide failure of civilization after the Roman Climactic Optimum or the reorganization of social forms after the Medieval Warm Period.

    This would be difficult to believe if we didn’t have contemporary problems with an overextended production / distribution system. The current problem with parts shortages (that have blocked automobile manufacturing in the US) are nothing compared to the same sort of problems during a blockade, or later when the parts manufacturers are no longer in business. Factories also need a constant supply of replacements for failed equipment, and this is true for factories that make spare parts also. Once stopped, the manufacturing establishment would be difficult to re-start.
    As it is right now, the industrial world is coasting. The ability to re-make the manufacturing base has been rationalized out of existence. Even the trained and experienced engineers have been replaced by technicians, people who know how to use equipment but not how the equipment works. The failures induced by the COVID-19 lockdown are minor compared to those induced by an invasion of Taiwan (which stops Taiwan’s industrial production) followed by a war of trade route interdictions.

    I hope that an age of suffering and retrogression does not occur. Among other things, it would certainly kill me and my family.

    ** which is almost certainly why the US gave Australia several nuclear submarines as an enticement to join AUKUS.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  177. @Sepp

    Apparently there are evil Western WMD bioweapons scientists from some of those laboratories holed up with the NATO officers in Mariuopol and probably in some other encircled locations. Russia would do itself a great disservice if it lets any of this scum out for whatever promises the West may make, like lifting some of the sanctions or not forcing further sanctions. The West cannot be trusted. Russia should sever all relations with the West, including diplomatic, and concentrate on relations with the rest of the world where it should conduct a war by any other means, especially economic, against the West and its propaganda.

  178. j2 says:
    @Sepp

    Sepp, you once kindly wished me the best, so I will answer to you kindly. I will explain to you how you can check the table of strengths that you included in your post.

    Let us estimate the number of tanks that Ukraine has, as you seem to think that the only way they can get tanks is by being given ten old T-72s from Czech. This is not the case, this is the public image given intentionally by Zelensky. We must calculate how many tanks they really may have now. The Ukrainian army gives no information, but we can estimate it rather well.

    Let us start from information that we know as it is in many sources. Before the war Ukraine had the following tanks.
    – 133 T-64BM (Bulat). It is their modernized T-64, a quite good modernization of a quite good, though old tank.
    – 258+400=658 T-64BV (2017-) modernized T-64, of similar level.
    – 344 T-80, the main battle tank of the Soviet Union
    – 5 T-84, a bit modernized version
    = 1140 tanks that are about as good as the tanks Russia uses in this war.
    Additionally Ukraine has
    – 300 T-72 (not modernized)
    – 1000 T-64B (not modernized).
    The T-72 tanks are to be used as reserve and in this war some have been used as some have been also destroyed. The old T-64s will probably not be needed unless the war is so long that some are modernized. This reserve is 1300. Together these make 2,440 tanks.

    Ukrainian standing (regular) army was 260,000 of which 160,000 is the Ground Forces. To make things simple, let us use an old division partition. Thus
    160,000=10*14,000+10*2,000
    meaning 10 infantry divisions and 10 special brigades. The special brigades typically would include three tank brigades, each having 60 tanks. An infantry division of 14,000 soldiers typically has 30 tanks, so a batallion has 3 tanks. Ten infantry divisions have 300 tanks and in total the standing army had 10*30+3*60=480 tanks.

    The first and second echelon reserve is 200,000 men. Ukraine mobilized this reserve. Let us divide it as 200,000=14*14,000+2*2,000. So, they mobilized 14 infantry divisions a. 30 tanks, and two tank brigades a 60 tanks. In total these reserve units have
    14*30+2*60=560 tanks.

    The sum is 480+560=1040 tanks. Ukrainians had modernized 1140 tanks, so they had 100 tank reserve. Seems reasonable. Now the question is how many Russia has destroyed? The tanks of the reserve were in bomb shelters in hidden places, so Russia did not destroy any of the 560 tanks before they were mobilized and after they entered the war, Russia has not done so well, so maybe 100 tanks of these 560 they may have destroyed or captured. Of the standing army 460 tanks Russians may have destroyed a large part. Soon after the attack they claimed to have destroyed 606 Ukraine tanks. As 606 is larger than 480, we can doubt this number and divide it by two, as it seems that Russia multiplies enemy losses by two. Thus, they destroyed 303 tanks. After that time they may still have managed to destroy 100 of these 480 original tanks. Thus, Russians have destroyed about 303+100+100=500 tanks. Ukrainians had 1140 modernized tanks and 300 T-72s and 1000 T-64Bs (which they will not use now). Thus, Ukraine should still have about 640 modernized tanks and 300 old T-72s for this war. It is less than Russia, which originally had 120 batallion tactical groups (10 tanks each) and reserve units with own tanks, so maybe 1,500 or 2,000 tanks in total. Russia can get more tanks easily, but it does not easily get more men. Tanks are not a limiting factor in this war in either side. Russia has lost 350-700 tanks, so if it had 1,500 tanks originally and has not yet got replacements, it has some 1,000+ tanks. It has more than Ukraine, but Ukraine has more antitank weapons, which equalizes the situation.

    A similar calculation can be many from any weapon in the list that you posted. The result is always they same: your list is incorrect and must be considered crude propaganda, not independent estimation by scientists and analysts.

    • Replies: @Sepp
  179. Anonymous[205] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    And here’s the missing plot of time vs. temperature to accompany the reference to Roman and Medieval climate deterioration:

    Note that the Minoan warm period also includes a civilizational reorganization, the Bronze Age Collapse of ~1200 BC, ~3.2 thousand years before present. As with the Roman and Medieval curve, the reorganization occurred after the temperature had peaked. I’d guess that the agricultural capital (fields, crops) that supported the various Empires became obsolete, and there wasn’t enough capital/time to shift back to the crops of a century or three before or to move populations to where agriculture was still productive.

  180. Sepp says:
    @j2

    j2, clearly you don’t realize who Carl Quintanilla is:

    20+ years anchoring @CNBC & @NBCNews / Peabody Award, Emmy, Murrow & duPont winner / @WSJ alum / Board member, @NYCityCenter

    This guy is a fact checker’s fact checker. Who am I to believe, a conspiracy theorist like you who gets his numbers from a Turkish fever swamp blog like Oryx, or a CNBC/NBC Peabody awarded Journalist?

    One important factor here is that this guy is a deep state/Khazarian mafia propaganda organ, and he himself is saying that Ukraine has lost 91% of its tanks. That completely contradicts your narrative that Russia is “losing” the ground war. This guy is on the same TV news you watch every night, are you saying that the TV talking heads are lying, but you watch it anyway?

    I really don’t bother to get into the minutia here, because I recognize that the Russian special operation in Ukraine is a small limited time period skirmish in a far larger century old war of genocide. The central bankers war over reserve currency and the trade war of resource outer money dominance dwarf the importance of the kinetic war anyway.

    • Replies: @j2
    , @Anonymous
  181. j2 says:
    @Sepp

    “This guy is a fact checker’s fact checker. Who am I to believe, a conspiracy theorist like you who gets his numbers from a Turkish fever swamp blog like Oryx, or a CNBC/NBC Peabody awarded Journalist?”

    You should trust me.

    • Replies: @j2
  182. j2 says:
    @j2

    Think back Sepp how you have been cheated by those MSM journalists in this war, then you should trust me. Remember how this war started. You only saw videos of the territorial troops using Jabelin and stinger. I told my wife, this is strange, Ukraine has an army, even a big one. Armies have artillery, tanks, airplaned, helicopters, where are they? She, like your MSM journalist, said that they do not have them, all were destroyed. I thought, nonsense. But Russians, like you and your journalist, apparently believed that this was so, their strategic strike did work and Ukrainian army does not want to fight, probably they support Russians and stay aside, the only fight is with some rightist paramilitaries. Strangely, these rightist paramilitaries stopped a spetsnatz special force group from taking the Hostomel airport. That should not happen. I think now that it was not paramilitary, it was Ukraina alpha and omega special forces. But Russians did not yet think so. Then these MSM videos showed people making Molotov cocktails and most amateurish barricades (later army people replaced them with Czech hedgehogs, but it was later). It really looked like Russians will have no problem at all, though strangely spetsnaz lost to paramilitaries. Then in the night some Ukrainian forces fought Russians and stopped them, again these far too skilled paramilitaries, Russians thought. It was the standing Ukraine army, but very carefully no video showed any Ukrainian artillery or tanks. I remember in TV a Polish general was wondering what in the world could have destroyed these tanks so badly, maybe a mine, he could not guess how. To me it was obvious that what was seen was the result of an artillery strike, but nobody wanted to admit that Ukraine has artillery. This lasted for a month, because Ukraine mobilized partially secretly and it took time. Zelensky demanded that all men stay and it was clear that there is a mobilization, but it was made to look like it is mainly for the territorial troops, paramilitaries that in the beginning did not have even rifles, like Poroshenko said in the TV. (Just think about it, Ukraine inherited from the Soviet Union some seven million assault rifles and ammunition. So, this is all to mislead Russians that there is no army they will have to fight.) Later they started, first in the Ukraine TV, to show that Ukraine army does have tanks, helicopters and artillery. Two fighter jet pilots gave an interview and told that they do fly and can fly. S-300 around Kyiv intercepted ballistic missiles. It was told that Ukrainian air defense intercepted missiles, but not that they have S-300 around Kyiv. It was made to look like that Ukraine might get from Czech their only S-300 launcher, but NATO finally did not send it. At the same time Ukraine had many launchers, also BUKs and other. So, this was all misleading people like you Sepp. Ukraine needed time to mobilize, but it managed to get this time. Now it has 3 to one overpower in men and tanks and all are roughly equal. I guess you did not understand this. You would have understood had you checked what equipment Ukraine army actually had. I did check it when this started and it made me wonder what is going on. But you prefer to believe in all propaganda, all that you would like to be true.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @Sepp
  183. Anonymous[312] • Disclaimer says:
    @Sepp

    J2 is a well known low IQ shill in these parts. I just ignore his posts but others should probably engage and deconstruct his brain farts just for the sake of blue-pilled normies from time to time.

    I don’t say low IQ just to throw an insult. He’s basically extending the “Ghost of Kiev” invulnerability narrative in the face of overwhelming Rusian air superiority to tanks on the ground. You can’t make this shit up – as they say.

    Plenty of people have said that the West is winning the PR war but the calculation is actually pointing in the other direction.

    – Some poor Ukrainian anti-Russian lemming on the front will believe that they’re winning – until he ends up watching his comrades ripped to shreds because they’ve ended up in an unsupported, unsupplied , unwinnable death cauldron.

    – A Western anti-Russian lemming will believe it until the cauldron(s) in the east snaps shut and every Ukrainian “winner” in those trenches who’s not grinded into a pulp surrenders. At that point, the MSM they follow will tell them that this is just what winning looks like and that they should probably join the fray or at least downgrade their lifestyle to eating bug paste and driving a unicycle to work (if they have any) – for “our values“. I’m not even joking.

    Bottom line is that the jews in the West are enamoured with the “Fake Realities” strategy while the East has gained the upper hand in creating real – like, seriously – real – realities some time ago in the real world. The jews will get the shabbos-goy Metaverse groupies – and themselves – to play along in a virtual world until the real one unplugs that laughable infrastructure and equipment. It’s kind of funny, when you think about it.

  184. peterAUS says:
    @j2

    ….I think now that it was not paramilitary, it was Ukraina alpha and omega special forces…

    Something like that.

    But Russians did not yet think so. …

    They definitely did. Some of the men fighting each other then and there had been friends; they spoke with each other during the fight for the airport.

    …Ukraine needed time to mobilize, but it managed to get this time. Now it has 3 to one ratio in men and tanks and all are roughly equal. …

    Yep.
    Plus all that gear they got from NATO. Thermal sights, drones, etc. etc..
    Plus all the intel/recce NATO is getting as we speak in almost real time.
    Etc…etc…

    The cabal in Kremlin has a BIG problem.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
    , @Sepp
    , @j2
  185. ASSUMING YOU allude to the Judeo-Chr. god, I’m to the Right of Mussolini but that absurd deity has ever been dead for me. One doesn’t have to be a “liberal” to be sane on that point.

    Rabbi Saul’s gift just keeps on giving. A time bomb that eventually exploded.
    https://theeuropeanfamily.com/f/rabbi-sauls-gift-that-keeps-on-giving
    https://theeuropeanfamily.com/f/a-time-bomb-that-exploded?blogcategory=internet+polemic

  186. JamesinNM says:

    The American Civil War was not a civil war. Lincoln and the North fought and won the second American Revolution for the Crown bankers who replaced the lawful American Government with a de facto private corporate government and enslaved everyone. Ukraine is the money laundering, child trafficking, and bioweapon development hub for the globalists. Those activities must be ended and the ones involved must be prosecuted for crimes against humanity and the guilty dispatched.

  187. peterAUS says:

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/03/16/fact-sheet-on-u-s-security-assistance-for-ukraine/
    Among it:
    ..100 Tactical Unmanned Aerial Systems..
    ..Four counter-artillery and counter-unmanned aerial system tracking radars..
    …Four counter-mortar radar systems…
    ..secure communications, electronic warfare detection systems…
    And the last but DEFINITELY not the least
    …Satellite imagery and analysis capability..

    Ah, yes, and this:
    https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-polytics/3450899-us-senate-unanimously-approves-lendlease-act-for-ukraine.html

    I am sure that The Great Chessmaster saw all this happening 3 years ago. Or it was 5? Anyway, all part of The Plan. Not “Q” but “Z” but the same principle.

    Ah, another thing: Putin has huge support from Russian public, apparently. Polls say it.
    As :

    I somehow missed long queues to volunteer for the..ahm….special operation.
    My bad, most likely. No need for additional troops. Trust the plan. “Z”.

    All good.

  188. @peterAUS

    There is talk of Ukrainians planning a counteroffensive in three directions with all these mobilised forces and equipment they have received from the West which supposed to start in one to two weeks. We’ll see if it materialises, Wars have a way of going to and fro. I guess at some point we’ll know how it all ends unless it goes the way of the war on terror that went on 20 years. But I doubt that Russia’s high command doesn’t know approximately the state of things and really thought it had eliminated all hardware with those aerial raids given the size of the Ukraine. Maybe ordinary soldiers believed they would get petrol bombed watching all that bullshit. Do they let troops have phones and tablets with them and access to the Internet? That should be banned and their only source of information should be what their command gives them. But I guess it’s impossible to prevent the msm trickling down to them.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  189. @Boo

    Yeah, it is that simple. And it is a joke.

    Wake up Boo.

  190. Sepp says:
    @j2

    I said that Carl Quintanilla was deep state/CIA, and you know that I don’t watch TV, let alone CNBC. My point was that these if guys who are 110% behind Ukraine are saying that 91% of her tanks are out of commission then perhaps there is something to the assertion.

    I really don’t have a dog in the fight, I have never been a soldier and I know little about modern military tactics. I accept that the fog of war is far too thick for me to take a strong position. I do find your calculations interesting, but I definitely take them with a grain of salt, especially in light of the never ending stream of lies that Nato is famous for.

    I have little doubt that the Khazars (Nato) has special forces on the ground in Ukraine and has had them there since long before Maidan. The MH17 shoot down and cover up was a joint effort between the Ukrainian Khazar slave army and the Nato Khazarian mercenary Special forces.

    As I have said before, to me the biggest question here is if Putin is just a Khazarian puppet, playing his role in the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Ukraine.

    If Mariupol falls and there is no proof or mention of the presence of Nato special ops then we have strong evidence that Putin is a patsy.

    • Replies: @j2
  191. Sepp says:
    @peterAUS

    The cabal in Kremlin has a BIG problem.

    LOL. But Ukraine doesn’t.

    Ukraine Foreign Minister Demands More “Weapons, Weapons, Weapons” In NATO Meeting

    “Met with Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at NATO HQ in Brussels. I came here today to discuss three most important things: weapons, weapons, and weapons,” Kuleba wrote. “Ukraine’s urgent needs, the sustainability of supplies, and long-term solutions which will help Ukraine to prevail,” he added.

    Meanwhile, Australia is a non-Nato “country” on the other side of the hemisphere and the planet that never misses an opportunity to whore herself out for the Khazarians:

    Australia sending 20 repainted and refitted Bushmaster armoured vehicles to Ukraine

    The vehicles have been stenciled with a touching message showing our country’s support for Ukrainian forces.

    Australians love putting lipstick on their whore-pigs.

  192. j2 says:
    @peterAUS

    To peterAUS. Out of the commenter here, you seem to have most military experience. Take a look at this map from Wiki. They update it a bit slowly, but East from Charkiv Chuhuiv just turned blue after a long battle.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Russo-Ukrainian_War_detailed_map

    The blue and red dots do not quite correspond to city populations as they mark more of them when there are force concentrations. They are not quite force concentrations but a combination of city size and troops there. The so called caudron idea is that Russia would cut from Izium to Donesk (which seems to proceed very slowly). Joint Command Operation of Ukraine would according to this idea be trapped, but the map shows that this idea is impossible as JCO is in both sides and gets fortifications, as Ukriane soldiers say in a video, every two days. (From the mobilization speed we can calculate that in two days Ukraine mobilized 14,000, a division, they are still making bullet-proof vests and there are the 300 T-72 tanks, so it looks they will mobilize all 600,000 in some time).

    Now a question to you. I personally, were I an Ukrainian, would be to attack in Charkiv are and cut the red forces in Izium from their supplies. Russia does not control any area in reality as they have too small forces to do it. They control the area where they are, but there are no lines in most of the area. Ukraine used trenches to stop Russian mobility. Assuming that they attack from Charkiv direction, they will eventually threaten Luhansk, which Russian must protect as Luhansk and Donesk were the goals of this war. So, they must concentrate troops there and can be forced to a decisive battle there.

    In the South, the Ukraine attack moves from Mykolaiv first taking the red spots on the left of waterways, then forward. Russia has at most 40,000 troops in this whole area up to Mariupol. Mariupol is left to defend itself with the brigade left there.

    I considered several possibilities for Ukraine and thought this is the most natural one. Do you agree with this? Attack comes from Charkiv direction, threatens Luhansk, another attack from Mykolaiv a bit later. Interested in hearing your view.

    • Replies: @Sepp
    , @peterAUS
  193. j2 says:
    @Sepp

    “My point was that these if guys who are 110% behind Ukraine are saying that 91% of her tanks are out of commission then perhaps there is something to the assertion.”

    You do not understand what they mean by 91%. The Ukraine standing army had c. 480 tanks at the beginning of the war. If 91% were destroyed, then 43 tanks remained. I calculated roughly that 80 tanks remained and 83.3% were destroyed. It is not much different, especially as Ukrainians captured at least 40 Russian tanks, so certainly about 80 tanks of 480 tanks did remain. So, I can fully agree with your 91%, but it gives exactly the figure that I gave you, that you find so salty.

    You confuse this figure of how many of the original number of tanks were destroyed with the number of tanks that the Ukraine army now has. It is not the same number. See the difference when we take into account the soldier reserves and reserve tanks. You have to add the tanks that the recently mobilized 200,000 men first and second echelon reserve must have been equipped with, and you have to add the tanks that Ukraine had in reserve for its wartime army.

    You calculate like this: Ukraine had 1140 modernized tanks and 300 T-72 and 1000 T-64Bs. Assuming that your 91% is correct, they lost 480*0.91=437 tanks from the 480 tanks that the standing army had before mobilization. From the newly deployed reserves of 200,000 they may already have lost 100 tanks, but Ukraine has captured some 180 Russian tanks and some 40 can be used.
    So they now have
    1140-437-100+40=643 tanks
    additionally they have 300 T-72 tanks that they will use in this war, and 1000 T-64B tanks that they can use if they get them running and the war becomes long.

    As for this absurdity that Ukraine lost all equipment, consider this that Ukraine had 2,500 tanks and 3,700 pieces of artillery and ask yourself what kind of a strategic strike with some 300 helicopters can destroy all this material (and all airplanes and helicopters). The answer is simply that no strategic strike can destroy all this material as most of it is in bomb protected shelters.

