ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2017 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Saturday, June 24, 2017

A dangerous game in Syria

Fortunately, the Russians aren't biting as the US attempts to slow down the Syrian army's destruction of ISIS and reclamation of its territory. The Saker explains the dynamic.
The dynamic in Syria is not fundamentally different from the dynamic in the Ukraine: the Neocons know that they have failed to achieve their primary objective: to control the entire country. They also know that their various related financial schemes have collapsed. Finally, they are fully aware that they owe this defeat to Russia and, especially, to Vladimir Putin. So they fell back on plan B. Plan B is almost as good as Plan A (full control) because Plan B has much wider consequences. Plan B is also very simple: trigger a major crisis with Russia but stay short from a full-scale war. Ideally, Plan B should revolve around a “firm” “reaction” to the Russian “aggression” and a “defense” of the US “allies” in the region. In practical terms this simply means: get the Russians to openly send forces into Novorussia or get the Russians to take military actions against the US or its allies in Syria. Once you get this you can easily see that the latest us attacks in Syria have a minor local purpose – to scare or slow down the Syrians- and a major global purpose – to bait the Russians into using forces against the US or an ally. It bears repeating here that what the Neocons really want is what I call a “tepid” war with Russia: an escalation of tensions to levels not even seen during the Cold War, but not a full-scale “hot” WWIII either. A tepid war would finally re-grant NATO at least some kind of purpose (to protect “our European friends and allies” from the “Russian threat”): the already terminally spineless EU politicians would all be brought into an even more advanced state of subservience, the military budgets would go even higher and Trump would be able to say that he made “America” “great” again. And, who knows, maybe the Russian people would *finally* rise against Putin, you never know! (They wouldn’t – but the Neocons have never been deterred from their goofy theories by such minor and altogether irrelevant things as facts or logic).

Does the Russian strategy work?

To reply to this, don’t look at what the Russians do or do not do in the immediate aftermath of a US provocation. Take a higher level look and just see what happens in the mid to long term. Just like in a game of chess, taking the Gambit is not always the correct strategy.

I submit that to evaluate whether Putin’s policies are effective or not, to see whether he has “sold out” or “caved in” you need to, for example, look at the situation in Syria (or the Ukraine, for that matter) as it was 2 years ago and then compare with what it is today. Or, alternatively, look at the situation as it is today and come back to re-visit it in 6 months.

One huge difference between the western culture and the way the Russians (or the Chinese for that matter) look at geostrategy is that westerners always look at everything in the short term and tactical level. This is basically the single main reason why both Napoleon and Hitler lost their wars against Russia: an almost exclusive focus on the short term and tactical. In contrast, the Russians are the undisputed masters of operational art (in a purely military sense) and, just like the Chinese, they tend to always keep their eyes on the long-term horizon. Just look at the Turkish downing of a Russian Su-24: everybody bemoaned the lack of “forceful” reaction from Moscow. And then, six months later – what do we have? Exactly.

The modern western culture is centered on various forms of instant gratification, and that is also true for geopolitics. If the other guy does something, western leaders always deliver a “firm” response. They like to “send messages” and they firmly believe that doing something, no matter how symbolic, is better than even the appearance of doing nothing. As for the appearance of doing nothing, it is universally interpreted as a sign of weakness. Russians don’t think that way. They don’t care about instant gratification, they care only about one thing: victory. And if that means to look weak, that is fine. From a Russian perspective, sending “messages” or taking symbolic actions (like all 4 of the recent US attacks in Syria) are not signs of strength, but signs of weakness. Generally, the Russians don’t like to use force which they consider inherently dangerous. But when they do, they never threaten or warn, they take immediate and pragmatic (non-symbolic) action which gets them closer to a specific goal.
It's rather fascinating how the Russians, rather like George Washington, keep "losing" the direct engagements, but somehow end up in the superior position a month or two later. But that's why strategy and operations matter more than tactical brilliance.

Labels:

72 Comments:

Blogger Mr.MantraMan June 24, 2017 9:21 AM  

The American Empire does security theatre for the conservatives whose minds never leave the year 1945 and the normie moderates who have no real thoughts. The theatre is to impress upon those two groups legitimacy of the government. If the government loses its legitimacy in the eyes of those two groups, Empire over.

