 |
| Paranoid or legitimately fearful of assassination? |
No sane person would undertake a war with no possible positive outcome and my big mistake was to assume Putin was sane when clearly he is not.
It's hard to believe that the two largest powers in the world were, until Trump's dismissal run by maniacs concerned more with their own power than the welfare of their respective nations, but there we are.
At any rate, can anyone out there imagine how this invasion turns out well for the Russians?
What is their best-case scenario?
For this reason, I could not fathom a winning strategy in invading Ukraine.
The cost of a western anti-tank missile is less than $150,000 while a Russian tank costs in the neighbourhood of 7 million dollars. An investment by western powers of $100 million can wipe out the entire Russian expeditionary tank force.
As for the rest, my other predictions that the war would be a nightmare for the Russians wasn't that much of a stretch given the state of the Russian military, its incompetent leadership and its uninterested and unmotivated conscripted military personnel.
As the blitzkrieg stalls, the Russians are reverting to form, bombing civilians into submission which did not work for them in Afghanistan but did so in Iraq.
But Ukraine has already demonstrated that they will not yield and so the carnage will continue until a resolution is found.
For the Ukrainians, the best thing they can do now is to shift to the next phase of the conflict, which is an urban guerilla war waged against an occupying force.
As the blitzkrieg stalls, the Russians are reverting to form, bombing civilians into submission which did not work for them in Afghanistan but did so in Iraq.
But Ukraine has already demonstrated that they will not yield and so the carnage will continue until a resolution is found.
For the Ukrainians, the best thing they can do now is to shift to the next phase of the conflict, which is an urban guerilla war waged against an occupying force.
Instead of having their cities bombed into oblivion, the Ukrainians should just let the Russians in and allow them to occupy.
The subsequent guerrilla war against the occupiers will be devasting on the Russians and has a better chance of sending the Russians home sooner than later.
The subsequent guerrilla war against the occupiers will be devasting on the Russians and has a better chance of sending the Russians home sooner than later.
With supplies from the West and knowledge of the cities they are defending, as well as the support of the population to resist, a motivated force of underground soldiers can devastate the occupying force.
Supplying the resistance with hundreds of these missiles will send Russian tanks into hiding outside the cities or better yet, home.
Softer occupying vehicles like jeeps, trucks, missile launchers can be easily attacked with Molotov cocktails and small arms fire.
Russian soldiers can be easily picked off by snipers making an occupying presence untenable.
Russian soldiers can be easily picked off by snipers making an occupying presence untenable.
Putin has made the greatest strategic blunder since Hitler invaded Russia.
He should have learned from his forefathers who beat a superior Nazi force back by sheer determination and grit.
And the Nazi invaders were infinitely more capable than the present-day Russian military which is demonstrating and confirming their incompetence by resorting to mass civilian bombing.
And the Nazi invaders were infinitely more capable than the present-day Russian military which is demonstrating and confirming their incompetence by resorting to mass civilian bombing.
Russia is cooked, win or lose they will lose.
Russia has now cut off Ukraine from the sea, taken over a major city on the Azov sea where they can establish a beach head, encircled pretty much all major Ukrainian cities in the east of Ukraine, besieged the capital city of Kiev, taken over a couple of nuclear power plants, and in no time they'll close the ring around the Ukrainian army army in the east. All in the span of 5-6 days of plan B (which the west thought that Russia did not have), given the first couple of days were plan A (the blitzkrieg) which Russia has trial-run and quickly abandoned. And the weapons flowing from the west will soon be ending up in Russian hands.
ReplyDeleteThe rock star Zelensky is looking worse and worse by the day, and with bags under his eyes is communicating his messages to the sentimental western public from some bunker. Surrounded by the Russians and seeing his capital city ripped to shreds, he now must be contemplating his fate and pondering if it was worth to take on a role of a western stooge.
If Russia did not carry out this invasion, Ukraine would have been taken into NATO, nukes would eventually be placed at Russia's doorstep, and Russia reduced to a state dependent on and robbed by the west. It would be a return to the 90s for them, where Russia will never return to that time.
adski, beach head? Ukraine shares borders with Russia and Belarus, which are much closer to Kyiv and the western part of the country than any southern port city... A beach head is irrelevant. Supplies are coming in from the west, an area where the Russians still have zero control, so to assume western weapons will soon be seized by the Russians is laughable. Their plan B is a joke, an embarrassment in basic logistics and a totally asinine decision to do this now, when mud season is starting, and that's no joke for mechanized infantry. Even now, on paved roads, they get stuck, break down, run out of fuel, supplies, food, etc... their trucks are equipped with garbage Chinese tires and they keep blowing tires constantly because the trucks sat static on those tires for far too long, before the invasion.