    • Replies: @j2
  194. j2 says:
    @j2

    You see Sepp, you have to be careful when asking to be sure you ask the correct question. Especially so if you ask a country in war what war material it now has. Ukraine has been especially secret of its losses and war material it has, the whole mobilization was kept quiet. So, if you ask

    What have your losses been in tanks? You get the answer, we lost 91% of our tanks. This means that they had 480 tanks in the standing army and they lost 437 tanks.

    If you ask:

    How many tanks you now have? The answer is not 480-437=43. It is 640+300 because when an army has as first and second echelon reserves (i.e., those reserves that are regularly trained) 200,000 men, they necessarily also have equipment for these reserves, so they did not have only 480 tanks, they had 1140 tanks as we happen to know. And they did capture some working Russian tanks, and even got 10 T-72 from Czech.

    It is similar to the difference between the two questions:
    What is its name?
    What is it called?
    These need not have the same answer. In programming the name (often meaning the name of the file) is usually not the name by why which the function is called (a routine in the file).

    Be careful to ask the correct question and to understand the answer.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
    , @Sepp
  195. @stozi

    Your comment makes more sense than anything the interviewee had to say.

  196. @Face_The_Truth

    Yes, in this case Mike has fallen for the MSM switch to war from covid as the bait for attention diversion.

  197. As I’ve often said before, all wars are bankers wars. International Organizations must find a way to restrict the initial flows of money and other investments that go into emerging conflict zones. This financial restriction or nipping at the bud, will stop the next major war from starting. In effect, commentators must be vigilant and follow the money from the very start to the finish line…

    Be it atomic or conventional weapons warfare, all military conflicts initially, have a specific goal. But how to address the premonitory period leading up to escalation and then mass slaughter? The UN and similar agencies tried desperately to create recognized rules of engagement-to no avail. Despite the Nuremberg trials, attempts to and codify what constitutes a war crime failed to do what was and is impossible to do, reduce the needless savagery of war.

    Let us take a moment to review recent U.S. history; Congress delivered on a platter the fate of Vietnam handing it to that devil’s lieutenant, LBJ. Giving him carte blanche to do whatever he ordered the military to do there. Thus Congress took steps to relinquish most of the responsibility and guilt attached to war, in this case a “police action”…not unlike the biblical Pilot of old, washing their hands of the entire matter. In the end, and with the help of President Nixon, more bombs were dropped on Vietnam than in all of World War two and then indebted our tax payers with a one trillion USD (circa a 1965 valuation) price tag. At the same time these same facts shook the Christian foundations of morality when B-52’s carpet bombed, napalmed, used Agent Orange against a third world and impoverished nation. The western media began to publish rumors of a phenomena colloquially known as “fragging”, murdering officers on patrol committed by their subordinates. Gradually over time all these atrocities became common knowledge. The one trillion USD did not include long term health care costs or the suffering wounded veterans endure to this day. My point being, no legal writ, policy or standardization can ever solve the riddle of how to turn war into a series of respectable engagements (killings). The prospect of another world war has yet to awaken the citizenry at large to denounce statements by Naval officials at the Pentagon, who now incorporate the use of small atomic munitions into conflict scenarios. They truly believe that the use of these weapons will not expand beyond a battlefield or specific region of the globe.

    The handwashing by Pilot has returned with the introduction of AI software into Atomic munitions on the battlefield where decision making will be made inside the bomb and not some three star general.

    Zooming out of this picture and prior to the Vietnam “conflict”, war bonds, war taxes, savings stamps, or other financial instrument(s) were used during any major conflict. They were a means to finance a nations war footing however were not applied after the Korean War ended. Consequently, any military actions after 1953 (Vietnam and the next seven “conflicts”) reduced the purchasing power of USD, do mainly to the printing of money (going into debt) but the economic impact was negligible at first because of a global confidence in our USD coupled with two undeniable facts. At that time, the USA was number one in a wide variety of finished product production(s) for domestic and foreign markets and Fort Knox stored most of the worlds gold, with bullion free of Tungsten !

    Not to wander too far off from the original subject, somewhere between 1960 and 1970, the House Ways and Means Committee had a closed door session. To deliberate on strategies that could finance future “police or kinetic actions” since a Declaration of War by Congress automatically translated into destroying valuable private properties situated on the soil of the enemy or nonbelligerent. These properties were owned by Western Occident Oligarchs. Surely, alternative countries could be found, put in the cross-hairs of our MI then after war’s end, foreign investment would flood in. For example; During WW II German civilians were astonished by how accurate and destructive allied bombing was of residential areas adjacent to weapons manufacturing facilities, yet factory buildings were left completely unscathed. You may very well ask, why? Factories belonged to the Oligarchs. As Shakespeare once wrote, there’s the rub…in this case, property is always more valuable than life! Along similar lines During WW II, Switzerland manufactured and delivered both day and night via rail guns and munitions to a war torn Germany, yet those factories and transportation systems were never bombed…

    The grumblers at Ways and Means concluded that the only solution to investing in war, regardless of the outcome was to tap into the largest pile of money anywhere around, our Social Security Fund -SSF. In effect to finance the “softening up” aka bombing, of commodity rich but human resource(s) poor second and third world nations. This choice was far better than tapping speculative investors or issuing treasury instruments at an enticingly high interest rate for those capitalists trained in the black art of turning blood into gold. However a few congressional lobbying efforts had to overcome certain limitations within the SS Act. The fund was in a lock box, could not be borrowed against nor monies withdrawn from it for alternate purposes. FDR saw to it that restrictive protections were built-in. A necessity during promulgation, knowing the greed and rapacity of his very own aristocratic classes. Well, like contracts, any good (corrupt) lawyer can break one. So too the fate of our Social Security Fund by legislators who betrayed the rank-and-file worker, permitting the theft of monies they never intended to replace back into the SSF. Borrowing lock-box monies to fiance war. It was so easy, circulating a simple amendment to the original Act. Since 1975, the MIC has ravaged Social Security not to serve national interests but to steal from a retirement fund, that every day workers paid into and was deducted from their weekly employment checks. To add to their sins, the US war machine then insisted on burning the candle at both ends by printing money atop of what they were pilfering from the Fund. Total nihilists and maniacs because the MIC knew what was indeed down the road (financially) and did not give a hoot! With three or more different passports, private jets, ready cash in their strong boxes and dozens of Greek islands to choose from, the Oligarchs could care less what flag was flying on their new overseas estate(s).

  198. @j2

    I haven’t been paying too much attention to numbers because how do you know that all the tanks and other hardware destroyed by the Russians were real? The Yugoslavs used dummy tanks to deceive the NATO air force and lost very few real ones in the bombing campaign. There are wooden, plastic and inflatable dummy tanks and other military hardware decoys. Then you place a microwave oven inside to deceive sensors which detect it as an engine. So if you group a few dummy tanks together then the enemy decides that it could be cost effective to destroy them and wastes a missile.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dummy_tank

    There you can order all sorts of inflatable decoy military hardware from alibaba.

    tanks

    https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Tank-Inflatable-Personalized-8-8×3-5x2_62532569508.html?spm=a2700.7735675.normal_offer.d_title.5e2c2fbfvyTI8W&s=p

    missiles

    https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/High-quality-inflatable-military-missile-decoy_1600473780983.html?spm=a2700.pc_countrysearch.main07.129.66a66e3cn6H0l4

    cannons

    https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Customized-Inflatable-Military-Tank-Inflatable-Army_1600101202311.html?spm=a2700.pc_countrysearch.main07.31.66a66e3cn6H0l4

    You can move a real piece next to a dummy, fire away, then move the real piece away while an incoming missile fired in response destroys the dummy.

    • Replies: @j2
  199. Sepp says:
    @j2

    How many tanks you now have? The answer is not 480-437=43

    Award winning senior CNBC correspondent Carl Quintanilla said that Ukraine had lost 1969 tanks. You can play fantasy football and slice and dice the statistics all you want, but the CIA mockingbird media spokeshole himself said 1969 tanks. Clearly for propagandas sake he would be more likely to underestimate Ukrainian losses than overestimate them.

    I have provided more than enough links showing that Zelinsky is offering any officer at Nato or EU politician a drag queen blow job in order to get more military hardware. Ukraine is more desperate than a starving toothless whore is for a few sheckels.

    • Replies: @j2
  200. Sepp says:
    @j2

    “I considered several possibilities for Ukraine and thought this is the most natural one.”

    LOL. Ukrainian Shabboz-faggot dancers fighting set battles with the Russian army is the most unlikely scenario. Let be provide a few far more likely moves by the Khazars:

    – Chernobyl gets hit by a Ukrainian Tocha missile and there is a massive radioactivity release, but Nato and Ukraine blame Moscow. Russia gets blamed and the only possible escalation for the Khazars is a full trade embargo of Russia.
    – Kiev gets infected by one of the Bayraktar drones that Turkey weaponized for the Khazarians to carry 20 kg of bio-warfare agents. Russia gets blamed and the only possible escalation for the Khazars is a full trade embargo of Russia.
    – Ukraine fires a Tocha missile at the depot in Poland where the useless Australian Bushmasters are being loaded for shipment in to Ukraine. Russia gets blamed and the only possible escalation for the Khazars is a full trade embargo of Russia.
    – Ukraine fires a Tocha missile at some Nato naval ship in the black sea. Russia gets blamed and the only possible escalation for the Khazars is a full trade embargo of Russia.

  201. Sepp says:

    https://youtube.com/shorts/wcJY88Iy4tw

    LOL. No wonder Ukraine is desperate for Weapons, Weapons, Weapons.

  202. Wielgus says:

    Vzglyad Russian website – Yandex translation edited
    Six illusions, because of which Ukraine believes in its victory
    Ukrainians see their army as all-conquering
    April 7, 2022, 17:05

    [MORE]

    Photo: REUTERS/Serhii Nuzhnenko
    Text: Nikolay Storozhenko
    The Russian Armed Forces are methodically grinding the Ukrainian defence every day, taking new territories, preparing for a major offensive. However, the polls, paradoxically, show that the absolute majority of Ukrainians believe in the upcoming military victory of their country over Russia. How can this be logically explained?

    Commenting on the progress of the work of the Ukrainian and Russian negotiating groups, Vladimir Zelensky denies the possibility of demilitarisation of Ukraine: “We forgot the phrase about demilitarisation of Ukraine even when I was offered to leave Kiev. We told them that forget about demilitarisation and denazification, we won’t even talk about it.”

    In fact, the demilitarisation, which Zelensky disowns, is on its way: the Ukrainian army is gradually losing military infrastructure, MTO and military equipment. And this is gradually weakening the negotiating position of Ukraine, voiced by the same Zelensky. No one will return to February 23, 2022. In other words, the Ukrainian president lives in some fabulous reality.

    But he’s not the only one. Even at the beginning of March, when Russian troops were already standing near Kiev, almost 90% of the surveyed residents of Ukraine believed in the reality of “repelling Russia’s attack.” And here are more complete data from the Rating sociological group, which has been tracking such confidence since the beginning of the year. And if in January only 56% were convinced of victory, today it is 95%. Even in the first days of the special military operation (SVO), Ukrainians’ confidence in their abilities was less (70%). In addition, over the past month and a half, there have been almost no vacillators left and the share of those who are completely confident in victory has increased (from 47% to 69%).

    That is, something definitely feeds this confidence, but what? It seems that this hope has several streams feeding it at once.

    1. Allies and military assistance

    Anyway, Ukraine is not alone in its struggle. Long before the start of the special military operation, the Ukrainian army began to receive not only assistance from abroad, but also lethal weapons. After the start of its so-called allies, its so-called allies are pumping Ukraine with weapons beyond measure. Especially after the Kiev authorities stopped asking for impossible things (joining NATO, establishing a no-fly zone) and moved on to more real things – the supply of heavy weapons.

    As of March 20, the volume of US military aid to Kiev alone exceeded \$ 2 billion – such data was announced by the head of the US Department of Defence Lloyd Austin. This is strikingly different from the deliveries at the beginning of the year – when Germany sent Ukraine five thousand used helmets and a military field hospital. In addition to weapons, the AFU is supplied with intelligence reports and information. Without which, in particular, an attack on the storage of fuel and lubricants in Belgorod would have been impossible. Officially, such an agreement has been in effect since the end of March. In fact, partial information was transmitted to Kiev earlier.

    2. Anti-Russian sanctions

    It has been repeatedly noted that even after the SMO, Ukraine adheres to its constant manner: it is stalling for time. The AFU are hiding behind civilians, clinging to urban development, dragging out negotiations. The country’s top leadership probably sensibly assesses its capabilities in the confrontation with the Russian Federation, so it does not pin hopes on a military victory.

    Why fight? Let the sanctions work. Moreover, unlike the previous ones (2014-2015), they are not an example of tougher. This should probably include the hope of seizing the frozen foreign exchange reserves of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. Like, it doesn’t matter, we’ll restore everything for their money!

    3. Relocation

    At the end of March, hopes probably strengthened even after the announced redeployment of Russian troops. After that, the entire northern grouping of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation was withdrawn from Kiev. The Pentagon rightly points out that soon these forces will be in the Donbass, but many Ukrainians perceived the regrouping as a retreat (which Ukrainian politicians did not dissuade them from).

    4. Gradual pushing of Kiev’s demands to Europe

    The dynamics of increasing Kiev’s wishes and their fulfillment by its allies also gives Ukrainians hope. We have already said that tanks are now being supplied to them instead of the old helmets. But after all, the same “Javelins” once did not want to give at all. And now they and other ATGMs have piled up so much that they have even appeared in service with the National Militias of the DNR.

    The same applies to other requirements. Ukrainian embassies spam the Foreign Ministries of their host countries with endless demands to break off any contacts with the Russian Federation. Only at the end of March Zelensky spoke very harshly with diplomats, and even recalled the ambassadors from Georgia and Morocco: they say they did not work well, they did not achieve their goals.

    Europe is gradually capitulating to these demands. We have already accepted a request to close the ports of EU countries for Russian vessels, although at the beginning of March many considered such a step redundant. It is possible that it will come to an oil embargo.

    Moreover, Kiev does not hesitate to use informational productions like the Mariupol maternity hospital, drama theatre and Bucha to achieve these goals. But we need to talk about manipulation and fraud separately.

    5. Manipulation of information

    Otto von Bismarck once said that there is an indecent amount of lying in the war. Well, information is also a weapon. This includes several directions at once.

    Firstly, underestimating their own losses, increasing the losses of the Russian Federation (“they will soon run out of soldiers”) both in manpower and in technology (option: “the rockets will soon run out”, often sounded in March).

    Secondly, the dosing of information about missile and air strikes. According to Ukrainian sources, sometimes it is not clear at all where the shots were fired and what the damage is: “today Russia has inflicted a certain number of strikes on infrastructure facilities” and that’s it. A number of foreign journalists have even been expelled from the country with a 10-year ban on entry, which shows how seriously the Ukrainian authorities take someone’s initiative in this matter. And this is also a good option, because Ukrainians are already threatened with close communication with the SBU for publishing any photo and video materials with military equipment, objects, checkpoints, places of air and missile strikes (especially with topography).

    Even before the disclosure of such information was banned, freedom of speech was actually abolished in Ukraine. Since the first days of its existence, TV has been a continuous telethon “United News” – and all TV channels are obliged to broadcast it. That is, whatever channel a Ukrainian turns on, he will hear the same thing there. Approximately, as in the Soviet joke about Brezhnev’s speech, which is broadcast by three TV channels. And on the fourth – a KGB major shaking his finger: “You’re still switching on!”.

    For those who don’t watch TV, there is an alternative: FB-groups and TG-channels, where it’s about the same, plus a lot of fakes and invented stories about the scale of sabotage attacks by the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the Defence Ministry (“they burned all the columns, all the Javelins are over, there’s nothing to shoot with”). In general, the TSYPSO of the AFU (special propaganda unit) eats bread with lard for a reason.

    Are there those who exist outside this information bubble and have retained the ability to think? Of course, opinion polls even suggest exactly how many: these are the 3-4% who answer “rather not sure” and “not at all sure”.

    6. The old “carrot” – joining the EU

    On February 28, Ukraine applied for membership. “The negotiations between the Presidents of Ukraine and the European Commission (EC) ended with an agreement on fast track – an accelerated path that will be applied for the first time in the recent history of EU enlargement. According to estimates from Brussels, it should lead to a positive conclusion of the EC on Ukraine’s readiness for candidate status in a matter of months,” the publication Ukrainska Pravda encourages. And already in June, Ukraine is supposed to receive the status of a candidate.

    For many Ukrainians, especially those of them who have been individually integrated for a long time, such a prospect is quite a reason to fight and destroy the remnants of the Soviet heritage. Anyway, then loans, help – we will restore!

    Well, the calculation is certain: they say, the more we ruin and suffer here, the more chances that they will regret and accept. We do not undertake to predict here. Now many have gone crazy – including those who will decide on the approval of Ukraine’s application. It is possible that this will indeed be the case.

    So Ukrainians really have a lot of reasons for optimism, there is a lot to choose from. Well, their value will soon become clear.

  203. j2 says:
    @Commentator Mike

    I remember this Yugoslavian trick. I once spoke with an UK military guy about it and he assured me that now it will not work: they have enough ammunition to destroy both decoys and the real ones.

    In this war I find it likely that Russians did manage to destroy a considerable amount of Ukraine material in the strategic strike, it was largely by helicopters (=humans in the loop), not smart (=not that smart) bombs. Ukraine announced that they have a larger half of their fighter jets still left after the strike. It sounds correct to me: 98 fighter jets, 56 left after the strike.

    I calculate those numbers as I have special interest in this war. It is not of supporting or disliking any party but this war is a Russian attack in Europe and the defence Ukraine applies is a variant of territorial defence. Territorial defence, used by some countries (like mine) and earlier also by NATO, was believed to be the only working way to stop a Soviet attack in Europe. It includes allowing the attacker to advance deep (so Russian initial deep advances do not mean anything more than that they are allowed to do it), weakening the attack (e.g. by attacking supply lines and by antitank weapons) and hopefully stopping it, then after mobilization is done to push the attacked back with the wartime army (in a strategic strike scenario there is no time to mobilize before). This defence had one big problem: if could not stop conventional missiles (we talk here about a conventional war), so any city that did not have missile protection system (i.e., most) would be very possibly destroyed. So, you can defend against Soviets (or Russian) but your capital and other cities would be ruins after this is over. But no better strategy was found. The only better one was to avoid the war if possible, good relations if possible.

    We see this defence strategy now in practice. It does work as intended. Russia made its typical strategic strike at the start and then advancing on roads (as it does), and how the defense works. But the war is not over yet, Russia may still be too strong. We will see. Sadly, most commenters here do not care of the military side of this war and only focus on moral issues (like if the bodies in Bucza are dead or not and how terrible Azov was). What importance moral issues have here, we talk of a case of Russian attack and can see how it works against territorial defence. That is something to follow. Highly relevant for Europe.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  204. peterAUS says:
    @j2

    Out of the commenter here, you seem to have most military experience.

    In certain areas, yep. Overall, not so sure. There ARE a couple of guys here who really know what they are talking about areas I am not very versed in. Interestingly enough they rarely post here. Pity. Understandable too. The combination of military illiteracy, overall stupidity and unhealthy dose of verbal trash tend to keep such types away.

    Take a look at this map from Wiki. They update it a bit slowly, but East from Charkiv Chuhuiv just turned blue after a long battle.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Russo-Ukrainian_War_detailed_map

    Well…maps in this conflict tend to be unreliable.