Blogger ZhukovG June 24, 2017 9:25 AM  

In the future, historians will say of the United States, "In their effort to control the world, they lost, not only the world, but their country".

Anonymous DirkH June 24, 2017 9:27 AM  

"One huge difference between the western culture and the way the Russians (or the Chinese for that matter) look at geostrategy is that westerners always look at everything in the short term and tactical level. This is basically the single main reason why both Napoleon and Hitler lost their wars against Russia: an almost exclusive focus on the short term and tactical."

Well Stalin prepared a full scale invasion of Western Europe, see Suvorov, The Icebreaker, so Hitler who knew exactly how difficult a war against Russia would be had no choice but strike first and destroy the lightweight roadworthy fast tanks of the Red Army that had only one purpose, take Europe in a Blitzkrieg but were incapable of maneuvering in the whiterussian swamplands were they were waiting for the command to attack.
So that was the first of four 5million strong Red Armies we wiped out. The Red Army never had more than 5 million heads, we destroyed it four times over. Without FDR's unlimited fuel provision the USSR would have collapsed.

Blogger Antony June 24, 2017 9:29 AM  

OT - but reports coming in of clashes in London at an English Defence League march ; http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/820888/EDL-London-London-Bridge-Police-Presence-Monument-St-Pauls-Latest-News

Blogger Lazarus June 24, 2017 9:29 AM  

In the Saker's previous column,(Russia and Islam) he declared victory for Russia in Syria, pointing out how Russia has turned Turkey into an ally and how they have made the Chechens who are sunni, immune to Wahabism.

So far, the Australians have announced a suspension of military flights over Syria. We shall see what else comes of it.

Meanwhile, the population of East Jerusalem is being successfully wooed by Erdogen, with lots of Turkish flags popping up.

The prophecy of the impending revival of the Ottoman Empire is taking shape.

Blogger Phillip George June 24, 2017 9:32 AM  

Russia are yet to learn the power of defiance vis a vis, a candle lit vigil. They need to learn to show solidarity and strength..

https://www.rt.com/news/393851-israel-containerized-missile-launcher/

\
See, Russian not so fake news want to shine a spot light on shipping containers sending nukes into any port in the world and making it look like not them again next time. Mueller's DNC backed honor guard of legal eagles will probe fake tweets about obstructing container inspections too I suppose.


Blogger Jack Ward June 24, 2017 9:33 AM  

If the above is true, why the heck is Trump allowing it? Doesn't he want Isis destroyed? If he is really playing 'bait the bear' I don't know who to vote for in 2020.And, commenters here, save me the rhetoric of 'be patient', he's plying high level chess, etc. I don't think playing war/conflict chess with a bear is conducive to long range health.

Blogger VD June 24, 2017 9:34 AM  

Stalin prepared a full scale invasion of Western Europe, see Suvorov, The Icebreaker,

No. Suvorov was wrong. You're confusing a war plan for an actual plan of invasion. The Red Army was not going to attack Germany that year. It wasn't ready.

Blogger VD June 24, 2017 9:35 AM  

In the future, historians will say of the United States, "In their effort to control the world, they lost, not only the world, but their country".

Athens writ large.

Blogger bw June 24, 2017 9:41 AM  

as the US attempts to slow down the Syrian army's destruction of ISIS

I love the smell of proxy wars in the mornin'

"In their effort to control the world, they lost, not only the world, but their country"

The Internationale do not have "countries"; they've been busy destroying them for a Century so as to gain the World. It's that or nothing.







Blogger ZhukovG June 24, 2017 9:44 AM  

Jack, I believe the truth of the matter is that Trump is surrounded by enemies who hate him. Moreover they hate everyone who has supported his Presidency. The only thing that keeps President Trump breathing is that they haven't figured out how to off him without causing a civil war... yet.

Every President has needed people close to him that he can trust. JFK was so isolated he pretty much only had his brother Bobby to lean on. Does the GE even have that?

Blogger Phillip George June 24, 2017 9:49 AM  

Russians self constraint over mh017 and Metrojet Flight 9268 over Egypt was simply super human,
it was purportedly the same friends of the USS Liberty

if Russia ever cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war it will all be over in 60 minutes......

and i for one would be saying fair enough

Anonymous Rocklea June 24, 2017 9:57 AM  

"They don’t care about instant gratification, they care only about one thing: victory"

Russians Don't Care, they're so alt right(aside form the whole meddling in other countries thing, but who can blame them, everyone else does). And Putin plays underwater chess. Sucks to be Europe right now.