DeleteIt's clear Russia can't afford any of their fancy modern weapons in large enough quantity to deploy them in Ukraine, they must stay home, ready to defend in case NATO gets involved. They also used up large stocks of precision guided munitions and advanced ammo in Syria, which hasn't been fully replenished. Ukraine's Turkish drones are decimating even the heaviest armored tanks, Russian Pantsir-S short range air defenses can't handle the drones, they are losing equipment at an astonishing rate. The siege of Kyiv will turn into Grozny 2.0, but this time, the whole world is watching, and the more they indiscriminately kill civilians, the more isolated and deprived of western technology they become, and it'll be worse than the 90's, that's for sure. Russians got used to modern comforts, I bet they'll take care of regime change from within, before the west has to step in. How badly do you have to screw up to make even Switzerland set aside their neutrality to get onboard with the sanctions.
I work in the commercial aviation industry, I know for a fact how disastrous the sanctions and airspace closures are for Russia's largest airlines, which are equipped with mostly western planes, that will no longer be serviced by the likes of Lufthansa Technik Vostok and all kinds of MROs I know personally. Even if Russia nationalizes the fleets of these airlines, they will not get the support (it's all digital, accessed online, from Boeing and Airbus servers) and parts they need to keep them flying safely. They are a decade+ from being able to replace all those planes with domestic ones, their best effort so far, the Irkut MC-21 is only certified with western engines right now and Russian engines are still in the testing phase. Western planes, western cars, trucks, smartphones, computers, etc, etc... 90's? They're going back to the early 50's.
Beach head in the south along the Azov sea where Ukraine's major defenses are. The allies in WW2 worked their way into Europe in 1943 via Italy, yet Normandy in 1944 was still called a beach head. These terms apply locally to various theaters of operations.
DeleteThe amount of red indicating areas taken over by the Russians grows larger and larger every day, yet the plan B is a "joke". These areas btw is what pro-NATO Ukraine will never get back.
NATO won't get involved because the Russians have threatened a nuclear WW3 a few days ago and they were serious about it. Stoltenberg had to fly to Poland to get Poland's hothead president to desist from allowing Ukrainian air force to use Poland's airports for missions in Ukraine as that would put NATO at war with Russia. NATO has also refused to declare Ukraine a no-fly zone that Zelensky was pushing for. Zelensky slammed NATO yesterday as weak (his own words). The Ukrainian FM said yesterday that he always thought that NATO was strong while EU weak, but last week proved to him that it's the other way around. So what's keeping NATO out of this war is not Russian conventional equipment that the Russians have left at home but, amongst other things, the nuclear-armed Russian submarine dispatched the Barnets sea. That, and what Doug MacGregor, US retired army colonel, said on FOX yesterday - NATO is not able to take on Russia, especially with China backing Russia in this war.
And Germany will now be buying Russian gas via CIPS, a Chinese alternative to SWIFT. Because Germany and some other EU countries simply do not have a choice.
China has approved this invasion btw as it suits their interests too, and China and Russia are not Libya, Serbia, or Iraq, that the modern-day cancel culture can just "cancel" or sanction out of existence.
For the west, the Ukraine from 10 days ago is lost forever.
Yes, a joke, watch to learn why:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4wRdoWpw0w
China only sees profit for itself, don't kid yourself, they're no one's "friend". China will gladly pickup trade that Russia will lose from the west, but at a fraction of the cost.
The main blunder of Russia was wasting 3 days on a blitzkrieg and anticipation of a quick Ukrainian surrender when it was obvious from day 1 that actor Zelensky was ordered by the empire to fight the Russians to the last Ukrainian retiree and teenager, and being a narcissist, he was going to do it for 2-3 weeks of fame in the west. Something that was obvious from the get-go.
DeleteThe second blunder of Russia are the negotiations that they're undertaking with the Ukrainians and abiding by some of these "agreements" such as ceasing operations for a day over the weekend in order to enable city evacuations, a noble idea except that those are stalling tactics - today the the Azov battalion (nazis basically, but "good" nazis, because they are "our" nazis) blocked Mariupol residents from getting out of the city via a humanitarian corridor. I suppose that they will want human shields when the Chechens surrounding the city start moving in. A few hours ago Russia announced that they are resuming operations as the evacuation deal was a play for time. Again, something that everybody knew from the get-go.