    The blue and red dots do not quite correspond to city populations as they mark more of them when there are force concentrations. They are not quite force concentrations but a combination of city size and troops there. The so called caudron idea is that Russia would cut from Izium to Donesk (which seems to proceed very slowly). Joint Command Operation of Ukraine would according to this idea be trapped, but the map shows that this idea is impossible as JCO is in both sides and gets fortifications, as Ukriane soldiers say in a video, every two days. (From the mobilization speed we can calculate that in two days Ukraine mobilized 14,000, a division, they are still making bullet-proof vests and there are the 300 T-72 tanks, so it looks they will mobilize all 600,000 in some time).

    I’d change “…this idea is impossible…” into “very difficult”.
    As for mobilizing, I hope you ARE aware that getting 14000 men into one place and calling it “division” has no relation to reality. They’ll need, at minimum, a month, to get at the level where they could execute simple mission. Say, a defence of a well sited area. Definitely NOT any kind of offensive operation.

    Now a question to you. I personally, were I an Ukrainian, would be to attack in Charkiv are and cut the red forces in Izium from their supplies. Russia does not control any area in reality as they have too small forces to do it. They control the area where they are, but there are no lines in most of the area.

    You’d attack, at operational level, Russian forces close to Russian borders? Fine.
    I wouldn’t. I’d strongly believe, were I in Ukrainian General Staff, that my forces aren’t strong/good/equipped/trained/whatever to do that.

    Ukraine used trenches to stop Russian mobility.

    Don’t think so.
    Russian mobility was stopped, first and foremost, by idiotic plan of their highest levels of command. Mission and R.O.E. in particular.
    Then, by lack of proper preparation, IMHO derelictioin of duty, by tactical command elements. They did NOT prepare, properly, their men and material for the mission.
    Then, in that order, elastic and in-depth defense of Ukrainian forces.
    That’s on overall level.
    In that region it was the above, plus, correct, very strong defensive system. That “system” is much more than “trenches”. MUCH more. Plus, use of mostly LDNR forces, instead of the massed best what RF has to offer. Anyway….

    Assuming that they attack from Charkiv direction, they will eventually threaten Luhansk, which Russian must protect as Luhansk and Donesk were the goals of this war. So, they must concentrate troops there and can be forced to a decisive battle there.

    I’ll reiterate my position: Ukrainians shouldn’t attempt any large scale offensive operation. LOCAL counterattacks, say up to a battalion level are fine. If…IF…done properly. Anything bigger, I wouldn’t do it. To put it bluntly, if I were a brigade commander there and got an order to attack I’d refuse. The most I’d do would be a quick, well prepared, battalion raid.
    Bottom line I do not think Ukrainian armed forces are capable of any offensive operation above level of battalion tactical group. In time………TIME.

    In the South, the Ukraine attack moves from Mykolaiv first taking the red spots on the left of waterways, then forward. Russia has at most 40,000 troops in this whole area up to Mariupol. Mariupol is left to defend itself with the brigade left there.

    Same. NO serious offensive operation. Multiple, quick, raids, by, say, up to a batallion, yes. WELL prepared.

    I considered several possibilities for Ukraine and thought this is the most natural one. Do you agree with this?

    Nope.

    Attack comes from Charkiv direction, threatens Luhansk, another attack from Mykolaiv a bit later. Interested in hearing your view.

    Here it is.
    Ukrainians got lucky because of those criminal errors by Russian CiC I mentioned above.
    If I were somebody in Ukrainian high level of CiC, I’d KEEP doing what “we”’ve been doing so far, with addition of those small, local, (counter)attacks. Plenty of them along ALL of the front line.
    And, execute a strong defense of that group in LNDR region. If…IF..done properly that defense can maul Russian forces so much that the current stalemate becomes permanent. Which will put strain on the cabal in Kremlin AND give “us” time to re-arm, re-train and prepare for the (possible) offensive operations in…say…3 months from now. “We” need time to re-organize and TRAIN to get our forces up to required level of competence.
    Bottom line: keep strong strategic defense. Exhaust the enemy. Get the stalemate. Use the stalemate to get ready for offensive. Execute the offensive to retake the lost ground. Which if…IF…the cabal in Kremlin keep fucking up would take…say…6 months. Now…should the cabal gets its head out of its arse and start doing a (proper) war, well…………….this game changes ugly in a hurry.
    So….we’ll see………..

    • Replies: @j2
  205. j2 says:
    @Sepp

    “Award winning senior CNBC correspondent Carl Quintanilla said that Ukraine had lost 1969 tanks.”

    You must be joking with your award winning senior CNBC correspondent. Military losses are estimated by military people. As you only trust Russia, let me do the calculation using their announcements only.

    Russia in Tass claims the following:

    “A total of seven military planes, seven helicopters and nine drones have been downed. A total of 87 tanks and other armored vehicles, 28 multiple launch rocket systems, 118 special military automobile vehicles have been eliminated. Russian Navy destroyed eight Ukrainian military patrol boats,” the spokesman added.” Tass 26. Feb. 08:29.

    “The Russian armed forces also destroyed 827 Ukrainian tanks and other combat armored vehicles, 84 multiple rocket launchers, 304 field artillery guns and mortars, 603 special military vehicles and also 78 drones, the general said.” Tass 7. March 10:33
    https://tass.com/defense/1418143

    Thus, in two days Russia claims to have destroyed 87. That is 43.5/day. In eleven days Russia claims to have destroyed 827. That is 75/day. In 42 days Russia may have destroyed something between 1827 to 3157 tanks or armoured vehicles.

    Ukraine had 2,440 tanks and 12,027 armoured infantry carriers (IFV 2,308, AMP 9,619) before the war. Total tanks and other combat armoured systems Ukraine had 14,467.

    “Ukraine also lost a significant portion of its combat vehicles: 65.7% of all tanks and armored vehicles, 42.8% of all field artillery and mortars, 30.5% of all multiple launch rocket systems and 82% of its S-300 and Buk-M1 missile air defense systems. A total of 85% of all Tochka-U tactical missile systems were eliminated. ” Tass 25. March
    https://tass.com/politics/1427617?utm_source=google.com&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=google.com&utm_referrer=google.com

    We see that Russia claims to have destroyed 65.7% of Ukrainian tanks and armoured vehicles. Clearly 3157 (the higher estimate) is not 65.7% of 14,467. It is 22% of 14,467. Russia does not mean all Ukraine tanks and armoured vehicles. So, what do they mean? They mean that Ukraine before the war had 1,140 tanks and 3,660 armoured infantry carriers. Then the total is 4,800 and 65.7% of it is c. 3157.

    Thus, Russia claims to have destroyed 65.7% of 1140 tanks. It means they destroyed 749 tanks and 391 tanks remained. But as Ukraine captured at least 117 Russian tanks:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2022/03/24/the-ukrainian-army-has-captured-enough-russian-tanks-to-make-good-all-its-own-losses-and-then-some/
    Ukraine has 391+117=508 tanks, plus it also has 300 T-72 tanks.

    So, this Russian calculation states that Ukraine has 508+300 tanks.
    Here I intentionally used the higher destruction rate 75 tanks/day. Actually we can assume the destruction rate was smaller, so Ukraine has more tanks.

    Whatever reasonable calculation you do, the result is always more or less the same. Ukraine has tanks and your “Award winning senior CNBC correspondent Carl Quintanilla” borders on insanity.

  206. peterAUS says:
    @j2

    Further to my previous post, YOU described most of what I’ve been trying to say:

    …the defence Ukraine applies is a variant of territorial defence. Territorial defence, used by some countries (like mine) and earlier also by NATO, was believed to be the only working way to stop a Soviet attack in Europe. It includes allowing the attacker to advance deep (so Russian initial deep advances do not mean anything more than that they are allowed to do it), weakening the attack (e.g. by attacking supply lines and by antitank weapons) and hopefully stopping it, then after mobilization is done to push the attacked back with the wartime army (in a strategic strike scenario there is no time to mobilize before). ….

    We see this defence strategy now in practice. It does work as intended. Russia made its typical strategic strike at the start and then advancing on roads (as it does), and how the defense works.

    Now, as to this part

    …after mobilization is done to push the attacked back…

    Not quite, at least not in this case. The enemy is simply too strong for that. There must be a phase/TIME between successful defense and, possible/hopeful, offense, for reasons I mentioned in the previous post. In fact, it’s quite possible that there could be no offense whatsoever, just ongoing, for a long time, stalemate.
    Personally, I think it’s quite likely we’ll have the same situation, just on a larger scale, what we had from 2016 to start of this RF debacle.
    Again, time will tell, as you say

    …But the war is not over yet, Russia may still be too strong. We will see…

    If the cabal in Kremlin goes “war” instead of this ..ahm…”operation”, well………………………………………

    • Replies: @j2
    , @Commentator Mike
  207. j2 says:
    @peterAUS

    “As for mobilizing, I hope you ARE aware that getting 14000 men into one place and calling it “division” has no relation to reality. They’ll need, at minimum, a month, to get at the level where they could execute simple mission”

    Yes, I am aware of that. Mobilizing 200,000 men seems to have taken them one month. If they are still building new reserve units, the one month is in the pipe already and we only need to know how much comes out at a given time.

    “You’d attack, at operational level, Russian forces close to Russian borders? Fine.
    I wouldn’t. I’d strongly believe, were I in Ukrainian General Staff, that my forces aren’t strong/good/equipped/trained/whatever to do that.”

    I am not sure of that. In the West it was the Belarus border, Ukrainians went to the border. As for this idea that Russians simply decided to withdraw I would add that before it happened Ukrainians announced that Russian troops there will very soon run out of supplies and several analysts concluded that Russian must reduce fronts by at least one, maybe two. Then they did just that, but they did not aim to do it: they withdrew only 20% because those they had to withdraw. But soon after that they had to withdraw totally and so fast that some units stayed behind and were destroyed. It is these units, a conquered army, that will strengthen the Russian front in Charkiv are. If they once lost and do not defend home country or any ideology, will they fight well?

    “I’ll reiterate my position: Ukrainians shouldn’t attempt any large scale offensive operation. LOCAL counterattacks, say up to a battalion level are fine. If…IF…done properly. Anything bigger, I wouldn’t do it. To put it bluntly, if I were a brigade commander there and got an order to attack I’d refuse. The most I’d do would be a quick, well prepared, battalion raid.”

    So far Ukrainians have done as you suggest, but that is not a way to regain the lost areas, and they want to regain them. But we will see.

    Thanks for your comments.

  208. j2 says:
    @peterAUS

    “Not quite, at least not in this case. The enemy is simply too strong for that.”

    “If the cabal in Kremlin goes “war” instead of this ..ahm…”operation”, well………………………… ”

    Yes, of course, if e.g. a small country would defend against the old Soviet Union, then it just might be so that Soviets cannot be pushed back, while if NATO would have been attacked, it might have been a different case. A long stalemate would not have worked against Soviets as they would simply have amassed more soldiers and cared nothing of their losses. But Russia is not quite the same. I do not know of Ukraine. It is big Russians attacking small Russians, both are Russians to me and neither is so small.

    Should it happen that Russia calls this a war and an attack on the mother Russia and mobilizes and not partially and secretly, yes, that would be a problem. But I do not think Putin has this power. Legally he still needs to ask the parliament. A special operation yes, but a war – a war against what power would it be? Would it be a war to defend mother Russia against superpower Ukraine? Would anybody in Russia believe it, or would it be a war against NATO/USA? Would anybody in Russia want it?

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  209. @littlewing

    Whoever sacrifices his own child ritually, or sacrifices the goy that will be offered to him for the purpose, will be accepted among (((them))). Whoever refuses will be killed for the confirmation ritual of another. Once they are alone (about 500 000 000?) YHWH cuts off the Earth’s magnetic protective field and the raw sunlight cooks Earth into another Venus.

  210. peterAUS says:
    @j2

    The RF “Kiev force” retreated because they failed in their offensive operation and additional troops were/are needed for the “phase2”. Ukrainian (offensive) effort had minimal impact on that decision.
    I’ll reiterate and keep reiterating: Ukrainian armed forces are NOT capable of any serious offensive operations. Not yet, for two reasons:
    -They lack expertise and equipment, in that order.
    -The enemy is simply too strong.
    The later in particular.

    You, of all people, as a Finn, should be aware of that reality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vyborg%E2%80%93Petrozavodsk_offensive
    As you said in your next comment:

    … if e.g. a small country would defend against the old Soviet Union, then it just might be so that Soviets cannot be pushed back, …

    About “Kiev Force”, after retreat/regroup/refit/resupply….retraining even.

    …will they fight well?..

    Depends on several factors. I guess some will well enough. VDV and Spetznaz, for example. Not so sure about the rest.

    As for

    .. a war – a war against what power would it be? Would it be a war to defend mother Russia against superpower Ukraine? Would anybody in Russia believe it, or would it be a war against NATO/USA? Would anybody in Russia want it?

    Those are definitely the right questions. I am sure that the cabal in Kremlin is trying to answer them, properly, as we speak. With the abysmal track record on getting things right so far in this debacle, anything is possible.

    • Replies: @j2
  211. @peterAUS

    I don’t know if some of the reasons you keep mentioning for the Kremlin and the Russian command underperforming, although probably present, are really relevant in this context. It would appear that Russians really don’t want to intensify the conflict needlessly and they seem to be genuine about not wanting to cause too many Ukrainian, and of course their own, casualties. But the logic of war as it develops may make them change their mind and they may be less scrupulous about massive casualties, especially among the Ukrainians. Of course the Jew Zelensky and his Western sponsors would like this very much as after all it’s only goyim lives.

    Since the Ukraine had those biowarfare US WMD labs and had probably not only experimented but may have also launched some pilot/test attacks on Russia, especially the agricultural sector, as the US had done in China repeatedly, both on agriculture and the population (or purportedly, apparently – although some investigators like Ron Unz are convinced about the attacks on China and Iran), then why should Russia refrain from using WMDs too? They have enough evidence about what went on in those WMD labs so why not release the gas as the West keeps insisting it will do? At least the gas could be limited to the targets instead of the bioweapon WMDs which can spread far and wide as claimed by Ron Unz in his case study of Covid-19. So the West would raise a stink and condemn Russia even more. So what? The western media never condemned the bioweapons WMD development and attacks (purported by Ron Unz et al). Damn it, they may as well inject gas into those underground bunkers and be done with the rats inside instead of risking their own soldiers to flush them out. There is no moral imperative for them to be any more ethical than their enemies.

  212. Wielgus says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Without control of the air I find it hard to see a counter-attack working although it might draw more Russian troops in, which I suspect is going to happen anyway.

  213. Wielgus says:
    @Sepp

    It appears Russian SIGINT has picked up military radio transmissions from Mariupol in languages that are not Ukrainian and Russian – they seem increasingly confident of the presence of these people, whether or not one is a US general.

  214. j2 says:
    @peterAUS

    “You, of all people, as a Finn, should be aware of that reality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vyborg%E2%80%93Petrozavodsk_offensive”

    You refer to the Continuation War 1941-44 and the end stages in the Karelian isthmus. In that front Soviets were stopped by coordinated artillery strikes. They tried many times, finally gave up and went to take Berlin. Finns stopped the Soviet attack in all fronts in 1944 and attacked successfully in Ilomantsi at the end of the war. But this war was the real WWII. With Germany losing, Finland needed to get out of the war, did get out and stayed independent. Finns did attack in this war and were quite often successful. War cannot be only defense.

    But the Continuation War is not a comparable to the situation in Ukraine as it was a world war. We can take the Winter War. That situation is not very comparable either. Finns had too few men and no weapons to say, and got practically no help. They run out of men and ammunition. Yet Finns did attack successfully in that war in Tolvajarvi, Suomussalmi, Raattee and they regained areas where Russians had already made advances. Russians never took militarily all the area that they got in the peace agreement. But what you can say of these both wars is that a fixed defense system with trenches and bunkers, like in the Karelian isthmus and what we now see in Donbass, does not hold the enemy for a longer time. That is not the way to win. It is a way to delay, but you must attack. Have mobile units attacking in chosen places where you arrange local overpower.

    The issue is that in a war you must also attack even if the opponent is much larger. You must take the initiative and focus forces in some place in order to get local overpower. The problem is always airforce as it can move fast, ground forces of the opponent do not move so fast, so there may be many of them but they are not all in the correct place in the correct time. The sizes of the armies matter only globally, locally you can focus an overpower. But you need to do something with the airforce, like take local airsuperiority even with a small airforce.

    What you suggested, small attacks on the whole front, is not a correct advice. It may be correct in the tactical level (like is the general advice: do not attack, only defend) but not in the operational level, and with this advice you cannot regain areas. It is not the way territorial defence works. In order to get local overpower you must select some point and concentrate force there, and you must grep the initiative in this place. You cannot only do a short attack, it has no operational effect. You must follow the enemy and destroy it when it is withdrawing. Russians are not unbeatable, they only think so.

    “Ukrainian (offensive) effort had minimal impact on that decision.”

    You say so, but I do not think this is the case. Ukraine won after a long time many battles for cities, and not only in Kiev area. They also won where Russians were not intending to withdraw. The Russian attack on Kiev failed, that tells all. It did not fail because Russians had their own problems, it failed because in addition to these problems (largely caused by attacks on their supply lines) they had an enemy that they could not beat. Think of the 64 km convey from Chernobyl to Kiev. It stopped because Ukrainians blew up bridges and destroyed two fuel trains. It was not because Russian command chain was so poor. Because the attack to Kiev failed due to Ukraine actions, Russians were forced to withdraw, but because of Ukraine offensive effort the withdrawal was unorganized, troops were left behind and they suffered high losses. Do not underestimate the enemy.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  215. peterAUS says:
    @j2

    Well, you are definitely interested in the topic, put a lot of effort into it and express your thoughts and ideas in concise and civil way.
    Compliments.

    Let’s just say I definitely disagree with your approach.
    If we were two Lt.Cols advising a General I’d strongly object your brief and do my best to present my, different ideas/suggestions/advice.
    I’d strongly emphasize that your approach is..how to put it…”theoretical”… and lacks understanding of practicalities/realities re offensive operations at the place and TIME.

    Here in this online pub I don’t feel like doing it and getting into debate and/or arguments, though.

    May I make a suggestion: do a war game along your thoughts/ideas. Shouldn’t be a problem; there are some good maps online with disposition of forces. “Assume” a command of that attacking element of yours (a Brigade Combat Team I assume; Corps?!) and go ……..
    METT-TC, Commander’s Intent, Orders, the works. One point: try to be realistic re capability of your troops.
    Good luck. Have fun.

    • Replies: @j2
  216. j2 says:
    @peterAUS

    “May I make a suggestion: do a war game along your thoughts/ideas. ”

    peterAUS, I like you but it looks like you are have a military background but not on the operational level. It is operational art you need here.

    These scenarios are indeed played in war games every year by some country and territorial defense every time works. Russians are always stopped and not only stopped, they are pushed back, no joke here, careful planning and very good use of terrain. The main problem with this defense strategy is that cities are ruined and that cannot be helped, so nobody wants to do this war.

    See what the territorial defense requires: local overpower and local air superiority for some time. Conclude what that implies to the troops: you need small but very effective mobile forces, so best airplanes there are, but not many, best tanks there are, but not many. As what you need is very few very powerful units for local overpower to push them back. And you need a conscript army to hold the defense while the attack is made in a chose place. So, check where you find this combination and ask yourself why they have it. And if you are from the Eastern troll factory, do not believe what they tell you there, trust me, Finns do not lie.

    This concept was developed because a fixed defense system with trenches and bunkers was the (only) place where the defense failed in WWII. It did not really fail, but defense lines were pushed to the third defense line and only there the attack was stopped. Because in fixed lines defense you have several lines, first, second, third, it is up to fifth. Russians are (always) finally stopped by this system, but the area lost cannot be regained in this defense system. So, because this fails, but in every other front the enemy was pushed back and there were no lines, it was concluded that there cannot be lines, but it is indeed possible to push them back. It was done in many fronts.

    Think about this, and no irony, please (not warranted).