Blogger rumpole5 June 24, 2017 10:05 AM  

What I want to know is this: Does Trump have a long term strategy? If so, what is it? I had a sense that the Syrian airfield bombing was more to wow the Chinese leader at Trump's elbow and to distract Trump's critics than it was to hurt the Syrians (the airfield was up and running the next day). Likewise, all the other actions seem designed more to let the air out of the "collusion with Russia" narrative than to actually hurt Assad.

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable June 24, 2017 10:09 AM  

I don't know who to vote for in 2020

Whatever Trump may or may not be doing with respect to Russia, it's likely to be a whole hell of a lot more sensible than what would be done by any current presidential option.

Blogger cheddarman June 24, 2017 10:33 AM  

Americans suck at fighting unconventional war. It always fights like a bull in a China shop. The Russians know this and will continue to work through their allies including the Syrian Government, Hezbollah, Iran and the Shiites in Iraq to bleed the Americans but come short of an escalation. If they avoid an escalation in the conflict and keep killing Americans Russia will win.

Blogger cheddarman June 24, 2017 10:36 AM  

I wonder how the Russians are working to recruit Turkey as an ally. The US is backing Saudi Arabia as the major Arab power in the region, and helping out the Kurds, a traditional pain in the arse of Turkey. Both actions could alienate Turkey.

Blogger SJ June 24, 2017 10:37 AM  

The Pentagon took over almost right away. Haven't you been paying attention? Plus if Trump acts up too much they'll just impeach him with the totally fake he's a Russian spy narrative. Why do you think they're keeping that fakery alive? Trump doesn't run the Pentagon, the Pentagon runs him.

Blogger Cail Corishev June 24, 2017 10:39 AM  

If the above is true, why the heck is Trump allowing it?

I assume it's because he hasn't drained enough of the swamp yet. Maybe it can't be drained any faster; I don't know. He's trying to do it constructively instead of burning it all down, and that might not be possible. But a full frontal assault on the swamp might spook enough of the GOPe into impeachment (or a coup by other means), so that might not work either. It was always questionable whether he could defeat the establishment, even among those of us convinced he would try.

The neocons in the military didn't spend Iraq and Afghanistan resting on their laurels; they spent them giving each other awards and promotions and using PC garbage to push out the old guard. And even the good ones who survived, like Mattis, are prone to thinking that every problem can be solved with a military strike -- they just tend to want to keep the strikes small and focused on clear goals, while the neocons want the goals vague and the actions ever-expanding. One of the president's weaknesses is that he has great respect for men in uniform, probably too much at times. If they tell him these strikes are necessary, and that they're convinced they can keep it from escalating, he'll probably defer to them. He doesn't want to be a military president; he wants to be an economy/diplomacy president and let trusted military men do their thing.

The situation isn't ideal, but we could have elected Hillary or one of the many GOP neocons being offered, and already be in a proxy war or three. With full control over the White House and intelligence agencies, they'd probably even have everyone convinced Russia started it.

I don't know who to vote for in 2020.

Good grief, you're already fretting about that? Maybe wait until about March 2020, and see if it looks like we'll still be having elections.

Anonymous Sam the Man June 24, 2017 10:59 AM  

One comment on the supposed invasion of Europe by Russia in July 1941.

I worked with a lot of Russian engineers, who have read the source material that was released in the early 1990s. Every one says Stalin was planning an attack in July 1941 and that the June 22 attack prevented it.

I do not know as I do not read Russian, but upon probing for the evidence they have provided the following:

1) The Russian forces were not set up for defense, but offense. That was why the Germans got through the frontier area so quickly, the ground troops were not in a defensive stance. That is why they made such deep penetrations when the Russian army, if correctly deployed should have put up a much better resistance given they knew there was a German build up and they had since November of 1940 to build multiple lines of resistance.

2) The same is true of the Russian air force, it was wiped out as they were at forward fields, not back a ways as you would expect if they were planning on defense. Every thing was forward, making the German tactical whip out of the Air force possible. The Russians were not dumb, they studied the German air attacks in Poland and France, they were not deployed defensively but for an attack which was imminent.