As Doug MacGregor told Fox, Russia has been too "delicate" in the week of phase 2 and is only now stepping it up. Until the negotiated ceasefire took effect 24 hours ago, you could see that on the maps - more and more eastern Ukraine in red. MacGregor may be right about Russia being too "delicate", I would say that they are also a little too gullible.
As for Russia being a secondary partner to China, yes, this appears to be the case and it appears that Russia has decided to go that way. The Kremlin must have decided that it'd be better to play second fiddle to China, than second fiddle to the West with nukes stationed in Kharkov and pointed right at Moscow. It's a decision that they made and Putin ratified with Xi Jinping in Beijing during the Olympics.
I see you take a lot of your "facts" from Kremlin's mouthpieces like RT and Sputnik. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but it sure is misguided, if you think Russia has the moral high ground in this conflict.
DeletePhilip, the editor and creator of this blog wrote "...until Trump's dismissal run by maniacs concerned more with their own power than the welfare of their respective nations."
ReplyDeleteBiden's State of the Union speech reinforced his "buy American" credo again, so what if he ignores the USMC agreement and former NAFTA? That's concern with his own power vs the welfare of their respective nations.
As for you adski, Putin can be serious about a "nuclear WW3", but that will mean the end of him, too. Isn't there enough of a nuclear arsenal by now to destroy the world 100 times over? Even if it's ONLY 30 times over, I imagine that's more than enough to destroy us all. It's not as if Putin won't still be a bandit multimillionaire if his billions and those of his oligarchs are confiscated; worse yet, his oligarchs will be after his gonads as they lose their easy billions that Putin lined their pockets with.
Yes, many times over. It would be the end for us all. This is why this chain of events makes sense: Lavrov last Thursday - "WW3 will be nuclear", NATO as that day: "There will be no direct NATO involvement in Ukraine and there will be no "no fly zone".
DeleteZelesnky has been pleading for NATO to get involved directly for the past few days, but NATO isn't coming. Precisely because that would spell the end for everyone.
As for what's next, below is a post from Vladimir Goldstein, a Slavic Studies professor in Yale. The outcome he's predicting (#2) is what I've been thinking since day 2 of this invasion and wrote in a comment above - pro-NATO (non-neutral) Ukraine will never get back the territory it has lost in the last 10 days.
--------------------
1. Scenario one, which Putin hoped for, but which does not seem to be forthcoming. Zelensky pleads for peace, and agrees to some sort of lasting neutrality and full autonomy for the Donbass region. That's the solution which China would love too. But I have a feeling that the US wants to use Ukraine as a trap, irritant, wedge, so making peace with Russia and agreeing on neutrality will go against all the billions of dollars that US had put in Ukraine precisely not to stay neutral. Besides, keep in mind that neutral Ukraine would be an important part of the Chinese Belt and Road initiative, another thing that the US does not want.
2. Scenario #2. Since the first one is not forthcoming, Ukraine will be split, like Cyprus, or Korea, or Germany after WWII. It will be western Ukraine (left bank of Dniepr) and Novorossia (right bank of the river plus Odessa). This is the Russian speaking territory which is sympathetic to Russia, they always felt funny about Lviv maniacs and they will find their way without them.
If scenario #1 is not forthcoming, Putin will get #2, no matter what the price is.
Western sanctions will be offset by the Chinese involvement. More than any country, China is interested in Russia's success. For a simple reason, that they know that they will be next, if Russia falls. So they will do the best they can, economically and politically to keep Russia afloat.
If Russia collapses and the West moves in on Russia's territory and resources, China will lose in a big way, and they can't afford it.
Of course, as my son observed, all this effort and loss of life and reputation was done to move NATO borders 500 miles west?
Not only. Western Ukraine will be a liability for the west and Poland, being extremely weak economically. And the source of cheap labor for sure.
In any case, I can't say it is a big victory for Russia, but it is not a terrible loss either. But we are entering a new world, where Russia and China are getting more and more joined at the hip.
"Joined at the hip" until one decides to screw over the other. Putin won't accept being second to China and vice versa.
DeleteOne thing for sure: Putin, even if Ukraine doesn't go as planned, will then attack other former Soviet republics one by one. He said he will...Hitler laid out his blueprint in Mein Kampf!
He may go for Abkhazia/Ossetia.
DeleteMein Kampf is probably more popular on the Ukrainian side.
Deletehttps://www.sott.net/article/465139-Zelensky-is-Not-in-Charge-of-Ukraine-Nazis-Are-And-They-Believe-They-Are-on-a-Mission-From-God-to-Derussify-Ukraine-in-Holy-War
sott.net lol, is that the source of your misguided opinions? Figures. Bunch of conspiracy theory tinfoil hat wearing loons.
ReplyDelete