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  217. Sepp says:

    Perun gets off track at the very beginning when he defines “Russian goals” to be limited to what he considers to be Russia’s “stated objectives”. All those 4 objectives (demilitarization, denazification, protecting Donbas, halting Nato expansion) are clearly far to vague to go to war for. This is not a war between Russia and Ukraine anyway. It is a war between Russia and Nato. He states himself that even if Russia destroyed every arms plant in Ukraine they could still rearm themselves, because all the weapons factories are in the “west”. Russia could never have disarmed Ukraine, and clearly Russia knows this. Perun’s war goals are nonsensical even if Russia did “state” them, and Perun goes through and makes clear that they are. Weapons plants are in western Europe anyway, Nazi boogey man is a joke, Donbas cannot be protected, Finland and Sweden would join Nato if Russia attacked. Perun proves that the war never made sense, especially in light of Nato claiming for weeks before it started the “Russia is going to invade” while beating their war drums and refusing to negotiate.

    The video descends downhill from there into one conjecture based on another. For example, Russia stopped her encirclement of Kiev as part of a negotiated withdrawal agreement, yet Peron blithely states that Russia was “mauled” and in retreat and repeats this assumption as fact throughout the presentation.

    The most important question Perun did not ask is “why did Russia attack Ukraine with far less forces and inferior weaponry than Nato supplied Ukraine?” Why was the planning so haphazard?

    There was never anywhere near enough forces to occupy Ukraine to begin with, all the stated Russian war goals are fake. So why did Putin do this. Here are a few possibilities, divided into two groups:

    Reasons for Russia invading Ukraine if Russia is NOT part of the WEF conspiracy
    1. Ukro-Khazarian Bio-weapons labs releasing or planning to release bio-weapons
    2. Ukro-Khazarian army was about to invade Russia/Crimea/Donbas and offense is the best defense (Russia’s Barbarossa)
    3. Ukro-Khazarian army was about to get new weapons and radically change the balance
    4. Putin hoped to be able to expose some dastardly deed like child sacrifice
    5. Some kind of internal Russia political crisis, likely involving Russian and/or Ukrainian oligarchs
    6. Recent events in Kazahkstan, Armenia and Belorussia

    Reasons for Russia invading Ukraine if Russia IS part of the WEF conspiracy
    1. Khazaria 2.0
    2. Slav/European Genocide
    3. Distraction from Vaxx meltdown
    4. Promote and further: supply chain meltdown, energy crisis, food crisis, global warming agenda
    5. Putin simply received his orders from WEF/Rothschild/Schwab and has no real goal
    6. Promote Holocaust/Nazi hate agenda

    Notice that none of these important strategic “goals” was discussed by Perun, because at his core he is just a millennial gamer and lacks an understanding of History.

  218. peterAUS says:
    @j2

    You are definitely drawn to the topic. And (still) civil. Along the line, if you will.

    I am not sure I’ve completely understood the latest comment of yours.
    Would you be so kind as to clarify a couple of things, please:

    …it looks like you are have a military background but not on the operational level. It is operational art you need here….

    Would you be willing to share your experience in the …ahm…”operational art”, please? Am I “speaking” here with a two star general with considerable command and staff experience at, at least, Corps level?!?

    The main problem with this defense strategy is that cities are ruined and that cannot be helped, so nobody wants to do this war.

    Sounds reasonable.
    Would you be willing to clarify what kind of war would be wanted, then, by the side on the defense ?

    Now, to this war and your idea that Ukrainians should to large attack operations:

    ….you need small but very effective mobile forces, so best airplanes there are, but not many, best tanks there are, but not many….

    What would be the size of those mobile forces? Would you know what are those, as we speak, within current Ukrainian military? Where are they?
    What are those “best airplanes”? And, more importantly, how many of those Ukrainians have, as we speak? Where are they?
    What are those “best tanks”? How many of those Ukrainians have, as we speak? Where are they? How are they organized?

    By this

    ….Finns do not lie….

    I am starting to get a strong impression where this conversation is going and how it’s going to end.

    Still, you HAVE put a lot of thought in all this, so a couple of questions:
    HOW would you attack Russian forces currently in Ukraine, on the operational level?
    To clarify my question:
    WHERE would you do it, as we speak + a week (I guess enough time to get ready?).
    WHAT would be the forces you’d use for the attack?
    WHEN would you attack (day, night)?

    HOW would you attack?
    This could be tricky, so here are sub-questions:
    Would you do art prep? By what and for how long?
    What would be the units in the first and the second echelon?
    Would you support them with arty? With air force? How?
    How would you take care of Russian air force? I am really curious to read this up.
    What would be your casualty estimate from Russian standoff weapons?
    How would you take care of Russian counter-attack by their mechanized reserve?
    How deep and wide would your attack penetrate into enemy held territory (estimate)?

    It would be really helpful to compose the above by the book. I am…. sure…. you’ve done it hundreds of times. METT-TC etc.
    Mission: “To …….”
    Enemy: “A Brigade Combat Team reinforced…..”
    Troops: “Task Force xxx composed of….”
    Terrain: I’ll leave this to you.
    Time:
    Civil….

    Orders:
    “The Armored Batallion shall….”
    Etc….

    Looking forward to that learning experience here. Really.

    • Replies: @j2
  219. j2 says:
    @peterAUS

    General staff officer means ranks major, colonel lieutenant, colonel, general, those who were in the general staff officer course, where the most important topic is operational art and tactics. It is the study of how to do war.

    I understand your irritation. I expressed myself incorrectly. I meant that you give reasons that are more on the batallion level, like how the squad works, but the question I wanted to ask you is on the operational level: how does Ukraine intend to regain the lost areas and possibly win this war?

    I am civilian and not from operational art and tactic, with only conscript service very long ago and ten years working with general staff officers, and no combat experience. I have zero own experiences of commanding any army to share with you. Naturally in ten years, I did hear something of territorial defense from general staff officers and did read something, but of own experiences you should ask some colonel or general who was in the headquarters in a war, or much easier, read some book about some war written by someone who knows operational art. I can of course share with you what some Polish generals have said of the Ukraine war in the TV recently, and there are several high commanders who have said something of this or another war, so there is quite enough material, but I guess you have your own sources.

    Neither one of us need to be general staff officers in order to speculate what will be the next move of Ukraine. That level is operational art: how do they intend to regain the lost area. As I see it, they must attack. I cannot see how otherwise Russia would leave the corridor from Crime to Donbass. In order to attack it must figure out some way to do it, so my guess is that they will attack in Charkiv area and you thought that it is the area where Russians are strong and therefore not good. It may well be so that you are correct, but the problem to solve is how Ukraine will try to gain the area. Somewhere they will attack, it looks so to me.

    I will clarify the issues you mentioned:

    “Would you be willing to clarify what kind of war would be wanted, then, by the side on the defense ?”
    I did not mean it this way, but maybe there are such cases: I think Hitler was hoping that France will attack Germany in the beginning of WWII as they had declared war, yet France did nothing. Had France attacked, Germany would have technically been the defensive side and if it would lose (like it did), this could be an argument to avoid reparations. I meant simply that territorial defence does not solve the problem of Russia attacking. The defender, knowing that cities will be destroyed, may not want to use the defense strategy and surrenders.

    “What would be the size of those mobile forces? Would you know what are those, as we speak, within current Ukrainian military? Where are they?
    What are those “best airplanes”? And, more importantly, how many of those Ukrainians have, as we speak? Where are they?
    What are those “best tanks”? How many of those Ukrainians have, as we speak? Where are they? How are they organized?”

    In Ukraine we have a variant of territorial defence, or so it so far seems to me. Ukraine must attack. In their situation how they get local overpower depends on how Russia uses its troops. Russia has these BTGs, about 120 in Ukraine. Half were in Kiev area, half of the rest is in the South. That is 30 BTGs. In the South they have three fronts (East, North, West). Let us take West, it may be 10 BTGs.
    If these 10 BTGs stay as batallions, there are 10 places where these troops are, so they can be isolated and cut from supplies. If the 10 BGTs are divided to 40 units of the size 2 tanks, 200 men and so, then local overpower is easy to get with antitank weapons, one tank or self-propelled gun and 300 men. So: if Russia uses large units, then unit is not where it is not and can be isolated, if Russia uses small units, then small is small and is overpowered.

    But it could also be that one kamikaze drone destroys BTG airdefence and two Migs destroy the unit. I do not mean that Ukraine needs in this war “best” airplanes and best tanks, like e.g F-35 and new Leopard as some country has, I mean that for the expected war one needs suitable equipment for getting local overpower if one wants to use territorial defence. Else there is no way to push the enemy back.

    “….Finns do not lie…. ”

    But this is a well-known fact. Even a child knows this to be true. One of the things in this changing world we can rely on. But OK, we have some Finns who can lie. We make them politicians, intelligence officers, diplomats, people talking to those cheating foreigners, such things. Do you not know the story that foreigners always tell of Finland, how some foreigner left a suitcase on the airport and nobody stole it (because everybody thought that there is a bomb) showing how honest people are there.

    “HOW would you attack Russian forces currently in Ukraine, on the operational level?
    To clarify my question:
    WHERE would you do it, as we speak + a week (I guess enough time to get ready?).
    WHAT would be the forces you’d use for the attack?
    WHEN would you attack (day, night)?”

    Answers from a complete civilian:
    WHERE Charkiv area, pushing forward the attack Ukraine how has there. Breaking the partial siege of Charkiv, then pushing towards East intending to such the supply lines to Izium. As soon as possible, that is withing a few days before Russia can regroup (which was to take 1-2 weeks).
    WHAT Triple the forces that now are doing the attack from Charkiv to North.
    WHEN Night, Ukraine always attacks at night.

    “HOW would you attack?
    This could be tricky, so here are sub-questions:
    Would you do art prep? By what and for how long?”
    Not a soldier, do not know the term art prep.

    “What would be the units in the first and the second echelon?
    Would you support them with arty? With air force? How?”
    I expect that Ukrainians would do what they so far did. They support with mortars and artillery, both towed and self-propelled and they have multiple rocket launchers (seems to be Grom).
    As a civilian without any detailed knowledge of the situation I leave this to the local commander,
    it is on tactical level.

    “How would you take care of Russian air force? I am really curious to read this up.”
    I sense some irony in your comment, but let us try. so from a complete civilian without any better information of the military situation than what is in media. But let me try:
    Ukraine is running out of medium range ground-to-air missile launchers, but as Russia has
    only dumb bombs bombing from higher altitude is not worse than artillery. Therefore the threat from Russian planes is close air support. For that I would use MANPADS that Ukraine has many.

    “What would be your casualty estimate from Russian standoff weapons?”
    I would expect that Ukraine losses in an attack operation would be about triple of their losses in defense operations because they can only put relatively small force to attack.

    “How would you take care of Russian counter-attack by their mechanized reserve?”
    There are no fixed lines that need to be kept. Russian counter-attack is taken care of in the same way as their original attack: let them advance deep, weaken them, and finally push back by a counter-attack. Russians can come many times, and be many times pushed back. Like they
    did in the Winter War, tanks coming every day, being pushed back every night. Here let us say, every week or two. Finally the attacker is exhausted or the defender runs out of something, but Ukraine will not run out of anything essential in this war.

    “How deep and wide would your attack penetrate into enemy held territory (estimate)?”
    There are no fixed lines in this war, but Russians are vulnerable to antitank weapons by partisans (territorial forces, here the National Guard forces moving as small groups in personal cars) when on road. They will occupy a city or village, so the attack penetrates to the next place where the Russians stop and the attack has to be wide, about as wide as the push back to North in Charkiv or to East in Mykolaiv. Russians basically move on roads. They would not need to do so, but they usually do so.

    “It would be really helpful to compose the above by the book. I am…. sure…. you’ve done it hundreds of times.”

    OK, finally the irony – he, he, he, as you usually … say… he, he, he.
    I have never planned any military operation, nor would I never suggest that any army would ask me to plan a military operation for them. I would let Ukraine army the do this by their books. What I wanted from you was an opinion what you think would be the likely direction of an attack. Your suggestion was to make many small attacks and continue by attrition as so far, but I doubt that it will be so. There is a silent moment in the war now. I suspect that Ukraine is planning an attack.
    Why I asked from you was because this discussion in Unz is usually such nonsense with alive corpses, Ukraine killing its own citizens who them fly to Poland and say that Russia is the aggressor and never blame the terrible UkriNazis for these causalities.

    So, whatever worth my answers are, you have them here.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @peterAUS
  220. peterAUS says:
    @j2

    Well………you definitely put a LOT of effort into this and that’s commendable.

    Here is my reply:

    What I wanted from you was an opinion what you think would be the likely direction of an attack. Your suggestion was to make many small attacks and continue by attrition as so far, but I doubt that it will be so. There is a silent moment in the war now. I suspect that Ukraine is planning an attack.

    I do not think the Ukrainian top military command is willing to try such an attack. The reasons are simple: Russians are too strong and Ukrainians are too weak for such a task. The later in particular.

    Now, for political reasons, they could try to do that. We do live in the Clown World.

    If…IF…Ukrainians do try such an attack you are, I believe, correct. It will, most likely, be in Kharkov area.
    I believe it will be repelled, with attacking force suffering heavy casualties. Will it bring some political gains, maybe. In the Clown World politics and post-modern management of public perceptions anything is possible. The Scamdemic proved that beyond any doubt.
    The attack will also definitely maul Ukrainian best forces.
    It will NOT regain any significant territory.

    Now…why we just don’t wait a bit and see what happens? I am positive that the next 4 weeks will clarify all that, and more.

  221. JayTe says:

    I’m sorry but Mike Whitney is completely oblivious to what the Russians are doing in Ukraine. They basically shaped the battlefield by destroying the logistics network of the Ukrainian forces while circling Ukrainian forces and holding some of those units in place (in places like Kiev and Kharkov) while methodically eliminating others in Lugansk and Mariupol. Now they are setting up another cauldron for Ukrainian troops in Donetsk. Once that is completed, they will move on to either Kharkov or Kiev. It is the same approach that Russia used in Chechnya and Syria.

  222. peterAUS says:
    @j2

    The most likely scenario, IMHO, for the next several weeks.

    I listened up to 5.00 minute.
    Disregarded the “victory at Kiev” and “bad Ruskies” parts here and there.
    Focused on purely military matters from now on.
    To each his/her own, of course.

    • Replies: @j2
  223. peterAUS says:

    Maybe interesting:

    And a Finn, of all people.

  224. j2 says:
    @peterAUS

    Thanks peterAUS. The generals analysis is quite good and it seems that all generals see this war rather much in the same way. The goal of Putin is probably correctly understood: NovaRossia by 9. May. It is much better than these Unz articles. I have followed for some time these kind of analyses, they seem more informative that Russian propaganda lies.

    I have two comments on the videos and the chances of success of this goal.

    From the Finn I point out that he incorrectly states that Ukraine army with reserves is 200,000. This is not so, they had 160,000 Ground Forces, trained reserve of 200,000 and territorial troops that were 35,000 and now may be 50,000. They are not so trained, but 40,000 in Dunbas are experienced and many others got some experience. It does not make them professional soldiers, but Russian contract soldiers are not professional in that sense either and their new volunteers are volunteers only. I see some ways how with US weapon help Ukraine can counter-attack also in Dunbas.

    From the other video, after this 5 min there is the motivation of Ukraine: they know what Russian suppression is and do not want it any more. This is not so only in the West, it is also in Russian speaking Dunbas that up to 24.Feb was under Ukraine power, and I strongly suspect that in reality the situation is almost the same in the area under the rebel control, that is, people there do not in reality support the rebels. The Tochka-U to Kramatorsk (in Dunbas) was probably shot from Donetsk (being one Ukrainian Tochka that rebels got in 2014 from side-changing Ukraine troops, looks like that to me). Many people there must suspect that such things happen there.

    One thing I can add here is that I finally figured out Sepp’s “award-winning journalist’s” statement that Russian has destroyed 1900+ tanks. It comes form Tass and it is not tanks. The military announcements always say “tanks and other armoured vehicles”. Then the number is quite that Russia says and tanks is about 1/4 of this number. So, they have destroyed 500 tanks, just like I calculated. If so, Ukraine has this 640+300 tanks left. Indeed, 1900+ tanks Russians could not have destroyed as of 2440 Ukraine tanks 1000 are T-64Bs and they are most probably no operational and are somewhere in bomb protected shelters waiting to be modernized.

    But you are correct. We wait. Your view that Ukraine should not attack is correct in a sense, but if Ukraine wants the areas back, it must at some point attack. It is a political issue: do Ukrainians agree to yield this area or not. I think they will not.

    • Replies: @DevilAdvocate
  225. @j2

    The Tochka-U to Kramatorsk (in Dunbas) was probably shot from Donetsk (being one Ukrainian Tochka that rebels got in 2014 from side-changing Ukraine troops, looks like that to me).

    Have you seen in a map in what direction Donetsk is relatively to Kramatorsk ?
    It’s NOT the direction from where came the missile, evidenced by the alignment of the explosion site and the fallen missile body.
    If you have such a detailed approach to your military scenarios, the minimum you could do was to assess these simple hard facts.

    • Replies: @j2
    , @j2
  226. j2 says:
    @DevilAdvocate

    The way you use for detecting the direction where the missile came from is not reliable. If the event is intended as a false flag, the apparent direction where the missile is shot from shows to a wrong direction. Indeed, Pentagon estimates that the missile was shot by a recently arrived Russian brigade, you can find their argument by a small search from the web. I base my guess that this missile is a false flag and it is an Ukraine missile that was obtained in 2022 by the separatists to the following argument:

    The serial number of the Kramatorsk missile is so close to the serial number of two tochkas shot in Dunbas that it seems to be from the same tochka launcher. Ukraine has 90-500 such tochkas, so it is not likely that ukraine tochka in 2022 would be from the same launcher. But rebels had maybe only one captured from ukraine.

  227. j2 says:
    @DevilAdvocate

    Let me refute some other crazy theories here in Unz.

    The theory that the victims of the Tochka-U in Kramatorsk were actors set there by Ukrainians is shown incorrect by the fact that even Ukrainians making a false flag would not use a missile that they use and Russia does not normally use, and if those were actors, there was no explosion and the missile wreck was transported there: then why would Ukrainians point it to a direction that it seems that it came from Ukraine (assuming that your way of detecting the direction were correct). We can conclude from these that the victims are not actors.

    Actor victims have also been proposed to Bucha. The arguments given by Unz commenters include that the bodies do not stink terribly enough, but the temperature there has been like in a morgue, so the bodies do not stink much in max for weeks. Another argument by Unz commenter is that there is no blood, but these bodies were on the streets for a long time and it may well have rained. Yet other commenters say that the bodies move. The body in a bag does not move, only plastic moves, the man in a shelter falls back for some reason, maybe he is not quite dead but the vast majority in the video clip are clearly corpses. French police team has been sent there, so they will investigate the scene, but even from television images it is very clear that there are bodies. Police will establish when they died and how. From the reactions of Ukrainians it is clear that they flee from Russians to the West and they do not flee from Azov batallion UkriNazis to Russia. It follows that they strongly believe that Russia has done the killings. Very likely they are correct as there are so many of them and many eyewitnesses among them.

    Back to the Tochka-U in Kramatorsk. As the victims are real, we have the following alternatives:

    1. A recently arrived Russian brigade shot it believing that Ukraine military has an unit at the trainstation. So, it was a mistake, then blamed on Ukrainians. This brigade was recently called for war and had to use old Tochka-U missiles. We can discard this theory because even if a Russian brigade would use Tochkas, the serial number would not be close to Ukrainian missiles used in 2014. So, 1 is false.

    2. Ukraine military shot it in a mistake and claimed it was Russians. This theory is false since even though Tochka is notoriously imprecise (0.5 km precision), Kramatorsk was in Ukraine possession and at least 10 km of it in each direction. Ukraine could not sot a missile there by mistake. We discard 2.