3) The Russian logistics were set up on the railroad/road lines for exploitation of an attack, if you look at the German attacks with reference to the rail centers and exploiting the Russian troop dispositions. That is why the first two week attacks were so successful in encircling Russian armies.

4) the Russians had no inkling of a German attack , even though the knew the Germans were building up on the frontier, as the Russians thought he Germans were aware of their build up and the German forces were defensive.

I have no idea why the Russians who have insisted the attack was coming are doing so if it is false. Perhaps it is another way to clang Stalin, but none of the folks I know were rabid fanatics about Stalin.

Anonymous DissidentRight June 24, 2017 11:00 AM  

I hope we live in the timeline where all the neocon leadership end up shot as traitors.

Anonymous Freddo June 24, 2017 11:08 AM  

I don't know who to vote for in 2020.

Imagine Shrillary announcing her nominations for the federal courts. Compare and contrast with the current democrat outrage on the picks made by president Trump. That should keep you going for the next 4 years.

Anonymous BBGKB June 24, 2017 11:15 AM  

Imagine Shrillary announcing her nominations for the federal courts

Rumors abound.
https://thehornnews.com/report-justice-kennedy-retiring-monday/

Blogger DJ | AMDG June 24, 2017 11:21 AM  

Even the MSM has been talking about Russian aggression and the threat of a Russian/US conflict over Syria, and every time I read these articles I ask myself, "But what about Putin/Trump collusion and how much Russians love him?" Then suddenly my anti-Trump friends who up to that point have argued how Trump is she dumb and incompetent explain to me that he has this huge strategic plan to rule the world with Russia and blah blah blah big business, MIC, and such.

The incoherence and babbling of the anti-Trumpers is exhausting.

Blogger Basil Makedon June 24, 2017 11:27 AM  

Putin is not an admirable person. That being said, he does play a poor hand well and there is something to say for that. We play royal flushes with ineptitude.

Anonymous badhairday June 24, 2017 11:29 AM  

Off Topic:

Grenfell fire update:
The DANGEROUS PRECEDENT of Unbridled Charity

Black Pigeon Speaks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FH6NQrhBgt4

Blogger Solaire Of Astora June 24, 2017 11:34 AM  

Is it possible the shorter term focus of western powers is due to their politicians running for office every 2 to 4 years? Symbolic acts make sense if your focus is on political messaging at home rather than long term strategy that would be impossible to sell with your political opponents taking advantage of the low IQ voting base by making you look weak for not reacting to every provocation.

Anonymous MoA link June 24, 2017 11:49 AM  

Moon of Alabama also wrote on how for US leadership, tactics drive strategy.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/06/when-generals-make-policies-tactics-replacing-strategies-replacing-political-decisions.html#comments

Anonymous Viiidad June 24, 2017 11:58 AM  

Basil Makedon wrote:Putin is not an admirable person.

Actually, he is. He has brought his people back from the edge of ruin, expanded Russia's natural resource acquisition immensely, stood up for Christendom and stared down the globohomo alliance, led by the US. It takes a hard man to hoe the row he has hoed, but Russia is reaping the benefits of his hand at the plow.

Blogger rondolf June 24, 2017 11:59 AM  

"It's rather fascinating how the Russians, rather like George Washington, keep "losing" the direct engagements, but somehow end up in the superior position a month or two later."
Could Trump be doing the same thing with the neocons and the military who want war with Russia, giving them just enough to think they are getting their way, but ultimately is allowing them to waste time while working strategically, as he has done in other matters. Because Fighting with Russia in Syria is definetely opposed to what he has said before, notwithstanding whatever nonsense he spouted after the chemical attck in Idlib.

Blogger Sam June 24, 2017 12:12 PM  

@20
The reason for all that was the Red Armies doctrine was to rapidly take the war onto the enemies soil. After Poland and France the Russians realized this might not be the best idea and were attempting to get into a better position but that took time and the USSR had exactly 1 year between the fall of France and the invasion.

Evidence for this is the forward Russian units were under equipped in supplies and ammunition, items that would have been stockpiled in the event of a planned offensive.

As for item 4
The Russians did have warnings the Germans were going to invade then... as well as warnings the Germans were going to invade the month before that and the month before that.

Anonymous Sharrukin June 24, 2017 12:27 PM  

30. rondolf

Could Trump be doing the same thing with the neocons and the military who want war with Russia

It looks more like Trump has largely abdicated responsibility to the Pentagon, willingly or unwillingly.

The missile strikes in Syria along with the shootdown of the Syrian SU-22 and other pointless provocations which resulted in the suspension of the air agreement. The sending of 4,000 more men to Afghanistan and the so far empty threats towards North Korea do not suggest any coherent policy.

The Pentagon, the State Department, and the White House all seem to be reading from rather different operational plans.

Haley, Tillerson, and McMaster have all publically contradicted Trump several times. Bear in mind these folks were hired by Trump and can be removed by him inside of an hour.

Trump initially backs the Saudis vs Qatar while the Pentagon sells a dozen F-15 jets to Qatar.

Plan?

There ain't no plan!

Blogger pyrrhus June 24, 2017 12:35 PM  

As John Dos Passos wrote in the novel '1919', "oil was trumps." And it's the same neocon banking cabal fomenting war in Syria and using ISIS as an instrument, to build a pipeline....I'm starting to think that all of the big bankers should be shot without a trial....

Blogger Al From Bay Shore June 24, 2017 12:36 PM  

I'm absolutely pissed at what the U.S. is doing in Syria. I thought this was a war against the jihadists not against the Syrian government and Russia. My mortgage is underwater because of the beltway morons AND they are spending my hard earned money to foment a proxy conflict against Russia in quest of undermining a nation that has preserved some of the oldest Christian communities on earth. I'm thinking Marvin Gaye.... "Makes me wanna holla', throw up on my hands."

Anonymous Just another commenter June 24, 2017 12:39 PM  

Vietnam: US won decisively and regularly at the tactical level nearly 100% of the time. Lost the war at the strategic just as decisively.

US politicians and business leaders (usually, there are some exceptions) are masters of the short-term thinking, where "a long time" is the 6-year senate election cycle.

Blogger Duke Norfolk June 24, 2017 12:42 PM  

"They don’t care about instant gratification, they care only about one thing: victory. And if that means to look weak, that is fine."

Sounds like Trump.

Anonymous Gen. Kong June 24, 2017 12:50 PM  

Jack Ward wrote:
If the above is true, why the heck is Trump allowing it? Doesn't he want Isis destroyed? If he is really playing 'bait the bear' I don't know who to vote for in 2020.And, commenters here, save me the rhetoric of 'be patient', he's plying high level chess, etc. I don't think playing war/conflict chess with a bear is conducive to long range health.

Trump is either a) not actually in command of the military (why in the hell are we there, in Trashcanistan, and the Ukraine still?); or b) he's totally kayfabe there to distract attention while the (((usual suspects))) continue their various schemes to exterminate YT and Christianity while looting them of everything at the same time.

Trump apparently has very little control over what goes on in the state mechanism of the Fake Banana Empire. Zero control over State Dept. - who is busy importing Musloids and Dindus ar record rates under Ted Kennedy's rapefugee resettlement racket. My theory is that the deep-state has him pretty much contained, though he now and again lands a blow like firing Clinton consigliere Comey - a criminal lawyer.

Anonymous Sam the Man June 24, 2017 12:54 PM  

# 31 Sam

That is what the histories you and I read, from the 1950s to 1980s said. You did an admirable job repeating that.

But what I was referencing were what the history oriented Russians, starting in year 1998, though as recent as 2016 told me. These are the fellows who read, in the original Russian, what was written about the "Great Patriotic War" in the early 1990s and analysis based on same, a topic which they seemed well read upon.

I do not have the knowledge to say one way or another, but referencing the "popular history" is not relevant. These chaps specifically referenced where those histories, rewritten from the 1950s on, were not accurate.

Anonymous Didas Kalos June 24, 2017 1:02 PM  

Ditto: In the future, historians will say of the United States, "In their effort to control the world, they lost, not only the world, but their country.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 24, 2017 1:02 PM  

Like the US marines, Hannibal never lost a battle.

cheddarman wrote:I wonder how the Russians are working to recruit Turkey as an ally.
What makes you think they are. Russians don't like Turks much. Long term, Russia has always wanted to retake Constantinople. Short term, Turks are not trustworthy. Medium term, Turks are becoming their rivals for regional power.