    3. Donbas separatist shot the missile on a target that they believed was a military unit close to the trainstation. They used Tochka that they had obtained from Ukrainian army in 2014. Then news came that the missile hit civilians, so they blamed Ukrainians and fast wrote a paper stating that one can deduce the firing place from the direction of the wrack (though it can be that in reality the direction cannot be reliably determined in this way, sometimes it is, sometimes it is not). This alternative 3 is supported by the facts that Russia first announced having done this attack in Kramatorsk and then the announcement was edited, the following text has links to telegrams proving this theory:
    “Russia tried to blame Ukraine for attacking its own citizens. Russian Telegram channel Siloviki prematurely published information that Russians are “working on a cluster of armed forces of Ukraine at Kramatorsk railway station” and celebrated casualties among Ukrainian combatants. A few minutes after the initial post, they edited it, presumably after reports of civilian casualties proliferated. In the edited post, they said that when the Kramatorsk railway station was hit, “It was possibly a Tochka-U [missile] that the Armed Forces of Ukraine use.” Both posts were subsequently deleted, but the original post and the edited message were archived as a forwarded message on another pro-Kremlin channel. Another pro-Kremlin Telegram channel, Veteran Notes, published an ominous message on the evening of April 7, suggesting people who evacuate from Kramatorsk and Sloviansk not use railway transport.”
    https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-russia-makes-false-claims-while-blaming-ukraine-for-kramatorsk-railway-station-attack/#kramatorsk

    There is an alternative claim that the tochka was shot from the separatist area:
    “According to the Conflict Intelligence Team, the missile was launched by the Tochka-U ballistic missile system allegedly from Shakhtarsk, Donetsk Oblast, occupied by Russia since 2014. Prior, videos of a missile launch from Shakhtarsk were published online.”
    https://kyivindependent.com/uncategorized/conflict-intelligence-team-missiles-hitting-kramatorsk-train-station-launched-from-russian-occupied-donbas/
    The source text in Russian is here:
    https://t.me/CITeam/2463

    Thus, theory 3. seems likely, but there is still one alternative.

    4. Ukraine neo-Nazis shot this missile in order to blame Russians, or simply because they like killing Ukrainians. This is unlikely, if UkriNazis usually kill Russian speaking Ukrainians, the latter would not flee to Poland and say that Russia is killing them. Also if UkriNazis wanted to frame Russia, why did they use a Tochka-U missile and not explosives and claim that the station was hit by an Iskander? Certainly it would be idiotic to use a missile that only Ukraine uses and try to blame it on Russia. We can discard this alternative..

    The conclusion is that 3. is correct. The missile was shot from Dunbas separatist region from a tochka launcher that in 2014 belonged to Ukraine.

  228. There are several flaws in your reasoning:

    Shaktarsk lies to south-east of Kramatorsk. Aerial photos taken of both the missile body and the place of killing show the direction is undoubtely from south-west. So either from ukrainian positions or from an advanced position of RF, NOT from inside DNR lines.

    Now, let’s examine the case for an action from RF advanced forces, and let’s also suppose they wanted to create a false flag against Ukraine army.
    There are simply too many things that are illogical:

    1- Why target civilians when the main objective is to defeat ukrainian army and not crush towns ? If the RF army wanted to target and destroy civilians and towns, they could simply bomb them to rubble.

    2- Why target civilians when it’s obvious the only MSM outcome coverage will be blaming the russians, in a way absolutely dominant, and attract more sanctions or a military involvement from Nato ?

    3- Why would RF or LDNR target civilians mainly pro-russian, their own people ?

    The risk of such an action from the part of RF or LDNR, is too great and the benefits are at a minimum very small, considering 1, 2 and 3.

    Moreover:

    Ukraine military shot it in a mistake and claimed it was Russians. This theory is false since even though Tochka is notoriously imprecise (0.5 km precision), Kramatorsk was in Ukraine possession and at least 10 km of it in each direction. Ukraine could not sot a missile there by mistake.

    Why not ? There have been other cases, in Kiev, where buildings were hit by ukrainians by mistake.
    And why bother with the lack of Tochka precision ? (Although it’s really hard to believ how a missile can be useful if it has 500m radius of precision. What can he destroy like this, without firing dozens of them to get a successful hit ? Better to use conventional artillery. Much less costly.)

    Donbas separatist shot the missile on a target that they believed was a military unit close to the trainstation.

    How could they be so inept as to use such an imprecise missile to target something amidst densely populated areas ?
    There was any confirmation of a military target there ? Even if there was one, they would never risk that, but instead they would have used more modern missiles, like the Kinzhal, if the target was really so important. And the K would have hit it, not on a station full of people.

    This is unlikely, if UkriNazis usually kill Russian speaking Ukrainians, the latter would not flee to Poland and say that Russia is killing them.

    I don’t follow your reasoning. you mean: “the latter would flee to Poland and say that Russia is killing them” ?
    If so, I ask you: why would they flee to Poland, where they are sure to encounter their galician enemies, rather than to Russia, which is much more welcoming to them ? Now they are entrapped in ukro-nazi territory and their only hope is just to move westward to other towns not in the middle of the cauldron.
    And I add another thing:
    If you were one of those Ukro-nazis, trying to defend territory at any cost, in a place filled with people you hate (because they are mostly pro-russian), wouldn’t you want to prevent their fleeing from towns and denying the opportunity of using them as human shields ?

    Then, sending them a missile accomplishes several things:
    – Creating fear among people trying to leave.
    – Get another great coverage from MSM blaming the russians.
    – Get more weapons and support from Nato.

    I see you look quite analytical and extensive in your observations, but I still suspect you are too attached to the idea that “Russia is wrong”, and so all your analysis are directed at proving that.
    Now, I invite you to have a more open mind and admit first that both sides are correct until proof against one.
    Please examine my points above and try to reflect on them, and come out with a logical whole picture.

    • Replies: @j2
  229. j2 says:
    @DevilAdvocate

    “I see you look quite analytical and extensive in your observations, but I still suspect you are too attached to the idea that “Russia is wrong”, and so all your analysis are directed at proving that.
    Now, I invite you to have a more open mind and admit first that both sides are correct until proof against one.”

    I am on nobody’s side. You are clearly pro-Russian. I ask you to have an open and honest mind and look again at the arguments I gave. I will show the errors in yours.

    There are several flaws in your reasoning:

    “Shaktarsk lies to south-east of Kramatorsk. Aerial photos taken of both the missile body and the place of killing show the direction is undoubtely from south-west. So either from ukrainian positions or from an advanced position of RF, NOT from inside DNR lines.”

    The method you propose, looking at the place of killing and the place where the surviving missile part landed is not reliable. It may give a correct result and it may not. There is another as relaible analysis that suggests that the missile was shot from Shaktarsk. Both methods are unreliable and their different results clearly show that they are unreliable. Furthermore, a small group with a Tochka-U launcher can easily pass any lines in this war, so Russians or Ukrainian separatists may well have driven with a vehicle to the direction where you think the missile came from, fired it, and returned. A simpler alternative is that this missile was fired from Shaktarsk and it was simply a mistake that there were civilians and not soldiers on the train station. It is very clear that Ukraine must move soldiers to the East for Donbas battles and probably most will come by train.

    “Now, let’s examine the case for an action from RF advanced forces, and let’s also suppose they wanted to create a false flag against Ukraine army.
    There are simply too many things that are illogical:

    1- Why target civilians when the main objective is to defeat ukrainian army and not crush towns ? If the RF army wanted to target and destroy civilians and towns, they could simply bomb them to rubble.”
    Shelling to rubble with artillery cannot be done from over 20 km and Kramatorsk is over that distance from Russian lines. Bombing by airplanes is not the choice anymore since Russian losses in airplanes are too high. Ukraine still has too many ground-to-air missiles. Therefore they chose a missile attack. Two powerful missiles were used on this target. One was intercepted. Had they hit buildings, the damage would have been much bigger. That weapon was one of the best suited for
    the goal, which in Russian’s case has been to shoot cities and civilian buildings with missiles. The
    goal of that is to kill the defense spirit.
    I think a mistake by Ukrainian separatists is more like than a false flag, but a false flag is possible.

    “2- Why target civilians when it’s obvious the only MSM outcome coverage will be blaming the russians, in a way absolutely dominant, and attract more sanctions or a military involvement from Nato ?”

    Russian propaganda is not directed to Ukrainians or to the West/world. It is directed to Russians in homeland. Putin does not care at all how the MSM sees the events. He cares only how Russians see the events, because MSM is not a threat to him, while losing the support of Russians would be.
    Targeting civilians is the way Russia makes wars today. This strategy has many effects and has worked in Chechenia and Syria. The strategy may defeat the spirit, but it also and certainly destroys the basis of the defending forces: they are denied electricity, water, food, ammunition, local support by the way of turning civilian areas into rubble.

    “3- Why would RF or LDNR target civilians mainly pro-russian, their own people ?”

    Yet this is exactly what Russians have done. Russian speaking Ukrainians, who escaped to Poland, ask the same thing and add that now they hate Russians.

    “The risk of such an action from the part of RF or LDNR, is too great and the benefits are at a minimum very small, considering 1, 2 and 3.”

    Russians have a different logic.

    “Moreover:

    Ukraine military shot it in a mistake and claimed it was Russians. This theory is false since even though Tochka is notoriously imprecise (0.5 km precision), Kramatorsk was in Ukraine possession and at least 10 km of it in each direction. Ukraine could not sot a missile there by mistake.

    Why not ? There have been other cases, in Kiev, where buildings were hit by ukrainians by mistake.
    And why bother with the lack of Tochka precision ? (Although it’s really hard to believ how a missile can be useful if it has 500m radius of precision. What can he destroy like this, without firing dozens of them to get a successful hit ? Better to use conventional artillery. Much less costly.)

    There were battles in suburbs of Kiev where Ukrainians did their share of shelling. No Ukraine missile hit the center of Kiev. Tochka-U nominal precision is 150 m and the range is 15-70 km, which means it was not planned to be too imprecise: it can carry a nuclear load when the precision has not meaning, or a conventional load that destroys in the radius of 200 m. However, it has turned out that the error of this missile can be up to 500 m, so the nominal precision only means that most missiles hit to this area. You would shoot two Tochka-Us, as the likely precision is 150 m and you want to halve it. 50 m is quite good for a medium range missile. Conventional artillery you would need to transport to max 20 km from Kramatorsk. I see that you have no idea of military issues. I repeat my argument again: Kramatorsk is in the middle of the area occupied by Ukraine. Shooting a missile anywhere close to Kramatorsk could not hit any Russian targets because there were only Ukrainian civilian and military targets there. Therefore it is not possible that Ukrainian army chose to shoot towards Kramatorsk with the intention of killing Russians.


    Donbas separatist shot the missile on a target that they believed was a military unit close to the trainstation.

    How could they be so inept as to use such an imprecise missile to target something amidst densely populated areas ?”

    The missile is usually not that imprecise, it is an inertia guided missile. What you do not understand is that Tochka-U has the nominal precision 150 m, so normally it hits within a circle of 150 m radius, but it is known that the missile may go 500 m off the intended target. That would be uncommon, but possible. Donbas separatists may have wanted to destroy a large group of Ukrainian soldiers coming by train. It probably would also kill some civilians, but that is acceptable in a war.

    “There was any confirmation of a military target there ? Even if there was one, they would never risk that, but instead they would have used more modern missiles, like the Kinzhal, if the target was really so important. And the K would have hit it, not on a station full of people.”

    Donbas separatists do not have Russian top-modern hypersonic missile Kinzhal. This top-modern missile is intended for passing missile shields in NATO countries and carrying nuclear warheads in the case of WWIII. It is Russia’s answer for the USA having built missile shields so that the USA could make a nuclear attack to Russia but Russia could not respond. This is why these missiles are very valuable and they are not to be wasted to any train station in Ukraine. Russia uses these missiles in this war only in order to show how precise they are. It was shown. The rest are for WWIII, and they will have nuclear heads. Iskander might have been used, but Donbas separatists do not have Iskanders. They have what they got from Ukraine army when many Ukrainian troops changed sides, so they have at least one Tochka launcher and a set of missiles for it.

    Pure logic says that Ukraine will transport many soldiers to the area by train, and the train arriving to evacuate people may have come full of soldiers, maybe the train stopped before the station and let the soldiers out. There was an announcement in the link I gave you showing that Russians did think there are soldiers in the Kramatorsk train station. This kind of target is important, but certainly not important enough for Kinzhal.


    This is unlikely, if UkriNazis usually kill Russian speaking Ukrainians, the latter would not flee to Poland and say that Russia is killing them.

    I don’t follow your reasoning. you mean: “the latter would flee to Poland and say that Russia is killing them” ?”

    The reasoning is this. I have seen dozens of interviews of Russian speaking Ukrainians in the TV. They escape to Poland, not to Russia. They blame Russians for destroying their homes and killing their people. They never mention anything of UkriNazis or Ukrainian soldiers or paramilitaries threatening them in any way. If they would have been suppressed and persecuted by Ukrainian Nazis, then they would not behave in this way. They would have escaped to Russia if Russia is the one that protects them, but they did not do so. They all now hate Russians.

    “If so, I ask you: why would they flee to Poland, where they are sure to encounter their galician enemies, rather than to Russia, which is much more welcoming to them ?”

    Exactly, and yet this is what they do. They flee to Poland. So it just must be so that they do not see Russia as more welcoming to them. They see Russia as the aggressor and Russian army as murderers, thieves and rapists. Whether true or not, that is the opinion of these people in every interview they give in the West, and these people are women, often old women, normal simple people, as far from Azov militant as you can get.

    “Now they are entrapped in ukro-nazi territory and their only hope is just to move westward to other towns not in the middle of the cauldron.
    And I add another thing:
    If you were one of those Ukro-nazis, trying to defend territory at any cost, in a place filled with people you hate (because they are mostly pro-russian), wouldn’t you want to prevent their fleeing from towns and denying the opportunity of using them as human shields ?”

    Ukraine does try to evacuate civilians from all these places where they are trapped. It is Russian and Ukrainian separatists who all the time stop civilians from leaving Mariupol by shelling evacuation routes. It is Russians/separatists because Ukrainian army does not have artillery/mortars close enough to do any shelling on these routes. Russian soldiers in North, when their supplies had finished and they could not hold against ukrainian attacks, apparently did use civilians as shields. There is no evidence whatsoever that so called UksiNazis were doing anything of this type. There are many interviews from the Mayer and people in Mariupol and many people who escaped Mariupol and many other cities. None of these people say that Ukrainian paramilitary or UkriNazis were stopping them form leaving or using them as human shields. This is simply not true.

    “Then, sending them a missile accomplishes several things:
    – Creating fear among people trying to leave.
    – Get another great coverage from MSM blaming the russians.
    – Get more weapons and support from Nato.”

    Making a false flag on your own people may occasionally work. Gladio and P2 lodge did make several false flag terrorist attacks in Italy, blamed them on communists. The goal was to change the pro-communist attitudes to anti-communistic and it did work. But UkriNazis have a different situation. By bombing the houses of Russian speaking Ukraine Russia has already turned their attitudes to be anti-Russian. There is no need for a false flag to change attitudes. You offer three reasons:
    – that the people would not leave. you suggest that they would be needed as human shields.
    But we see from Mariupol that civilians in the area do not stop a Russian attack. Russia does not care of any human shield. It will shell, bomb, sent missiles, attack all the same. As human shields do not help, UkriNazis would like the civilians to leave as they eat and drink from their diminishing supplies.
    – that MSM would not blame Russians.
    Putin does not care one bit of what MSM says. Putin cares only of what Russians think, and he can control Russian media.
    – Get more weapons.
    Already before the Kramatorsk and Bucha events there was a clear decision by the USA and England that they will not let Ukraine lose this war. They will give weapons when needed. What Zelensky says or does not say has no importance. This was was an USA planned war and the outcome is that Russia will lose.

    “I see you look quite analytical and extensive in your observations…
    Please examine my points above and try to reflect on them, and come out with a logical whole picture.”

    You are not especially analytical as a thinker. Your comments show that you have very poor understanding of military issues and weapons. You have a very biased pro-Russian view. All your points have logical gaps or errors. Please, think carefully of what I wrote and do not take my evaluation of your capabilities as an offense, I am just being honest to you.

    • Replies: @DevilAdvocate
  230. @j2

    How about it was a false false flag where the Russians took over that missile in flight by electronic means and diverted it onto the train station to blame Ukrainians for the massacre and hence cause outrage in the Russian public as what do they care about what the Western media portrays? Like they probably took over that Ukrainian drone in flight and guided it over several NATO countries’ airspace to crash it in Zagreb. The only way for the Ukrainians to prove that the Russians did it is to prove that the Russians took over their missile by electronic means and they can’t do that so it remains that they fired the missile at the crowded train station.

    • Replies: @j2
  231. @j2

    I am on nobody’s side.

    You aren’t being honest. You are clearly biased towards the western side of the story.
    I, for myself, I was too on that side until I started seeing too many “red signals” warning there was another story under all that propaganda of “democracy”, “freedom of expression” and other blabla. This started to become obvious with the Covid psyop.
    But I stand open to hear and discuss with the “other side”, providing they present sound factual and logical arguments. I did that with PeterAUS, for example.

    Regarding military questions, I am far from being an expert, but I’m open to learn.

    The method you propose, looking at the place of killing and the place where the surviving missile part landed is not reliable. It may give a correct result and it may not. There is another as relaible analysis that suggests that the missile was shot from Shaktarsk. Both methods are unreliable and their different results clearly show that they are unreliable.

    I have to examine the study which claimed it was from Shaktarsk before I can say it invalidates the other. Can you provide references ?

    Shelling to rubble with artillery cannot be done from over 20 km and Kramatorsk is over that distance from Russian lines.

    You are forgetting all the towns that were at some moment encircled (totally or partially) by the russians: Kiev, Chernihiv, Sumy, Kharkiv, now on Severodonetsk and Lysychansk, even Mariupol. And all the other smaller towns and villages. They were all within 20 km range.
    In the case of Mariupol (and the others), if your logic stands, that RF combined armies do not care about populations inside, it would have been much less costly to shell them until rubble, than risk thousands of men and precious time in urban combat.

    Russian propaganda is not directed to Ukrainians or to the West/world. It is directed to Russians in homeland. Putin does not care at all how the MSM sees the events.

    I concede we shall never know the absolute truth. Only the one which will emerge from the winning side. Someone here pointed that “history is just the congealed propaganda of the time”. And the propaganda which will survive is surely the one from the winners.

    But Putin should care certainly about the amount of western propaganda because that unleashes all the sanctions against Russia and the endless military supplying to Ukraine, and this obviously will create difficulties to Russia.

    Targeting civilians is the way Russia makes wars today. This strategy has many effects and has worked in Chechenia and Syria.

    In Chechnya they had a more acute case like Mariupol. The resistance (which were probably more rabid than the Ukro-nazis) took the town, entrenched inside, and had to be taken house by house, with the inevitable consequences for their inhabitants and the buildings. Have you heard about Beslan ? That is the kind the russians were fighting. Real nice specimens…
    And in the end, would the chechens volunteer for this operation in Mariupol, if they were hating the russians for what they have done in Grozny ?

    Shooting a missile anywhere close to Kramatorsk could not hit any Russian targets because there were only Ukrainian civilian and military targets there. Therefore it is not possible that Ukrainian army chose to shoot towards Kramatorsk with the intention of killing Russians.

    You are forgetting again that the idea was not to shoot russian soldiers, but to create a false flag to win the support of west and get from them more arms, “volunteers” and supplies. And more sanctions against Russia.

    Donbas separatists do not have Russian top-modern hypersonic missile Kinzhal.

    But they are working together wit RF army (as all the others, chechens, etc). I don’t believe a military expert like you saying they all work independently in an operation like this one…

    The reasoning is this. I have seen dozens of interviews of Russian speaking Ukrainians in the TV.

    And I have seen dozens of interviews of Russian speaking Ukrainians in the liberated cities, in Mariupol, etc, saying that ukrainian army (and specially Ukro-nazis) shelled them, made them captive, robbed their food and water. You are being gullible if you believe the western MSM only says the truth…
    Let’s close this line assuming that all of them, from both sides, are carefully designed propaganda.

    They escape to Poland, not to Russia.

    The people residing west of combat lines cannot obviously escape to Russia, only those east of lines (which they did, even before the conflict started). And probably they cannot escape to towns in western Ukraine because they are hated there.

    Ukraine does try to evacuate civilians from all these places where they are trapped. It is Russian and Ukrainian separatists who all the time stop civilians from leaving Mariupol by shelling evacuation routes. It is Russians/separatists because Ukrainian army does not have artillery/mortars close enough to do any shelling on these routes.

    I don’t follow your logic…
    If the civilians are inside Mariupol with the ukraine army occupying it, what is the difficulty of not leaving them get out ? It’s enough to install a group of ten soldiers (obviously led by one ukro-nazi, to ensure compliance…) inside a block of apartments and shoot everyone who tries to leave. Maybe with just 2 or 3 snipers. I leave to you to refine numbers and tactics…

    There are many interviews from the Mayer and people in Mariupol and many people who escaped Mariupol and many other cities. None of these people say that Ukrainian paramilitary or UkriNazis were stopping them form leaving or using them as human shields.

    Interviews done by whom ?…

    Making a false flag on your own people may occasionally work. Gladio and P2 lodge did make several false flag terrorist attacks in Italy, blamed them on communists. The goal was to change the pro-communist attitudes to anti-communistic and it did work.

    It works very well indeed, and you are acknowledging this too.
    Specially when you have plenty of “disposable” people, who are not really “your own people”, but are viewed outside as being all ukrainian. You probably know Ukraine was never a united country but rather an ever mixmash of quite different peoples, until very recently ?
    A bit like the german jews in nazi Germany, btw.

    But we see from Mariupol that civilians in the area do not stop a Russian attack.

    Of course they do not stop. But they delay advance, consumes men and resources, which otherwise would focus just on a military-to-military fight. And this slow advance also supports the idea the russians are trying to preserve civilians.
    You should see the dozens of videos of Russian army and chechens rescuing people entrapped in their basements for weeks, with little food and water.

    Russia does not care of any human shield. It will shell, bomb, sent missiles, attack all the same.

    Again, if that was the case, Russia would have shelled, bombed, sent missiles into all the towns they have encircled, until there was no more than rubble, to then march triumphantly over.
    Like the US did in Iraq.

    Already before the Kramatorsk and Bucha events there was a clear decision by the USA and England that they will not let Ukraine lose this war. They will give weapons when needed. What Zelensky says or does not say has no importance. This was was an USA planned war…

    At least there is one thing we fully agree. USA goaded Russia into this war, firstly by feeding all kind of provocations (Nato adhesion promises, coups, supporting radical groups, providing arms and training, creating several biolabs), then by denying all kind of peaceful agreements (Minsk, December 2021 proposals, etc). And lastly by preparing a full force attack into Donbass.

    …and the outcome is that Russia will lose.

    We’ll see.

    Please, think carefully of what I wrote and do not take my evaluation of your capabilities as an offense, I am just being honest to you.

    Once again, I’m saying the same to you.

    • Replies: @j2
  232. j2 says:
    @Commentator Mike

    In the case of Tochka-U this cannot be done. It is inertia guided, meaning it has a gyroscope
    acting as a compass. Therefore it can navigate to a target fairly precisely (for Soviets that meant precisely enough for a nuclear head), but it does not use control from a ground station. One may
    be able to capture a drone, with a loitering drone like the kamikaze drones Ukraine just got this
    is again not possible: they have a catalog of target images, they match and hit if there is a match.

    But about this Tochka-U, I could not find confirmation that Ukraine used missiles that had a serial
    number very close to the one in Kramatorsk, but it is possible that this information is true. If so, then
    the missile is most probably from the same launcher, missiles that are to be fired with that launcher. Then we must ask what is the probability that one of 90-500 Tochka-Us that Ukraine had has a serial number close to the one shot in Kramatorsk. That is rather small, while if separatists in Ukraine had
    obtained in 2014 one laucher that had shot two missiles in 2014 in Donbas and was captured/given by troops that shifted sides, then it seems like possible that the separatists would have the launcher.

    I doubt this was intended as a false flag at all. It probably was a mistake. There is the For Children text, but soldiers write some texts to big bombs, so I would not care much of that text. A simple
    mistake, they happen in a war.

    About this reliability of Russian information, it now looks like the 36th brigade in Mariupol did
    not surrender at all but joined the Azov regiment. Some marines from the 36th brigade were captured, some killed, but some hundreds managed to join Azov regiment and now have again ammunition. Yet, for any analysts it is only a matter of time when Mariupol falls. But it does not mean much for this war. They will be martyrs if they die and their fight raised the spirit whatever happens to them.

    About who will win this war. So, all Western analysts in the beginning were certain that Russian will win the war, but it will lose on all other levels and this is still the expectation. But personally I am not anymore so sure about it. I will explain this to you: why territorial defense manages to push back a stronger enemy. This is a logical argument, think about it in the background that a territorial animal, though weaker, often wins on its own area.

    Take two armies in a long front. One army is stronger, but not so much stronger (say 3 to 1) that it would win on a frontal attack on the whole front. Both sides can by concentrating force on a small area get a local overpower and make a breakthrough. But the other side can push back this advance by concentrating forces. Put a trench system here and we have the WWI situation: armies advance some 10 km at most and are pushed back. The whole front can move a bit to either direction, but this is a stalemate. Every attack is costly if there is a trench system and this is attrition war. Assume now that neither side runs out of anything essential, so the attrition aspect does not solve this war.

    Next, drop the trenches from this situation. Now an attack is not so costly and an attack proceeds further, to the next defensible position. But it is still a stalemate. Notice especially that it is a stalemate even though one army is clearly stronger. As long as it is not too much stronger and Russia is not too much stronger since Ukraine has managed to stop its advances.

    Next, consider the change if one side has home field advantage. This advantage may be caused by many issues (spirit, support from partisants, knowledge of area etc.). This advantage means that it is easier for the border to move to one direction than to the other. The result is that the attacker is eventually pushed back to the border where there is no longer this advantage. That is the border of the countries.

    If you think about this for some time, you conclude that it is possible to allow the attacker to advance deep. It cannot keep the positions that it was allowed to get. It will be pushed to the country border.

    Naturally this is only a simplified theory, but it often works. Local overpower can always be obtained. Home field advantage can be arranged by planning. It is not necessarily so that the side with more firepower, more mobility and better training wins. Home field advantage can depend on many factors.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  233. j2 says:
    @DevilAdvocate

    “You aren’t being honest. You are clearly biased towards the western side of the story.
    I, for myself, I was too on that side until I started seeing too many “red signals” warning there was another story under all that propaganda of “democracy”, “freedom of expression” and other blabla. ”

    You are very wrong in this. I am honest but I doubt if you are. I noticed the other story behind the western MSM truth many years ago, but that does not imply that I believe this very obvious war propaganda in the Ukraine was coming from Russia.

    “Kiev, Chernihiv, Sumy, Kharkiv, now on Severodonetsk and Lysychansk, even Mariupol. And all the other smaller towns and villages. They were all within 20 km range.”

    When these towns where within the range of artillery, Russian shelled them. Kramatorsk was not within this range.

    “You probably know Ukraine was never a united country but rather an ever mixmash of quite different peoples, until very recently ?”

    I know history, looks like you do not. You do not seem to know Kievian Rus, where Kiev was the capital for 400 years:Moskov Russia was under the Golden Orda up to Ivan the Great, who conquered Novgorod, the other capital of Kievian Rus. It is exactly Russia what is made up of many people. Ukraine was a part of Lithuania after Kievian Rus, then Lithuanian and Poland formed a commonwealth. But Ukrainians are a people as much as Russians are one.

    “And I have seen dozens of interviews of Russian speaking Ukrainians in the liberated cities, in Mariupol, etc, saying that ukrainian army (and specially Ukro-nazis) shelled them, made them captive, robbed their food and water. You are being gullible if you believe the western MSM only says the truth…”

    The issue is that 4.3 million Ukrainians left Ukraine and they are out of the reach of any Azov regiment. They can speak quite freely and thought there is the MSM media, there are in the West also alternative medias. Many people in the West support Russia and would like to hear such alternative truths, but Russian speaking Ukrainians say the same as Ukrainian speaking Ukrainians. These people, including the Russian speaking ones, do not blame UkriNazis, they blame Russians. I have also seen some videoclips where some Western journalist makes an interview in “liberated” Russia and people blame Ukrainians. But I sense the same as when I visited communistic countries. These people say what they have to say. They do not feel free. There are two Ukrainian channels in Hotbird satellite, Ukraina24 and FreedomUA. The latter is in Russian and you can hear there Russian speaking Ukrainians. They same the same as Ukrainian speaking Ukrainians. I do not only follow western MSM media and I do not think it always tells the truth, but you seem to follow only Russian media and for some curious reason do not understand that in every war there is war propaganda and a party in a war always uses propaganda. It cannot be trusted, though it can be followed and interpreted.

    “If the civilians are inside Mariupol with the ukraine army occupying it, what is the difficulty of not leaving them get out ? It’s enough to install a group of ten soldiers (obviously led by one ukro-nazi, to ensure compliance…) inside a block of apartments and shoot everyone who tries to leave. Maybe with just 2 or 3 snipers.”

    But many were evacuated and they did come to the West and can tell if there were these 2 or 3 snipers. They tell that it was not so. They tell that their evacuation cars were shot by Russians and shelled (necessarily by Russians as Ukrainians did not have artillery so close to do it). So, one could do as you suggest, but then this one could not let tens of thousands of people to escape and tell how it really was. From Mariupol tens of thousands of people have escaped to the West and can tell what they saw. Some might be intentionally lying, but not so many. Nobody hates them here in the West and they can tell what they saw freely.

    • Replies: @DevilAdvocate
  234. @j2

    Earlier you wrote this

    the apparent direction where the missile is shot from shows to a wrong direction

    I did not quite understand what you meant so I assumed you were saying that it was fired from Russian controlled territory and then swerved like a guided missile to hit the target from another direction and also drop the rocket stage from this other direction to suggest it came from Ukrainian controlled territory, like a guided missile, and that’s why I proposed about the possibility of it being taken over electronically. How else could it have been fired from one direction so as to show it came from another?

    Whatever, Mariuopol is finished.

    About trench warfare I’m not sure if it would be like WWI. The artillery is far more powerful nowadays, the aircraft can deliver far more damaging bombs than those in WWI; then there are multiple rocket launchers, air-fuel thermobaric bombs, guided and hypersonic missiles with big payloads. Sure they had gas in WWI but they also had gas masks, while the types of explosives and quantities available are now far more destructive. There may be nothing left in those trenches after a decent attack. We’ll see soon enough. Russians also have those huge, world’s biggest, mortars to add to all that.

    • Replies: @j2
  235. @j2

    You didn’t provide any reference to the Shaktarsk hypothesis… But it’s ok, under proof against, I keep saying the best explanation was the ukrainians did a false flag in Kramatorsk.

    I noticed the other story behind the western MSM truth many years ago, but that does not imply that I believe this very obvious war propaganda in the Ukraine was coming from Russia.

    It looks to me you haven’t (yet) perceived the extent of that story…

    When these towns where within the range of artillery, Russian shelled them.

    So why aren’t they converted to rubble piles ?
    From what we see, life there is pretty normal (contrary to what appeared in western MSM at that time). Now, even Boris Johnson, Ursula vd Leyen and the other zio-puppets make relaxed strolls in the city’s streets.
    Would they do the same in Baghdad, after the US bombing ?…

    Ukraine was a part of Lithuania after Kievian Rus, then Lithuanian and Poland formed a commonwealth.

    So then explain me why polish people and lithuanian people hate so much the russians.
    You see, you are trying to justify your line of reasoning, but your own statements are filled with flaws.
    The history that counts now is the recent history, not some long gone events from centuries ago.

    But Ukrainians are a people as much as Russians are one.

    So why don’t they all tend to be more close to Russia than to the West ?

    Russian speaking Ukrainians say the same as Ukrainian speaking Ukrainians. These people, including the Russian speaking ones, do not blame UkriNazis, they blame Russians.

    There are two Ukrainian channels in Hotbird satellite, Ukraina24 and FreedomUA.

    I have to see it. Is there a way to see those channels through internet ? Have you links ?
    I made a search and didn’t find anything.

    but you seem to follow only Russian media

    I follow mostly western commentators, Scott Ritter, RayMcGovern, Alexander Mercouris, John Mearsheimer, and the english journalist in Mariupol, Patrick Lancaster.
    Will you say these are all russian paid propagandists ?

    You should see this interview with Samo Burja. He is more western oriented but nevertheless raises very critical points.

    They tell that their evacuation cars were shot by Russians and shelled (necessarily by Russians as Ukrainians did not have artillery so close to do it).

    Many tell instead they were shot by ukrainians who didn’t want them to leave.
    But anyway, in cases where the lies may be spread equally by both sides, we must follow logic and reasoning.
    And there are much more logical reasons to justify an intention of ukrainians wanting to kill all eastern pro-russian compatriots (you know the war against people of Donetsk and Lugansk lasts since 2014) and make free space for the western ukrainians come and stay (lebensraum), than to justify russians killing people who they recognise as free to decide their political fate and establish a partnership.
    If you cannot see this obvious logic, I can’t say you are being honest.

    So, one could do as you suggest, but then this one could not let tens of thousands of people to escape and tell how it really was.

    Of course many people were able to flee. The ukrainians could not control all the city at every corner.
    But they kept a sufficient number for their human shields. Which constituted a good large number.

    Nobody hates them here in the West and they can tell what they saw freely.

    I didn’t say it was the western countries that hated them. (Although now I’m not anymore so sure given the hate flaming against everything russian. They even sanctioned cats and old paintings…).
    I said the russian speaking ukrainians are hated by their counterparts from western ukraine. And the latter ones are probably the majority who fled, given their fear (and hatred) of russians.

  236. j2 says:
    @Commentator Mike

    I meant that if you want to make a false flag, then you try to make all visible evidence to look like your explanation is correct. That is, looking at the site you would conclude that it came from Ukrainians, while it really did not. You could make this in many ways, like have some people in the site to take the missile wreck and place it in another location, or you could for instance have a small group of men with a Tochka in a car to drive to the Ukrainian area (which is fully possible in this war, Ukraine is a huge country) and shoot the missile from a direction that could be continued to Ukrainian controlled site by drawing a straight line. There are many ways, but I doubt this was a false flag at all. I think is was an unfortunate mistake. Bad intelligence of what there was on the train station.

    The concepts of local overpower and home field advantage are eternal, they existed before there were humans and they still exist. The art of war (operational art and tactics) is largely dependent on logical concepts: there were Jomini’s inner and outer lines, Machiavelli’s regime change, Clausewitz’s center of weight, Sun Tzu’s deception, concept of (fire)power and mobility and so on. Nothing of it is tied to the time, only it has to be applied to the situation. Territorial defense is a concept developed for stopping a Russian/Soviet attack, not more, not less. When used correctly, a superior enemy with a certain specific behavior is pushed back. My only interest in this war is to see how well the concept works.

  237. peterAUS says:
    @j2

    My only interest in this war is to see how well the concept works.

    It can work, as anything, if done properly within certain parameters.

    Briefly, say, for Finns:
    Your “enemy” is, I am sure,Russia. Could work as it worked before, more or less.
    Could that have worked against Allies had they decided to invade in ’45? Don’t think so. Didn’t work for Axis so wouldn’t for Finland.

    Today, same thing. Looking at the current debacle in Ukraine the concept would, I think, work for Finland. Same principle as Ukraine. I am ABSOLUTELY positive that your high command are playing war games by that premise as we speak.

    What you, I believe, are missing in your approach is the element of time. The time between strategic defense and operational/strategic offense. Stalemate if you will.

    It’s simple, actually. The stronger enemy attacks, one defends. The defense, hopefully, exhausts the attacker, AND, hopefully, provides time to get own forces up to speed for offensive operations. Most people don’t get it but there is a WORLD of difference between defending and attacking in required expertise and resources. In that order.
    As concept it’s sound. All concepts are…………
    The problem is, always, putting theory/concepts in real practice.

    As we spoke about, Ukraine is STILL doing a defense. RF is STILL on the offense. That could go either way. I, personally, believe it will hit a stalemate rather soon.
    Then, it depends.
    RF could (and I doubt…) get into full war mode and, say, in three months, get strong enough for a push, again. Ukraine, if getting a LOT of NATO support, could get strong enough to, again, repel the attack.
    Or, as I think most likely, RF won’t get into “full war mode”. Ukraine, I believe, WILL keep getting strong enough to push BACK. That could take…..say……from 3 to 6 months…9…a year…who knows.
    THEN Ukraine could start that counterattack of yours to retake SOME of it’s territory.

    Bottom line, there is TIME between defense and (counter) attack.
    For countries, on strategic level, it can take years. Decades even.

    • Replies: @j2
    , @j2
  238. @j2

    I still get the impression that most of those Ukrainian troops, especially the Azov Neo-Nazis and obviously the foreign mercenaries, in the Donbass, Odessa and some other parts of the the south and east are from outside the area. So they are not really defenders in the strict sense of the word. Many locals and the Russian troops by now see them as occupiers. The population in the Ukraine is a mix and in the past they were not restricted to their ethnic areas. The Kiev regime deliberately sent even more outsiders into the Russian areas and many Russians moved out in a silent ethnic cleansing. This will now be reversed.

    Of course they’re all testing and fine tuning weapons in this conflict too and may want to drag it out even for this purpose.

    • Replies: @j2
  239. j2 says:
    @peterAUS

    Your prediction can well be correct in this war. This seems to be a variant of territorial defense, but it is not the same situation as in another country. The defense strategy is designed only against an enemy that behaves in a certain way (starts by a strategic strike, advances on roads, has the feeling of superiority, has in “some” -not always the same- sense too stiff command chain, and so on). It would not have worked against WWII Germans, if would not work against the USA, they attacked in a different way.

    Local overpower can be obtained provided that there are some good troops with good equipment, but if there is nothing or everything is destroyed in the strategic strike, but Ukraine has some good troops and has and gets some good equipment.

    Home field advantage may be obtained from three areas: spirit, local support, terrain. Spirit is not guaranteed, but sometimes there is this spirit, it was in 1939 and it is in Ukraine now. Local support includes hides, partisans, informers. Ukraine seems to have this. But terrain is not so good. There is a country where motored conveys always advanced on roads and there are not that many roads, while there is forest and water where advance is very slow, nearly impossible for armored vehicles. But that is not Ukraine or Poland. They have this situation only for a brief time when ground does not hold. Every time I drive through Poland I get this idea: just give me 3000 tanks and 2000 dive bombers and I will run over this country in three weeks.

    But that is not so in another terrain. If the terrain does not allow spreading and it is too narrow, you can have the situation more like Thermopylas. Soviets had any number of divisions, but they just did not fit to the battlefield. There was no room to operate. In Poland or Ukraine there is room to operate, so territorial defense should not have worked in Ukraine. But as it turned out, Russians came with relatively small troops and relied on American concepts of firepower, mobility and airsupremacy (which they did not get). Russians in Ukraine build a special configuration in their advances: advance on two roads and form an attack arrow. In Kiev area Ukraine attacked the head of this formation and managed to break it. The supplies had been disturbed before. When Russian attack configuration broke, they withdrew to cities, but were either driven away or destroyed there. I expect Ukraine will try the same in Cherson area and possibly above Mariupol area.

    In order to get any advantage from terrain of Ukraine one has to think carefully where this could come from. Knowledge of the terrain is one, but there must be more.

    Time is included. The reason the enemy is allowed to advance deep is to have the time to mobilize, but also in order to have the chance to weaken it. Counter-attacks are smaller and they must have some idea, no running against machine guns in this strategy. More like denying enemy units of supplies and then destroying weakened units. Slowly these counter-attacks should push the enemy away, but it takes time. Whether there should be a longer period of developing capabilities, this may not work: as long as there is war, economy goes poorly and there are less resources for developing anything. My guess is that Ukraine will try small counter-attacks, denies Russia reaching any goals (as an attacker has goals, when they are not reached, it gets nervous), and slowly pushes the enemy back. This is not the mass attack of Soviets. Here the enemy has small troops and cannot occupy all areas. When not occupied by red, they can be occupied by blue forces.

    Notice that there is a different defense strategy to push back the USA. It was seen in Vietnam and Afganistan. The USA cannot be stopped when it comes, but it cannot stay too long when there is resistance. This strategy would not have stopped WWII Germans, or Stalin, but it stops the USA. It is not so that the same strategy is good for everything. It is not so that some troop formation, like BTG, is good for everything. Now we can say, BTG lacks infantry. Earlier we could have said, BTG has enough infantry, it only has more tanks and other vehicles. Now we see the reality, equipment evens up but BTG lacks infantry, as it is not 3 to 1 in Ukraine advantage. It all depends on how you see it.

    But we will see. I am no expert in operational art, but this war in Europe is interesting. More interesting than worrying about Jewish power.

  240. j2 says:
    @Commentator Mike

    “Many locals and the Russian troops by now see them as occupiers. The population in the Ukraine is a mix and in the past they were not restricted to their ethnic areas.”

    The areas of the separatists were not in the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth. They originally were populated by a different people. Crime was originally a Greek settlement, then Roman, then Venice, and finally for a long time Krimean Khanate that stole slaves from Ukraine. Russia conquered the Khanate and I always felt that this area was not Ukraine and Russia had got it from the Khanate. So, there are several ethnic groups in Ukraine as there are in most countries. I have no doubt that before this war there was pro-Russian sentiment in many areas, but the brutal way Russia makes this war has turned most of pro-Russians to anti-Russians.

    The foreign league of 20,000 mainly US and UK former soldiers most probably behave quite professionally and the population most probably sees them as foreign helpers. They all have combat experience, so they are trained and can fight without having the patriotic spirit. The Azov regiment is in Mariupol. The UkriNazis are only a batallion of them, so one third. I expect that many Russian speaking Ukrainians are wary of the Azov batallion, but they will all die in Mariupol and they will be national heros, also for the Russian speaking people. (When dead, they do no harm to anybody). They fight, like Nazis, for ideology of being fighters.

    You all say that the Russian speaking Ukrainians prefer Russians to Ukrainian soldiers. I see no convincing evidence of that. It could have been so, but it does not seem to be so. In Cherson people demonstrate against Russians. In Izium Russians were poisoned by the population. I see no firm evidence that there is any more any strong pro-Russian sentiment anywhere there. That is the natural result of bombing their houses and killing their friends.

  241. j2 says:
    @peterAUS

    “Most people don’t get it but there is a WORLD of difference between defending and attacking in required expertise and resources. ”

    You talk about some specific army with some specific way it makes tactical level operations. Maybe you mean US professional army. But there are many ways of attacking. In the WWII time the Soviet unstoppable attack did not need any training at all. They gave a completely untrained reservist a rifle and vodka and told to run against machine guns. Behind were political commissars shooting those who retreated. This mass attack (like those of Napoleon) did work. The only place where such an attack was stopped was Finland and the final reason it was stopped was that there was not enough room for a larger scale attack, the front was not wide enough because if terrain. Yes, there was defense with dive bombers and coordinated artillery, but in Poland they would not have been enough. It was the terrain, too much forest. But we can take another example: Mao: they fight their way, we fight our way, yet they got with their way the whole country with the exception of Taiwan. That was was not really even asymmetric, it was not fighting the real enemy but fighting those who fought Japanese. But there is also asymmetric attack. And there is the Iranian child attack in the war against Iraq. Many ways, some need training, some not. Some cause enormous losses, some not. Who says that everybody must copy US army tactics in an attack?

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  242. @j2

    That is, looking at the site you would conclude that it came from Ukrainians, while it really did not.

    There are many ways, but I doubt this was a false flag at all.

    You don’t know really what was because you weren’t there…
    The best you can admit is a serie of hypothesis. You already told me the Shaktarsk hypothesis invalidate the ukrainian false flag (although you don’t back it with any reference…), but none of them have absolute proof.
    But it looks you have difficulty with dealing with contradicting scenarios, specially when the other contextual logical conclusions go against your “true” narrative.

    Best to keep to your strict military analysis. Confront them with this interview from Scott Ritter, where he gives 1 week, 2 weeks tops, for the ukrainian army in Donbass be crushed (after the battle starts).

    • Replies: @j2
    , @j2
    , @j2
    , @j2
  243. peterAUS says:
    @j2

    ….In the WWII time the Soviet unstoppable attack did not need any training at all. They gave a completely untrained reservist a rifle and vodka and told to run against machine guns. Behind were political commissars shooting those who retreated…..

    I see.

    • Replies: @j2
  244. j2 says:
    @DevilAdvocate

    “You already told me the Shaktarsk hypothesis invalidate the ukrainian false flag (although you don’t back it with any reference…), but none of them have absolute proof.”

    The Kramatorsk missile will be investigated as a possible war crime, so evidence will be presented. I can only mention that Pentagon, which can e.g. see how many sorties Russian planes do per day, has announced that the missile came from the mentioned site. And I can add that Ukraine air defence claims that there were two tochkas and they shot one down. If so, they probably tracked it with a radar and they may have saved the track. As the issue will be investigated, and not all police in Western countries is under any ziocon, the event will be clarified, I do not need to do it. All I can say is that there are two ways to get the site of firing the missile and they are in contradiction.

    I will lisgten to Scott Ritter in a while. I already listened one his analysis. It was strange because in that analysis he quite correctly pointed out that Russia is going to this war with much less manpower than Ukraine has and that it should not work, and that they cannot take Kiev with this power, which is correct, but Russians did try to take Kiev, it was not any operation to tie Ukrainian forces. Militaries do not make such operations: in military operations there is the opponent, so most complicated and strange operations fail. Militaries do simple plans, and the simple plan was to take Kiev, but it failed. Thus, it seems to me that Ritter quite correctly understood the situation, but as a Russian propagandist added to his analysis such obviously incorrect claims as that Russia is the greatest military power now (that is the USA or NATO/USA). Ritters analysis has correct parts but it is covered with deception, you have to interpret it.

  245. j2 says:
    @peterAUS

    … and they had lots of tanks and planes in the attack and before it was an enormous but imprecise and largely ineffective artillery preparation. But training played no role. We see now in Ukraine what the 65 years old reservists in the separatist area will do. They extended the draft to 65. If Ukrainians are anything like Poles, then they need a mobile farmacy shop to provide these soldiers with their ten pills every morning.

  246. j2 says:
    @DevilAdvocate

    I will listen this whole lecture, but from the first five minutes I comment to you how Scott Ritter is misleading you. He says Ukraine had 600,000 men and Russian attacked with 200,000 men, and that Russian attacked Kiev with 40,000 men.

    This is all misleading. Ukraine had a standing army of 240,000, but only 160,000 were in the Ground Forces and here we speak of the Ground Forces. Ukraine also had 35,000-50,000 men in territorial forces, basically in the cities, but Russians did not even proceed to fight the territorial forces. Russians had about 140,000 men (of their 190,000) went to Ukraine in ground forces. Including the separatists, the man power of the ground was fairly even, but Russians had much more firepower, mobility and their airforce was much bigger.

    Ritter’s 200,000 against 600,000 is therefore wrong, it was 140,000+separatists against 160,000. Ukraine was not to have time to mobilize, so 200,000 first and second echelon reserve was not to be in this war. 50,000 of the rest of the reserve is already in the territorial forces, so 100,000 reserve Ukraine is still mobilizing. Now it is indeed some 500,000 against 120,000, but this was not as Russians believed that it was to be. They expected to win before Ukraine mobilizes.

    Ritter also gives incorrectly the number of Russian forces in the Kiev area. It was not 40,000, it was 60,000-70,000. It was half of their forces in Ukraine.

    The plan of Russians was very clear: first there was the plan of a strategic strike, it required landing a division to take Kiev to Hostomel airport. It failed. The second plan was to take Kiev from two directions with the typical Russian arrow in the Eastern side. They needed to set two encirculation rings around Kiev in order to take the city. They tried to encirculate the city and failed. Ukrainians weakened Russian forces by cutting their supplies, then they attacked Irpin and the arror head in the east. Only after these defeats Russians decided to withdraw. It was a forced decision, not something they initially planned to do.

    I will continue listening, but it is clear to me that Ritter knows but is lying, he is a propagandist.

  247. j2 says:
    @DevilAdvocate

    Ritter, up to 24:49. Ritter explains how 60,000 Ukrainians are in a caudron in Dunbas and should break through and go to protect Kiev. Please, look at this map and locate the caudron. Is it in your opinion closed? Russians were ti encirculate Ukrainians three weeks ago in 8 days. They have made practically no progress.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60506682

    Se here Ritter thinks there are only 60,000 Ukrainians in the relevant area, while he also thinks there are 600,ooo Ukrainians in total. There will be a Russian major attack in this area, but it is not so sure how this turns out. Ritter seems to believe that Russians do not manage to take Charkiv and explains that they do not want to.

    Ritter’s analysis does not convince me. We will see how this war develops.

  248. j2 says:
    @DevilAdvocate

    OK, I listened the whole interview. Ritter does not give any convincing argument why the expected Russian attack would lead to Ukrainian defeat in 1-2 weeks. He merely states that Russia will use lots of power, but that we know. Then Ritter claims that somebody, who knows from both sides what units are where and what their losses are, could say how this war ends, and implies that Ukraine loses. What retired generals who still have access to information know is roughly what units there are and where they are, but the losses on both sides are not precisely known. Ukraine keeps this information very secret, from Russians there is what satellites show and it is not all. It is relatively easy to find out what equipment both sides have, but also there it is not well known what is on operational state now. By calculations one can make some estimates of what equipment the both sides have, but it is not certain. Ritter intentionally gives a wrong impression. I found this interview very poor in information content. Ritter knows the military field, but what he says here is propaganda. You have to try to interpret what he says in the light of what other analysts say.

    • Replies: @DevilAdvocate
  249. Delusional.

    This guy doesn’t seem to understand the Russian public at all.

    With regards to political risk for Putin, the only risk was his patience throughout 8 YEARS of the Russian public calling for him to send Russian forces into the Donbass to provide direct and concrete protection for those people from the Ukrainian army, which was growing stronger and stronger as units such as the Aidar, Azov and Right Sector battalions formed and grew stronger and stronger.

    With NATO formally expanding into the Baltic states (Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia), Russians became very concerned — not just the government but ALL Russians — over national security. Then with Kamala Harris talking openly about bringing Ukraine into NATO (after Putin had already petitioned for Russia to join as a member, and not even given the courtesy of a reply), that was the straw that broke the camel’s back, as the public recognized NATO as a direct threat to not just Russian national security, but to the personal well-being of over 80% of the Russian public, who live along the potential axes of advance from the Baltic States and Ukraine to Moscow, as well as St. Petersburg and it’s water-route connection to Moscow, and even in Rostov-on-Don and northward towards Moscow.

    They do NOT see this operation as an option but a necessity for survival of the nation.

    Interestingly, the recently leaded full text of the Project for a New American Century, authored by a group of radical Ashkenazis, who were ALL students of Leo Strauss (Ashkenazi, of the Frankfort School), shows that indeed, beyond the inclusion of the territory of the former East Germany, the expansion of NATO since 1991 has bad only one purpose — to encroach Russia as much as possible, with the goal being (since the Ashkenazi-run USSR government was ousted by the Rus’ in 1991) to recapture all of Russia to put it under Ashkenazi rule once again.

    Russians remember the 70 years of living under a government by, for, and of Ashkenazis (the sole exception being Stalin, who being a Georgian, was almost as hostile to Rus’ as the Ashkenazi), and how they were murdered wholesale, in the early years, not only without trial, but often without even arrest warrants (the years of the “Red Terror”), in which not even Communist Party members were safe from being raided in the middle of the night and either disappeared, or shot dead a few feet outside the front door of their own homes, and their body left there for all to see, as a threat, on the dangers of not being Ashkenazi in the USSR.

  250. @j2

    I shall reply here to your 4 comments.

    The Kramatorsk missile will be investigated as a possible war crime, so evidence will be presented. I can only mention that Pentagon, which can e.g. see how many sorties Russian planes do per day, has announced that the missile came from the mentioned site.

    Any serious investigation should be done by a team of experts from both sides. Otherwise it will not be credible. Would you accept if I just proposed the evidence collected by the russian MoD ?
    But this will never happen, unfortunately. UK has already blocked 2 calls made at UN security council to make such an independent investigation in Bucha.
    Another sign to suspect who are the parties which have things to conceal, no ?

    but Russians did try to take Kiev, it was not any operation to tie Ukrainian forces. Militaries do not make such operations: in military operations there is the opponent, so most complicated and strange operations fail.

    Per what Scott Ritter said, all great military strategists did those kind of “complicated” operations in the past. In another program he cited Napoleon, here he told about his experience with Schwarzkopf in Iraq.
    With your military culture (much better than mine) you should know battles are not just about crashing frontally masses of soldiers.

    as a Russian propagandist added to his analysis such obviously incorrect claims as that Russia is the greatest military power now (that is the USA or NATO/USA)

    Should I tag someone who makes the claim that USA/NATO is the greatest military power as a western/ziocon propagandist ?
    Unfortunately there is no 3rd party, independent, to assess both sides and make the verdict.
    Time will tell, I suspect sooner than later.

    Now it is indeed some 500,000 against 120,000, but this was not as Russians believed that it was to be. They expected to win before Ukraine mobilizes.

    I think you are wrong. Never in the history have such a large country be taken in a couple weeks. The fact they advanced rapidly, and with small numbers to take any city, it was precisely designed as the diversion tactic you refuse to acknowledge.
    You don’t really believe they were so stupid as to suppose Kiev could be taken with 40.000 men, no ? (or even with 60-70.000 as you state).
    So, the 600.ooo ukrainian army is a total number, including those who could be mobilized during the campaign.

    It was a forced decision, not something they initially planned to do.

    That remains to be confirmed. Military historians will tell.

    Ritter explains how 60,000 Ukrainians are in a caudron in Dunbas and should break through and go to protect Kiev. Please, look at this map and locate the caudron. Is it in your opinion closed? Russians were ti encirculate Ukrainians three weeks ago in 8 days. They have made practically no progress.

    He said rather they should retire and form other defense lines westward. And move around until exhausting russian forces. But they are hardheaded, they persist in their stubborness on controlling all the Donbass. And that will cause their demise.
    But look, their death will be good for the real war promoters (ZioUS), they will become martyrs to flame public opinion in the stupid west and lead for a global war. That’s why Zelenski is being pressed to not surrender, neither concede anything in negotiations.

    Still about the cauldron, you are forgetting that all the area between north and south fronts are constantly pounded by air force, missiles, drones, lines of transport are cut, etc. This ground is just ripe for a mass blitzkrieg advance, once russians finish their preparation.

    Se here Ritter thinks there are only 60,000 Ukrainians in the relevant area, while he also thinks there are 600,ooo Ukrainians in total.

    The 60.000 are mainly from the best part of ukrainian army, with best equipment. The remainder, reservists, etc, will not put much of a fight.

    You have to try to interpret what he says in the light of what other analysts say.

    Can you point some of them ? I think it would be fair to allow me to examine the ones you see as more credible.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @j2
  251. @bert33

    Will Zelinsky do the right thing and give up?

    Of course not. He’s an Ashkenazi. They make the Han look like angels.

  252. @Ukraine Tiger

    “Notice that the withdrawal of Russian forces has been from around Kiev, no where else. End game being that they don’t want Kiev and that leads me to conclude an offensive on Odessa and perhaps Dnipropetrovsk. That there is your end game and a new state.”

    If could be a double fake-out.

    Thinking that the south is the actual schwerpunkt, the Ukrainians send large forces to Odessa and Dnipropetrovsk, and as they become heavily engaged and unable to withdraw, Putin will send another field army in from the north and walk into a virtually undefended Kiev.

  253. @peterAUS

    “Russian armed forces showed such lack of performance, so far, that I believe they aren’t capable of closing the cauldron, let alone destroying the forces within.”

    You are so deluded.

    Most efficient territorial gain by a NATO force:

    0.013 km^2/soldier/per day, US 24th Mechanized Infantry Division, Desert Storm.

    In contrast

    The ENTIRE Russian invasion force (including it’s logistical tails)

    400 000 km^2 / 200 000 soldiers / 2 weeks
    = 2 km^2 / soldier / 2 weeks
    = 1 km^2 / soldier / week
    – 0.13 km^2/soldier/day

    That is literally 10x the territorial acquisition efficiency of the 24th Mech.

    Now, realize that the Russian logistical:combat maneuver elements ratio is 1 soldier:2.5 soldiers = 2:5

    so, 40 % of that force is logistics.

    So, revising to the number of combat maneuver soldiers, the 200,000 becomes 120,000 (so that we are comparing apples with apples)

    400 000 km^2 / 120 000 soldiers / 14 days
    = 0.23 km^2/soldier/day.

    that’s 18x better than the phenomenal achievement of the 24th Mech, who were advancing over completely open desert with heavy close air support and AFTER opposing Iraqi forces had been hit with 30 days of tactical air strikes AND B-52 carpet bombing strikes so heavily that Iraqi soldiers were attempting to surrender to film crews, and some entire units attempted to surrender by crossing the lines (due to impending starvation) but were turned away by allied forces who were not yet prepared to take prisoners, so they were given MRE’s and told to return to their positions and given white flags to raise once allied forces approached.

    Anybody saying that the Russian army is slow or underperforming isn’t looking at all of the facts, or is completely ignoring them.

  254. peterAUS says:
    @DevilAdvocate

    The reason I comment here is I do respect Mr. Marjanovic. Not much almost anyone else who’s written about the topic here.

    ..He said rather they should retire and form other defense lines westward. ..

    ..This ground is just ripe for a mass blitzkrieg advance, once russians finish their preparation…

    ..The 60.000 are mainly from the best part of ukrainian army, with best equipment. The remainder, reservists, etc, will not put much of a fight…

    Interesting.

    It looks like the …ahm….win… hinges on the successful execution (pun intended) re the second paragraph. Blitzkrieg advance, completion of the cauldron, and KEEPING the cauldron tight enough for several weeks.

    All content producers related to this online pub believe it will be done.
    Almost all of the commentators as well.

    I think all of them are wrong.
    I don’t think the cauldron will be completed, let alone kept tight.

    Russians lack TWO crucial elements for such a mission.

    One of them they could get. The another I don’t think so.

    Now comes the time to …ahm…discuss/debate the above. I have a better idea.
    Everyone in this online pub made his/her point known.
    The best is to wait and see what’s going to happen and then, several weeks from now, compare the notes.

    I was correct around 6 weeks ago, when almost everyone else disagreed, that Marioupol wouldn’t be taken fast. Taking into account that almost all people writing/commenting here are civilians/amateurs that wasn’t much of an accomplishment.

    Of course, I could be wrong now.
    Either way, let’s wait and see.

    • Replies: @DevilAdvocate
  255. @peterAUS

    I don’t think the cauldron will be completed, let alone kept tight.

    Russians lack TWO crucial elements for such a mission.

    One of them they could get. The another I don’t think so.

    Can you better explain your reasons ? Or give some references ?

    I was correct around 6 weeks ago, when almost everyone else disagreed, that Marioupol wouldn’t be taken fast.

    You will remember that I got my doubts too, after you provided me with some literature on MOUT.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  256. @Wielgus

    Anyone who uses the word “problematic” is a person who is avoiding talking about things, or attempting to make the reader think that something which is politically incorrect to the left or cabal constitutes an actual problem to normal people.

    The word “problematic” comes from left-wing academia, where they wanted to avoid specifying various make-believe problems, yet still discuss solutions and courses of action to resolve these not-problems.

    So, when an author uses the word “problematic,” it’s like waving a huge red flag that says, “Don’t take anything I say seriously, because I think that promoting people on the basis of competence over darkness of skin should be viewed as a problem….but I can’t actually say that, because then you’ll totally know that I’m pushing idiocy as fact.”

  257. peterAUS says:
    @DevilAdvocate

    Can you better explain your reasons ?

    Yep. To do that properly would require an hour. Prefer swimming. Nice day for it.
    Keywords, thought:
    Manpower.
    Battlespace awareness.

    Or give some references ?

    Shouldn’t be hard to find plenty of those on the Internet related to those two things above. There IS a third (capability to execute combined arms operations ) but those two are more than enough.

    This is what will happen: RF forces will start to hammer. Won’t achieve the required result.
    Then, well, they’ll need to attack. Armor and infantry. With shitty CAS. Against enemy saturated with anti-armor state of art launchers. It will make a bit of advance and then get exhausted and stop.
    Those …ahm…”pincers” won’t be longer than, at most, the range of their tube artillery.
    Yes, they can get ready again and to it again, and again. Say….20 kms per week. In theory. Because the troops get loses. Russians would need at least three echelons of equally good troops to execute such an attack. Plus reserves to fill the loses.
    They ……..do….not…have….those…troops.

    And, that’s all without Ukrainians counterattacking. At night, at flanks on those pincers. RF land forces have no capability to fight at night. What do you think all those night sights and drones are being sent by NATO for?

    Etc..etc…
    Going swimming.

  258. @peterAUS

    All of the fortification improvements in the world don’t mean a single bit if your opposition literally controls every single road, river, and railroad on which food from the farms would be shipped into your urban bastions.

    This is where the left and the cabal have completely screwed up.

    They forgot Mao’s dictum that it is absolutely necessary to first control the rural areas, because he who controls the farms controls the food. And he who controls the food controls EVERYTHING.

  259. @TaterSalad

    In lieu of industrial espionage in the USA, China can build from Russian blueprints.

    Just because the Chinese couldn’t innovate their way out of a paper bag doesn’t mean that the US is the only source of innovation.

    (All the genes predisposing for innovation were eliminated from the Chinese population centuries ago).

  260. @TaterSalad

    I’m a combat veteran.

    I don’t see much incompetence in the Russian performance considering that it’s been 20 years since they fought in Chechnya, and so in most companies, there are literally no NCOs at the platoon or even company level who have combat experience, save for the small contingent who were in Georgia, and the air defense artillery guys who were in Syria.

    These sorts of mistakes aren’t due to lack of professionalism so much as due to adrenalin.

    Remember, the US Army never lost a single battalion level engagement during the entire time there were ground forces in Vietnam, yet the most apt critique of the American personnel management system was that the US forces experienced their first year of combat…. every single year.

    What little I have seen outside of Ukie propaganda shows that the Russians are far more professional than the Ukies. For one, they aren’t committing war crimes every day of the week like the Ukies are. And it’s not as if the Ukies don’t know what the Geneva Convention is. War crimes are one of the biggest indicators of lack of discipline, even more so than the haphazard personal attire which characterized American troops in Vietnam in the last 2~3 years.

  261. @peterAUS

    I’m a NATO troop, coming up on mandatory retirement.

    We absolutely ARE NOT prepared for a war against a near-peer.
    You wouldn’t believe the number of times I have chewed out even sergeants for using flashlights in the middle of a clearing at night with no colored filtration or anything. Radio communications sound like lousy cop shows.

    We already have sergeants major whose only experience is COIN (counter insurgency) in which the doctrine is to be as visible and noisy at nearly all times, to display to the public that you are firmly in control of the territory. Things that I consider routine, because they were drilled into my training at the end of the Cold War, these higher ranking NCOs don’t even know to look for.

    And I have seen nothing to expect that other NATO nations are in much better shape, as all of them pretty much only trained for Afghanistan and some for Iraq.

    Being good at COIN makes you lousy against a near-peer opponent, and vice-versa.

  262. @peterAUS

    It’s NOT an attrition war. It’s a maneuver war. And although Russia is maneuvering somewhat clumsily at times, their manuever elements gained territory at an efficiency (as measured in km^2/soldier/day) 18x better than the best that has ever been achieved by American forces in the modern era (24th Mechanized Infantry Division during Desert Storm).

    And the RF did this WITHOUT the benefit of the preparation of the battlefield by a 30-day bombardment campaign by land & sea based cruise missile launchers and tactical and strategic bombers flying sorties around the clock.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  263. peterAUS says:
    @Dirk Gently

    I see you’ve put a decent effort in your four replies to my comments here. I’ve read them.
    That would’ve compelled me to answer, except for this, in the very first:

    ….You are so deluded…..

    You, as ..”NATO troop ?!”….who…”have chewed out even sergeants”….speak like that with your fellow (active/retired) officers about serious topics?! I don’t.
    Or so I say; anyone can claim anything on the Internet.
    Anyway, to each his/her own. Free will and such.

    Re the topic we have different perception of reality and, definitely, disagree on major points.

    Let’s move on.

    • Replies: @Dirk Gently
  264. j2 says:
    @DevilAdvocate

    “Per what Scott Ritter said, all great military strategists did those kind of “complicated” operations in the past. In another program he cited Napoleon, here he told about his experience with Schwarzkopf in Iraq.”

    Yes, there are operations where you tie the opponent, but Kiev was not one of them. Consider the sequence of events:
    – two weeks before Russia announces that it withdraws from Kiev, Ukraine announced that in a week Russian forces there are running out of supplies, which was credible since the 64 km convey was stalled because bridges had been blown up by Ukraine and 2 fuel trains had been destroyed.
    – Western analysts told that Russia cannot keep so many fronts because of the losses and it will have to withdraw from one or two fronts.
    – then in a long battle Ukraine took Irpin and encirculated Bucha and Hostomel. There was no indication that Russians were intending to withdraw before they lost the battle of Irpin.
    – then Ukraine attacked the head of the Russian arrow East of Kiev. They first pushed Russians further and them broke the arrow head. Before that there were battles in the cites on the supply lines, so it is very likely that Russians lacked supplies also in the East close to Kiev.
    – only after these all had happened, Russia informed that it decided to withdraw from the Kiev and Chernihow areas, but as it happened, it also withdrew from Sumy area.
    – Russian withdrawal was unorganized, troops were left behind, these troops had heavy losses while withdrawing, some BTGs are completely destroyed as satellite images show.

    And you say that this was a brilliant military operation to tie Ukraine forces and not, what it appears to be to any analyst, a natural but failed attempt to encircle Kiev and take it, as the capital is a classical choice for the center of gravity to have the decisive battle. As well you can claim that the sinking of Moskva was a brilliant military operation by Russians: the battleship tied Ukraine forces in Odessa where they expected a landing, but by deliberately sinking their flagship Russians fooled Ukrainians: their goal was just to keep these Ukrainian forces in defense of Odessa and not to let them to defend the eastern part of Ukraine. This would be very much like the Russian explanation in the alternative reality what they have and the pro-Russian commenters here have.

    As for the fast advance of Russian troops in the beginning of this war, it does not mean anything more than that Ukraine defense strategy is a variant of territorial defense. Because Russia is stronger and because Ukraine needed time to mobilize, Ukraine had to allow Russia to advance deep to its territory. Ukraine standing army could not stop Russia at the border, it could only delay and weaken Russian forces, but when Russia spread its forces on a larger area, the standing army did stop the advance. Now Russian advances are very slow. The wartime army is stronger and in this strategy it should be able to push Russia back, but we will later see if it can do it. In war plans often do not work out as planned: if they do, it is called winning.

    Russians had an intelligence failure in the beginning: they believed that the Ukraine army is similar to the one in 2014, as is shown by Putin calling them narkomans. In 2014 they were drug users and deserters, but this is not the case today. This is why Russians expected to take the country easily by a strategic strike and why they did not pull down the electricity grid, which they are expected to do in a strategic strike. But this intelligence was wrong. Then they tried taking the capital, a very natural move, but it also failed. Then they tried cutting the country from many places, all failed. What remains is the present situation, and you try to claim that this is what they always wanted to do and all the rest was just demilitarization. They did demilitarize some of their own army, at least as much as they demilitarized Ukraine army.

    “Can you point some of them ? I think it would be fair to allow me to examine the ones you see as more credible. ”

    You do not have the language skills to understand my sources, but you can find many analyses also from the web. Try the Institute for the Study of War, it is not so bad:
    https://www.understandingwar.org/
    (I did not check what political camp this site is, it is not any of my sources, but seemed reasonable when I briefly looked)

    As for the outcome of the war in Dunbas, it could turn out any way. We must wait. Russians have made small progress, but quite small so far. I doubt it will be a blitzkrieg (too many antitank, antiaircraft weapons in the defending side and the terrain is supposedly not open).

    • Replies: @j2
    , @DevilAdvocate
  265. j2 says:
    @j2

    As peterAUS guessed something correctly, let me try to guess how the Russian attack in Donbas may go.

    We can deduce how it might go by looking at the weapons Pentagon chose to give Ukraine. They are for the Donbas battle and Pentagon knows what Ukraine and Russia have. Thus, we have Russians ready to attack with many BTGs, so many tanks, infantry vehicles, airdefence, all supported by artillery and airplanes/helicopters.

    Pentagon gave loitering ammunition (kamikaze drones). They are to take off Russian air defence. Then armed drones are sent to destroy artillery, not helicopters that Pentagon gave yet, as some air defense unit may still remain. Russians cannot go to attack as they do not have sufficient artillery preparation, so they wait. Ukrainians go to attack as infantry but with antitank and antiaircraft weapons, and the 11 helicopters that Pentagon gave attack, the 11 self-propelled howizers that Pentagon also gave shell withdrawing Russians. The result: no Russia attack this time, it was pushed back. This repeats 10 times and Russians give up.

    • Replies: @j2
    , @peterAUS
  266. j2 says:
    @j2

    And to peterAUS. Training for attack is a tradeoff with tolerance of losses. The USA cannot tolerate losses, especially they cannot tolerate blue force losses (shooting your own). So they need lots of training and blue force detection. But in home land defense a conscript army can tolerate losses. Russians gave the best motivation for tolerating losses by bombing and shooting civilians, no need to invent atrocity propaganda in this war. Pentagon chose a set of weapons to complement the weapons that Ukrainians have. This set must be chosen to be complete, if correctly used.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  267. @j2

    “The way you use for detecting the direction where the missile came from is not reliable.”

    Unreliable? Dude, it’s a simple matter of physics:

    Launch ====> engine separates ==> warhead explodes ==> engine continues forward and comes to earth.

    There’s absolutely NO OTHER PLACE that the engine can land OTHER THAN farther along the line from the launch site to where the warhead explodes.

    • Replies: @j2
  268. j2 says:
    @Dirk Gently

    There are several ways why the obtained result can be wrong.
    Three simple cases: 1) some pro-Russian people may have moved the wrack of the engine
    to another place before it was found. 2) the missile was shot by a Russian team who
    had penetrated to Ukraine controlled area. 3) the missile shot was not Tochka and left no
    wrack, but a wrack of Tochka-U was found – it was placed by pro-Russian people.
    Invent more ways it you want, it is quite easy if you have any imagination.

    A radar track is very reliable if the source can be trusted. Pentagon has announced that
    the missile came from separatist controlled area. If two missiles were shot and Ukraine
    intercepted one, they have a quite good idea where the missile came from. They may have
    a radar track of it. This event will be investigated as a potential war crime. You or me do not
    get the evidence, but some crime investigator will look at it. Then, that is the legal decision
    and your or mine opinion is simply a layman opinion based on media reports.

    • Replies: @Dirk Gently
  269. j2 says:

    “Russia also downed one Ukrainian SU-25 aircraft near the city of Izyum in Kharkiv Oblast of eastern Ukraine, Interfax added, citing Russia’s defence ministry. 16. April 13:33 (Times of India)”

    These Russians do not know that Ukraine does not have any airplanes left, while the commenters and articles in The Unz Review well know that all were destroyed long ago.

  270. peterAUS says:
    @j2

    Let’ agree to disagree there.

  271. peterAUS says:
    @j2

    ……let me try to guess how the Russian attack in Donbas may go.

    Commendable.

    …armed drones are sent to destroy artillery, not helicopters that Pentagon gave yet, as some air defense unit may still remain. Russians cannot go to attack as they do not have sufficient artillery preparation, so they wait.

    Mostly disagree.

    Ukrainians go to attack as infantry but with antitank and antiaircraft weapons, and the 11 helicopters that Pentagon gave attack, the 11 self-propelled howizers that Pentagon also gave shell withdrawing Russians.

    Definitely disagree.

    Curious:
    Have you GAMED your approach? The map, the markers, timeframe(s), the works?
    Simple answer as “yes” or “no” would suffice.

    • Replies: @j2
  272. @peterAUS

    >> You, as ..”NATO troop ?!”….who…”have chewed out even sergeants”….speak like that with your fellow (active/retired) officers about serious topics?! I don’t.

    Um… I’m just telling you my experiences in recent times since our training was switched from staying in barracks to actually living in the field like actual expeditionary forces.

    If the soldiers I’m seeing today went into a non-COIN environment, they would get mauled.

    Against Russia, they don’t even have to be in sight. They’re lacking the basic radio transmission discipline of releasing the push-to-talk button every few seconds — this is something which the Cold War era army did without even thinking. It’s a technique to minimize the chance of RF/DF (radio frequency direction finding) from getting azimuth locks on your position. Against Russian forces, it’s crucial — part of their doctrine is, if a radio transmitter is located by RF/DF, to saturate with artillery fire a 500m radius circle centered on the location pinpointed by the RF/DF.

    Camo nets — too often I’m seeing the camo nets touching the tops of the equipment. Camo nets aren’t meant to hide the location of equipment, but it IS supposed to make it difficult to tell what’s underneath it, so that the OPFOR doesn’t know what’s important to hit and what isn’t. However, if the camo net isn’t supported above the roof of, say, a tent, then it looks exactly like what it is: a camo net draped over a tent.

    When I was a young soldier, it was routine for smaller personnel such as myself to be put ON TOP of a tent to emplace camo net supports between the tent and the camo net, make sure that the camo would properly obscure the shape and profile of whatever is underneath. Now, the excuse is “that’s a safety hazard”. 15 years of going up on top of tents and never once was I ever in any danger of falling off a tent.

    It takes someone with experience to see these things *immediately* AND to know how to solve it.

    This sort of thing isn’t a secret, and if my expeditionary support group were sent as part of an amphibous force to land on the shores of the black sea, they would get torn up because of stuff like this. In the 1980’s and 1990’s, NOBODY made these mistakes, because you learned all of these things while still a private, just be observing how everyone conducted themselves, what the standards of noise/light/visual were, and how OBVIOUS anyone was who failed to maintain those level of discipline.

    And God help us if these troops had to dig foxholes without an engineer unit in close attendance checking their work. American soldiers been PROHIBITED from digging foxholes on all bases except those where basic training is conducted. I don’t know about the USMC bases, but as of about 1996, even infantry battalions were ordered to stop training in any aspect of fighting position construction which requires digging beyond shallow (about 4~6 inch) “rifleman’s pits.”

    NATO is in no shape to fight a war except against any opponent other than small countries which are immediately overwhelmed by sheer force of numbers and rapidity of movement of mechanized infantry.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  273. @j2

    >> A radar track is very reliable if the source can be trusted. Pentagon has announced that
    the missile came from separatist controlled area.

    NBC news already admitted a week ago that the “intelligence” being released to the public is “modified to create the correct impression”. Which is a round-about way of saying, “we are not manufacturing false evidenence to fit the narrative, rather than letting the evidence speak for itself.”

    In other words, if a false missile track is needed to convince the public that Russians fired the Ukie-owned missile, then it will be done. If satellite imagery doesn’t show dead bodies of civilians littering the main streets of Bucha before the Russians left, then the dates on the images showing civilian bodies in the streets AFTER the UFA re-occupied the town will be changed.

    This is very simple. I intended to stay in the army until reaching 60, but I see that the corruption in Washington is beginning to seep into the upper reaches of the Pentagon. If things don’t start swinging in the other direction after the elections this November (2022), I’m going to put in my retirement paperwork.

  274. @j2

    Ok. Thanks for the reference.

    We’ll see how this unfolds.

  275. peterAUS says:
    @Dirk Gently

    O.K.
    I WAS expecting the usual “UNZ disagreement reply” but you came up nicely, for a huge change in this online pub.
    So, a reply.

    I do maintain that we have vastly different perception of this affair and I have ZERO interest in debating it, for a couple of reasons.
    I post here is what I think. That’s my viewpoint. Anyone can do with it whatever they want but, again, we aren’t going to debate it. Or at least I won’t.

    You speak about level of expertise in your military. O.K.
    Be that as it may, it’s not a topic, really, I am interested in. Most likely majority of people reading all this neither.
    BTW, I am sure that the level of related expertise of Australian and NZ troops is good. Fijians too when we are onto it. But, again, those aren’t fighting this war. Or, according to The Great Chessmaster it’s a “special operation”.

    All I am interested is THIS war and its militaries. NATO troops aren’t fighting here; Ukraine and Russia are.

    And there you are, IMHO, making a fundamental mistake as:

    ….part of their doctrine is, if a radio transmitter is located by RF/DF, to saturate with artillery fire a 500m radius circle centered on the location pinpointed by the RF/DF….

    They do have plenty of good doctrines. Almost all of them failed, in practice, so far in this war. THAT is my point. There is no doctrine to allow losing a flagship, a missile cruiser, to an enemy without operable navy either……….
    And…I am positive they’ll keep failing in weeks and months to come.

    It takes someone with experience to see these things *immediately* AND to know how to solve it..

    True.
    Which, when we are on that topic you ARE aware that the effort to create a competent NCO cadre in Russian armed forces failed. Concept was good; the execution was shit.

    I really suggest to look at this war through those lenses. WATCH a Russian unit in action; plenty of material around Internet. Especially, should you find it, in your area of expertise (I guess it’s communications). Then, without anyone else telling you anything, YOU make your own mind.
    Speaking of which, I guess you ARE aware of that critical, strategic, Russian communication vehicle captured by Ukrainians. I’ve seen the videos/pics. That should’ve been burnt out wreck. It wasn’t. What does that tell you?!

    You, in essence, are pissed of by slipping standards in basic units in NATO from Cold War era. Fact. Doesn’t matter ,not for this topic.
    NATO will not be fighting in this war. Except all those “embedded” either as elements of CiC, training, logistics and, of course, SF. Ukrainians will be fighting Russians.

    My point, again, is: Russian expertise/capability so far is bad. Not even keen on discussing that.

    The only important thing people who do know something about the topic should be doing is “what now/next”? Or at least that’s my angle. To each his/her own etc.

    So, if…IF…you wish to chat about the topic, fine. What’s your take about this…ahm..”phase 2″Russians told about?
    I’ve described, briefly, what I think in one of my previous comments in this thread.

    As you’ve seen I definitely disagree with j2 approach (those counterattacks etc).
    Your turn; what say you?

    • Replies: @j2
  276. j2 says:
    @peterAUS

    Simple answer, no.

    But another simple answer is that Ukraine finally must attack if it wants to get back the areas. How they will do it, or if they will do it, depends on them.

  277. j2 says:
    @peterAUS

    “As you’ve seen I definitely disagree with j2 approach (those counterattacks etc).
    Your turn; what say you? ”

    peterAUS, take a look at this map 18. April 2022. In Charkiv region and in the “caudron” Ukrainian counter-attacks:
    https://liveuamap.com/en/2022/17-april-ukrainian-army-counterattack-between-kreminna-rubizhne
    Probably limited counter-attacks to disturb Russian attack.

  278. peterAUS says:

    …Probably limited counter-attacks to disturb Russian attack….

    Yep.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Mike Whitney Comments via RSS