Anonymous Gen. Kong June 24, 2017 1:04 PM  

if Russia ever cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war it will all be over in 60 minutes......

Only if the Archangel Michael is literally leading them with a fiery sword. As Saker (who generally pretty good about Russian matters) has pointed out before, Russia is in no shape to engage in a major war. About the best they can do against the Fake Banana Empire's debt-fueled war-machine devoted to Lebensraum for the master race is run interference. Even this has stretched them to the limit. Just read something about a Canadian sniper scoring a record kill shot in Iraq. I thought Trudeau and all the snowflakes up there were pacifists. Looks like they're willing to send what they have to serve the interests of Judeo-Christ, whose Vicar on Earth is apparertlly Bill Kristol or another Talmudic Satanist. Never hear the Soviet Kanuckistani leftoid snowflakes squawking about theie own rather pathetic military being over there.

Blogger Robert What? June 24, 2017 1:13 PM  

But why is Trump letting the NeoCons have their way? Or is he on their side?

Blogger sykes.1 June 24, 2017 1:20 PM  

Oliver Stone has a very interesting interview series (four hours) with Putin. Whatever one might think of Stone (I cut him slack for his infantry service in Nam), the answers given by Putin have intrinsic interest. Putin clearly operates many levels above our own pathetic Ruling Class.

Blogger Timmy3 June 24, 2017 3:09 PM  

Why can't America let Syria destroy ISIS? ISIS is in Iraq for the same reason to destabilize the country. ISIS will never just stay in Syria. Okay, Russia takes Syria and US gets Iraq. Maybe it's the Bashar obsession. He can't be deposed.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 24, 2017 3:27 PM  

Timmy3 wrote:Why can't America let Syria destroy ISIS?
America doesn't want Syria to destroy ISIS. We created ISIS, we funded ISIS, we armed ISIS and we are defending ISIS militarily.
ISIS was supposed to be our means to destroy Russian and Iranian influence in the region, in favor of Turkey and Saudi. That has backfired spectacularly.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents June 24, 2017 3:28 PM  

Narrative fail as CNN retracts and deletes a story linking Trump and Russia.

Anonymous Andrew Anglin June 24, 2017 3:57 PM  

the Saker is the Russian equivalent of Dick Morris: regularly wrong on everything. In fact, about a week before the Russian Air Force landed in Syria, Saker predicted "Putin will not intervene militarily to support Assad". The problem with Putin is that he keeps trying to win with minimal force - in the Ukraine and Syria - so the mess goes on and on and the western Encirclement Powers slowly escalate. Soon the Judeo-globalists are going to decide that the Russians can be safely squeezed out of Syria. Then, thanks as much to Putin's pussyfooting as to the (((Deep State))), hell will be upon us.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 24, 2017 4:34 PM  

Andrew Anglin wrote:
Stop pretending to be Andrew.

Blogger cheddarman June 24, 2017 5:15 PM  

Snidley Whiplash, I agree that Constantinople is a long term goal for Russia. Before they can accomplish this, Russia has to survive and keep the Gulf Arab States and Saudi Arabia from building their natural gas and oil pipelines to Europe through Turkey. If Russia can get an Iranian pipeline to Europe through Turkey, that is an outcome they can live with, as Iran is on good terms with Russia and will buy Russian stuff like weapons and nuclear reactors with oil profits. The US fighting along side the Kurds really angers Turkey, as the Kurds are a pain in Turkey's ass for a number of reasons.

Blogger tublecane June 24, 2017 5:19 PM  

I think Russia's long-term planning is a bit overrated, there. When you're only comparing it to that of the U.S., naturally they look better. Democratic politics and leftward ideological drift makes us shortsighted. But in the Napoleonic and Hitlerian eras Russia was more lucky than wise, I should think.

I'm not with Tolstoy on his grand historical theories, but I have a hard time believing their "scortched earth" strategy against Napoleon was on purpose. More like a series of spontaneous reactions, couple with people of the correct temperament in power.

As for Stalin, does anyone think it was good long-term strategy to purge his officer class, make a pact with Hitler and leave himself open to invasion, allow Leningrad to be surrounded, nearly lose Stalingrad, and rely on the Capitalist West to supply him with vital stuff? I don't.

Blogger Jack Ward June 24, 2017 5:19 PM  

@11, 15, 19, 22.
Just back from the granddaughters birthday bash.
Yeah, guys, I know the a bomb we dodged with Hitlery losing. I just wish the MAGA master would not make me so nervous. If true that Justice Kennedy is retiring and Trump gets another the likes of his first pick to the court, I can forgive a whole s--tload of s--t. I mean trainloads of it. Maybe,also, the, apparent, decision by the high court on the activists judges shutting down the Donald's EO's may bear some great and welcomed fruit.
It just isn't popcorn and bourbon these days; good moonshine is needed to make it through the crap.
2020. Maybe a gosh darn, for sure major Alt Right candidate will appear ready to kick some major butt. Now, that I could vote for. If not, and its the likes of Hillary or look alike, yeah, Trump will get my vote and prayers for effectiveness. Who knows, by then he may own the world and we can breath easy again.

Anonymous Takin' a Look June 24, 2017 5:50 PM  

The Russians aren't biting because they know it is the Pentagon, alphabet spooks (((Neo-cohens and Derp State))) playing this game, not Trump or Americans.

Blogger Emmanuel Mateo-Morales June 24, 2017 5:57 PM  

"if Russia ever cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war it will all be over in 60 minutes......"

No they wouldn't. They'd lose. They'd lose miserably, which is kind of why they're acting like they are, because aside from nuking everyone, they know they'd lose and bad, because they'd be at war with everyone.

Blogger Rough Carrigan June 24, 2017 7:52 PM  

I don't see why Trump doesn't schedule a press conference and announce "It's my explicit directive that, effective immediately, all U.S. troops, advisers and any other armed forces affiliated personnel shall be withdrawn from Syria immediately."

He said in the campaign that we should let ISIS and Assad duke it out on their own. The portions of the pentagram that are controlled by the neocon globalists benefit from the lack of an explicit U.S. policy. "We're not acting on our own as a renegade subset of the CIA and NSA. We're following U.S. policy." - whatever the hell that is at this moment. Why let them have official cover via ambiguity? Force them to be explicitly treasonous not just probably treasonous. I bet you'd peel away some of them and that it would help to start shitcanning some of the neocon fascists to force their hands.

Anonymous Takin' a Look June 24, 2017 8:30 PM  

"No they wouldn't. They'd lose. They'd lose miserably, which is kind of why they're acting like they are, because aside from nuking everyone, they know they'd lose and bad, because they'd be at war with everyone"

The Russians already have rebuilt shelters for 70% of their population and 50% of their livestock. They've also got D.U.M.B.s for growing natural crops. E

Anonymous Eduardo June 24, 2017 9:59 PM  

So you guys will rise as Sparta Writ Large? ;-)

Interesting, after reading about the American Independency War, felt like George Washington was a gallant and corageous but failed General. He did lost most of the engagements, but it looked like it was British lack of control and sound strategy that handed the Colonials the ultimate victory.

You saying there was more to his engagements then simple attempts to weaken the enemy... Or expel the enemy in some cases (New York I think...) what would those long terms objectives be?

Blogger Emmanuel Mateo-Morales June 25, 2017 12:32 AM  

@55

Yeah... and they'd still lose, and badly, even if they skipped a conventional military conflict, which even you seem to admit they'd lose (and badly) and took the actual nuclear option where'd they'd wreck the greatest number of their enemies (which, again, entails they'd be nuked to oblivion too). All their preparing for this possibility is great and all and I wish Western powers were seriously prepared for this, but how is a nuclear winter going to help 70 percent of a population nearing some 150 to 200 million people in a big, massive ice box like Russia made even colder by a massive, global nuclear winter that'd make Krakatoa look like a warm day in July? You really don't think the globalists would nuke every inch of prime growing land in Russia just as much as Russia would nuke every inch of prime growing land in, say, the corn belt? How are natural crops expected to grow and be harvested fast enough to ignore the radical, legit climate change that'd be going on at some place at such a high latitude and the lingering, radioactive particulates in the atmosphere? Real life nuclear apocalypses aren't like Fallout or Mad Max or whatever fantasy of Russia not becoming a ghost of a memory like everyone else that matters in such a scenario.

Brilliant as the Ivans have been, you can't have the GDP of Italy and expect to take on the US, Canada, Britain, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Greece, Turkey, and a good deal of other European countries and the gestalt military industrial might and manpower of something like that and expect not to get wrecked and be enslaved for generations if you hash it out normally, and even if such a country had vaults where a hundred or close enough to a hundred percent of their population were living underground in mostly self contained and self sufficient environments, what kind of victory is that even if you managed to kill all of your enemies (doubtful) if not a massively pyrrhic, especially when you consider the limited resources that would have to survive forever or until they managed to leach away all of the dangerous radiation up top (which is also doubtful)?

Blogger Emmanuel Mateo-Morales June 25, 2017 12:33 AM  

"American Independency War"

American Revolution to you, Smelly Ed.

Anonymous Eduardo June 25, 2017 3:07 AM  

You know exactly what war was it Smelly Emmanuel lol it was a war for independence! Damn it!

Didn't really remembered the proper name, so? Lol Not like I read way too much about it.

And in my defense... I only smell after some exercise u_u what can I say, my hormones are strong lol.

But really I don't smell bad, here take a whiff hehehehe.

Anonymous Eduardo June 25, 2017 3:13 AM  

Sorry too many laughs... I am watching Milo and Cumia talking so I am in cracking a laugh mode.

Wait.... There is a singer called Smelly Ed o_õ. Obscure reference confirmed.

Blogger The Anti Antarctican June 25, 2017 3:24 AM  

I agree that the attack on the USSR was a less a tactical blunder (as many historians tend to believe) by Hitler and more a desperate but doomed attempt to stop a certain invasion of Europe by Stalin's forces that were massing on the western front.

Blogger The Anti Antarctican June 25, 2017 3:31 AM  

I believe Trump understands the situation very well, but in both Syria & Ukraine he's battling against well-entrenched Deep State/MIC power that doesn't allow him to do what he really wants in terms of foreign policy. He's compromising in order to get some things accomplished but does not yet hold a strong enough position to do everything he wants.

Trump, I believe, would love to have a real, functional relationship with Putin, but Deep State push-back is too fierce right now to allow it. Trump still needs to coslnsolidate his position more before he can get closer to Russia - something he really wants to do.

Blogger The Anti Antarctican June 25, 2017 3:37 AM  

Totally agree.

Putin has brought a country to relative peace and prosperity that suffered through hell the entire 20th century.

Blogger The Anti Antarctican June 25, 2017 3:41 AM  

Convinced this is not what Trump wants. He's having to make compromises that he hates with Deep State in order to get other parts of his agenda through. The more success he has, the more leverage he will gain and the happier us Deplorables will feel about his foreign policy. Gonna take time.

Blogger The Anti Antarctican June 25, 2017 3:43 AM  

Trump & Putin are natural allies and both patriots. Domestically, Putin id in a much stronger position than Trump, so that's why is foreign policy is more coherent and effective. Trump's power is far less consolidated than Putin's. Gonna take time.

Blogger The Anti Antarctican June 25, 2017 3:46 AM  

Turks, though fickle and unreliable as strategic partners, seem to be aligned with Russia, Iran & Qatar vs US, Saudis, Israel.

Blogger The Anti Antarctican June 25, 2017 3:49 AM  

Putin, a true Russian patriot and nationalist, has consolidated power and created financial independence in Russia in ways Trump can only dream of, although it's an excellent model for Trump to aspire to. Real Russo/Us partnership would be GAME OVER for the Globalists.

Blogger The Anti Antarctican June 25, 2017 3:51 AM  

Because that's not what Deep State wants. They want Iran & Russia as permanent boogeymen to justify existence of MIC as well as to justify what would otherwise be totally unnecessary defense spending con game with Israel. Trump is in a bind.

Blogger The Anti Antarctican June 25, 2017 3:54 AM  

Exactly!

Blogger The Anti Antarctican June 25, 2017 3:55 AM  

That is correct

Blogger The Anti Antarctican June 25, 2017 4:00 AM  

He wanted to do that, but once he took power he realized he couldn't do it so quickly without causing a total war vs Deep State. He needs to chip away at it piece by piece. Will take years.

Fortunately, as we see in Stone's "Putin Interviews", Putin understands very well what Trump is up against with Deep State, and that's why he continues to exercise restraint.

Blogger Martin June 27, 2017 4:36 AM  

Another long term effect of the neocon strategies is that people all over the world understand that the USA is a truly vile and evil entity.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts