ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, September 05, 2016

The Russians aren't coming

The Saker explains that Russia wouldn't take Ukraine even if it could do so without firing a shot:
Russia is much weaker than what most people think. Her landmass is immense and her military arguably the best on the planet, but population is relatively small, and her economy a struggling one. Yes, the future does look bright for Russia, but presently she simply does not have the means to single handedly rescue (resurrect, really) the Ukraine. Not even close.

The reality is that even Crimea has presented Russia with major challenges. After 25 years of total neglect, Crimea basically needs to completely rebuilt most of its infrastructure. The Kremlin has poured billions of Rubles into numerous and large modernization programs, including an immensely expensive but vitally needed bridge over the Kerch strait, and she will continue to rebuilt Crimea in spite of the immense costs involved. Down the road, of course, Crimea will end up being very wealthy, courtesy of an immense tourist potential, the presence of a much expanded Black Sea fleet and because of its strategic location. But for the foreseeable future, Crimea will remain a major burden which Russia will struggle to deal with.

The situation in the Donbass is even bleaker. If Crimean was neglected, the Donbass has been almost totally destroyed. Right now the Russians are paying the pensions of the local population because the Ukronazis have stolen them, in direct violation of the Minsk Agreements. Russia is also alone in supporting the Novorussian republics with humanitarian, medical, technical, administrative and military programs. And while the Novorussians have done an amazing job rebuilding much of Donetsk and a few other cities, most of what lies within artillery range of the Ukronazi forces still lies in ruins and the economy is more or less at a standstill. This will not change until peace truly returns to the region.

What is already quite evident that regardless of who will be in the Kremlin and regardless of how much good will and self-sacrifice the Russians will have, Russia simply does not have the means to salvage the Ukraine. It just ain’t happening. Furthermore, polls show that most Russians are categorically opposed to a full reintegration of the entire Ukraine into Russia. Who could blame them? They are not only acutely aware that the Ukraine has turned into one bloody hell of a mess, but that an entire generation of Ukrainians has now been terminally brainwashed with russophobic hatred. And, frankly, Russia has no use for Nazis of any kind, even if they are fellow Slavs or even if they are basically the very same nation as the Russian one.

So even if tomorrow Petro Poroshenko and his gang decided to invite the Russians to come in an fix this bloody mess, the Russians would decline (so much for the warnings about a Russian invasion!). Oh sure, there are a lot of Ukrainians who kid themselves and think that “the Russians will come and fix this”, but this is a pipe-dream: the Russians ain’t coming. At most, Russia will let the DNR/LNR get back the territories which belonged to their regions and Mariupol might be liberated. But that’s about it. And even if by some miracle the Novorussian tanks end up in Kiev, I don’t see them staying there for very long because the Kremlin fully understands that if they grab it, they own it and they have to fix it. Eventually Russia will, of course, simply be forced absorb the Donbass and make it a part of Russia, mostly because there is no way the Donbass will ever go back to the Ukraine again, but even this process will take time.
So, why is the Obama administration beating the drum about a Russian invasion of a) Ukraine, b) the Baltic States, and c) Western Europe? Because the USA is doing what it has often done before, attempting to cover its own aggressive actions by portraying them as necessary defensive ones.

However, the fact that it is US troops that occupy dozens of other countries, and that it was the US that overthrew the elected Ukrainian government makes it very clear that while the Russians are not the good guys, the US, and to a lesser extent the EU, are the bad guys of the scenario.

And believe me, none of this has escaped the attention of the people of both Eastern and Western Europe. Putin and the Russians may not be on their side, but unlike the USA and the EU, they are not actively encouraging and enabling the one-million-strong invasion of Europe by warriors of Islam.

Labels: ,

108 Comments:

Blogger Markku September 05, 2016 4:56 AM  

Can confirm. The news that I hear from them indicate that all the time. Their internal cohesion is hanging by a thread. Now, is this just US propaganda? No. You can't successfully run a propaganda machine from the other side of the Atlantic, about a nation right next door, with a few hours' drive to it. Their infrastructure, especially as concerns the essentials like food, is a MESS.

Blogger Nemontel September 05, 2016 4:57 AM  

The number of Muslim Invaders is already above 1,5 Million for Germany alone.

Anonymous VFM0265 September 05, 2016 5:00 AM  

I know it's been said before, but I'm still just profoundly taken back by the fact that everything has now come full circle since the so-called "Cold War" of the 80's. USA is now the Evil Empire starting foreign wars at its people's expense & RUSSIA is the last bastion of Christendom and Western Civilization. God Bless the Motherland and President Putin.

Za Rodinu!

Blogger Markku September 05, 2016 5:00 AM  

It is in their best interests to threaten invasion, and receive appeasement. It is not in their best interests to actually invade and annex.

Blogger Nemontel September 05, 2016 5:07 AM  

@4 Russia is not threatening invasion. Where are you getting your information? From the (((Media))) ?

Blogger yoghi.llama September 05, 2016 5:11 AM  

Well … Saker also thinks Wahhābism, Quṭbism and all violent jihad are a result of an Anglo-Zionist conspiracy to engineer a clash of civilization.

I'll stick to Raymond Ibrahim thanks.

Blogger Stephen Davenport September 05, 2016 5:11 AM  

Agree with Sakar that Russia will not invade Ukraine he is full of shit on the rest of it. 1) Nothing wrong with the Crimea before the Russkies stole it ( Yes the Putin gang stole it) 2) The Russian military is overrated and always has, their equipment is bad and gets beaten by Western stuff regularly 3) The Ukrainians stopped them cold in the Donbas (Sakar, Ukrainians have their problems but they are getting westernized and are less corrupt than your buddy Putin. 4) The Russian military struggles against supposedly weaker opponents (Chechnya, Afghanistan, Georgia and the Ukraine) 5) The Russian army is not as large as it used to be and has a large border so they cannot put that many troops (about 50,000ish) on any one border they want to take. 6) If they tried to take Kyiv or even one of the major cities or hell the rest of the Donbas it would be a bloodbath, the defender usually has the advantage thus the reason you need a 3-1 or more advantage when attacking. 7_ remember the Russians and their proxies had twice what they have now and the Ukrainians push them back to the present lines. Its never failed to amaze me the exaggeration put up by the so called western experts on Russia. Solid regional power with only their nukes making them relevant and Putin isn't insane enough to use them if the Ukrainians eventually push them out of Donbas or Crimea.

Anonymous Rezny September 05, 2016 5:11 AM  

The Saker just voiced the base of the local joke that Poland should annex Ukraine west of Dnieper to reach long desired peace with Russia.
Having russophobic NATO country of Poland die horribly and disintegrate due to having to provide for 20-30 million of gibs-addicted brainwashed peasants would be a show to remember. No Poland, no Ukraine - peace at the West at last.

Blogger Markku September 05, 2016 5:15 AM  

Nemontel wrote:@4 Russia is not threatening invasion. Where are you getting your information? From the (((Media))) ?

Cute.

Blogger VD September 05, 2016 5:17 AM  

Nothing wrong with the Crimea before the Russkies stole it.

The Crimea is Russian. It has been since 1783. If you want to be taken seriously, you should probably not lead with silly falsehoods like that.

Anonymous VFM0265 September 05, 2016 5:23 AM  

Well said, Vox. I wonder how many here know that Krushev gave Crimea away as a gift in 1955, never thinking it wouldn't still be part of an eternal U.S.S.R..

Blogger Elder Son September 05, 2016 5:29 AM  

Despite the Minsk agreement, Ukraine is still heavily shelling the towns within reach of their canons daily killing/maiming innocent civilians. Word is from the DPR that Ukraine is massing on the Donbas front lines. In response, Russia has place several mechanize units just inside its border with Ukraine. Lieutenant General Ben Hodges just 4 days ago visited the Donbas front lines and promises further assistance to Ukraine army to help defeat the DPR. All those NATO exercises in Ukraine is but a transfer of various US weapons to the Ukraine army. While Russia may wish to have it another way, it will not stand by and watch a complete annihilation of the separatist Novorussian republics forces. Russia has no intention of "retaking" Ukraine.

‘When we remind our fallen and wounded comrades, we understand that we must be prepared to perform our tasks more efficiently and put serious demands on training the younger soldiers, on which the future of the army relies. So US forces continue to provide assistance to the Ukrainian army,' – said General Hodges at the end of the visit.

Anonymous Rezny September 05, 2016 5:30 AM  

VD, you're a mistaken a bit. Crimea was first settled by Russians after Sviatoslav destroyed Khazars back in 968. Russian colonists ran only after the Mongols came in 1220'ies - those that managed to run away, that is.
Getting that land back from yet another nomad slaver state in 1783 was a restitution if anything. We were batized there in 988 on the place of modern Sevastopol of all places.

You others tell us more about stealing Cantrebury from some The Welsh Borderlands republic because some Welsh guy rearranged borders 50 years ago, I dare you.

Blogger Elder Son September 05, 2016 5:40 AM  

Meh. You can think of Sevastopol as our Guantanamo - Crimea as a buffer. And we are not giving it back.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash September 05, 2016 5:41 AM  

Depending on how you define "Russian", Crimea has been a Russian tributary/ally/dependency/possession since Genghis Khan. What Crimea has NEVER been is Ukrainian.
The population was mostly Tartars until Stalin decided to move them East in the 1930s, and replace them with Russians. The ethnic Ukrainian population of Crimea has never been above 10%.

The real problem in Ukraine is that nobody, and I mean NOBODY, cares about Ukraine. The ethnic Russians in the east don't care. Their neighbors, the Poles, Belorussians and Romanians certainly don't care about Ukraine for itself, only as a buffer from Russia. Moldova is simply a hideout for thieves, even NATO wants nothing to do with them.

The West sees Ukraine only as a prod they might use to goad Russia into making a serious error. Our actions over the last 10 years demonstrate rather conclusively that we'd rather have civil war in Ukraine than let people work it out themselves.

The Ukrainian government rather obviously doesn't give a single damn for the country or its people. At this point, I'm pretty sure even a lot of the Ukrainian people are giving up on the idea of having their own country. What has it profited them? Since partition it has staggered from one cabal of looters to the next.

When people look back to Tsarist times as the model of government integrity, you have a serious problem.

Blogger #issues September 05, 2016 5:42 AM  

I would certainly argue with the idea that the Russian military is "arguably the best on the planet". Outside of any contrived or highly specific definition of "best", every generally accepted measure of military capability favors the USA.

Anonymous DJF September 05, 2016 5:46 AM  

For a country which is claimed to be on the march, the Russians don't appear to have marched very far

In Abkhazia and South Ossetia they are located where international agreements including with Georgia say they can be as peacekeepers.

In Crimea they are located in the same place they have been since 1783

Anonymous Rezny September 05, 2016 5:51 AM  

@14 Sevastopol is The base of the Black Sea fleet.
Might as well give San Diego to Aztlan or Pearl Harbor to Japan.

Kaliningrad is more like Guantanamo.

Blogger Elder Son September 05, 2016 5:57 AM  

@1ABCT_#ID continues to move heavy armor equitment across Europe by land, air and sea in support of #AtlanticResolve.

@estNATO US troops scheduled to participate in 172 military exercises in #Baltic states in 2017

Blah-blah and etc. etc.

Anyone follow this stuff? If you are getting your crap from the MSM, think tank, or some hanger-on, you are more than likely not getting the real deal of what is going on. USNATO, from Estonia, all the way around to Georgia, is placing heavy armor equipment. And, anti-ballistic missile batteries, just in case Iran lobs missiles at Europe.

Russia is being contained, NOT because it has any aspirations to roll over Eastern Europe and go all USSR on the world again. It being contained, to prevent it from interfering with USNATO's aspirations of bringing the non-integrated Gap into the globalist NWO CORE.

Seriously???

Anonymous Philipp September 05, 2016 5:58 AM  

Nobody in Western Europe believes that the Russians are coming (unless you count people whose salaries depend on them believing that nonsense).

Blogger Elder Son September 05, 2016 6:11 AM  

Maybe not, but get around the Baltic's and you'll find a few USNATO brainwashed peoples.

Anonymous Philipp September 05, 2016 6:18 AM  

@21: Elder Son, the Baltics are not in Western Europe.

I understand that people in Central and Eastern Europe are afraid of the Russian, for both historical and geographical reasons.

These fears, howevers, do not mean that the Russians have any intentions to invade Eastern Europe.

Blogger Abyssus Invocat September 05, 2016 6:28 AM  

Exactly. Only those utterly ignorant of history were surprised by Russia retaking Crimea. Control of Crimea has been part of Russian grand strategy since 1783.

Blogger Elder Son September 05, 2016 6:29 AM  

By the way, IF Russia does anything, it is because of a direct threat of USNATO on its borders, in combination with economic sanctions, and the possibility of NATO/West freezing assets.

Russia will ride over it like a speed bump. In the case it doesn't, and USNATO moves into Russian territory (or even makes the first move), Russia WILL use tactical nukes on its own soil if it has to. IF USNATO responds in kind of Russia using tactical nukes on its own soil, all bets are off that the USA will remain untouched.

@16 You are making a big mistake on Russian capabilities. They design to make war. We design to be techno-fluffy.

Blogger Elder Son September 05, 2016 6:31 AM  

@22 It that we agree to agree, but disagree?

Blogger #issues September 05, 2016 6:40 AM  

The entire history of Europe(and humanity in general), is basically one political entity meddling in the affairs of another, covertly as well as overtly, with brief interludes of cooperation against a common foe such as the Ottoman turks, Napoleon and Hitler. European "interference" in the American revolution obviously helped the colonists triumph. As the USA established itself on the world stage, it employed the tactics and methodology gleaned from the Europeans, on an increasingly global scale.

The point is that the USA should not be criticized for the simple act of intervening in European or world affairs, but instead for the consequences of their actions.

The problem with this standard is clearly the difficulty in attributing various geopolitical developments to specific outside manipulation. An example is the varying opinions that the USA was behind the 9/11 attacks. The official USA statement denies involvement but some believe evidence suggests otherwise. The perceived degree of US culpability varies dramatically. The most important factor in judging the righteousness of an American power deployment is determining the ultimate influence of US action on the final outcome.

Blogger Elder Son September 05, 2016 6:43 AM  

And its crap like this. OMG! Putin is building nuke shelters! Because, only the US-NATO is allowed to have nuke bunkers!

VLADIMIR Putin is preparing for war with the West, security experts fear.

The Russian president has invested heavily in decking out top-secret facilities around Moscow in the event of war.


Russia is being surrounded from Estonia all the way around to Georgia by combined USNATO forces with heavy armor, and how dare Russia be a little paranoid.

See how western propaganda works?

Russia=War. Russia=War. Keep repeating. I am afraid that USNATO is going to deliberately push the wrong button, create a little spark, just to deliberately goad Russia to act, and all we are going to hear, is that Russia aggressed. Count on it.

Anonymous Philipp September 05, 2016 6:54 AM  

@27: Elder Son, absolutely right. Remember the war between Georgia and Russia? Georgia started it but the Western media generally blamed Russia for invading Georgia.

Thus I hope that Trump will get a elected. A Trump administration is far less likely to start a war with Russian than a Clinton administration.

By the way, I am not sure what you mean with your comment "It that we agree to agree, but disagree?"

Anonymous Clay September 05, 2016 6:55 AM  

The Russians are not stupid people. They seem to have a propensity for stupid laeders.

I would take back my land, and use the UN to do it for me. Belligerency gets you nothing but war. Unfortunately, submissive-smith, does the same.

All respects to Marrku...he's damn right.

Blogger #issues September 05, 2016 7:01 AM  

@24
I'm not saying the Russians lack military capability, simply that they are a step below the USA in most objective measures. The USA wastes vast amounts on "techno-fluffy" stuff, but all that aside, carriers are king. They allow the rapid deployment of firepower that tilts the battlefield in almost any conflict. In the case of a total/existential conflict, whichever belligerent deploys technological attacks(EMP, satellites, power grids, computer networks etc.) quicker and more accurately is likely to win.

Anonymous Clay September 05, 2016 7:17 AM  

Perhaps I should be more specific:

Do you think I would just see Mexico as invading Arizona as a "funny"?
(like they aren't already)

Would Russia join the battle to help them?

Ossetia? Ukraine?

Crap on them. I could care less.

Finland..I'd be the first to holler 'Help".

The rest can do on their own.

Don't even get me started about Germany. Send your Turkish battalions to fight the horde.

Anonymous Clay September 05, 2016 7:29 AM  

#issues wrote:@24

I'm not saying the Russians lack military capability, simply that they are a step below the USA in most objective measures. The USA wastes vast amounts on "techno-fluffy" stuff, but all that aside, carriers are king. They allow the rapid deployment of firepower that tilts the battlefield in almost any conflict. In the case of a total/existential conflict, whichever belligerent deploys technological attacks(EMP, satellites, power grids, computer networks etc.) quicker and more accurately is likely to win.



Mr. Issues....I have been admitting that Carriers are our greatest weapon.

Sinking one would be a total Act Of War.
I mean maybe nukes. It would be insane.

Blogger Markku September 05, 2016 7:35 AM  

There's being good at playing war on one side, and there's winning total war on the other. I know USA is pretty decent at playing war, with all communications and satellite infrastructure intact, and against a vastly inferior opponent. But what about total war, when the first move is to shoot satellites and comms towers down? From what I've heard, the overwhelming majority of US investments have gone to drone technology, which becomes scrap metal at the first minute of total war.

It seems to me that the Russians are likely to be much better prepared for total war. From what I've gathered, that's what THEY have been investing in all this time.

Blogger Tino September 05, 2016 7:41 AM  

@24's assessment is the correct one. Russia has prepared asymmetrically for this. They have Promethean weapons in reserve, and WILL atomize any force that moves onto its territory. They have sea and air superiority, and land parity. The arm-chair generals in the Pentagon running this would get a spanking like never before with a real potential for out-of-control escalation. This also ignores China, that will make common cause with Russia, and if needed, will take out the Carrier groups in the South Sea to make the point "Quit it, with the bullying!".

Blogger Phillip George September 05, 2016 7:41 AM  

MH017,

The most important factor in judging the righteousness of an American power deployment is determining the ultimate influence of US action on the final outcome.

wow, just wow. that sounds really close to the ends justify the dead David Kelly dead JFK type means. Arab Spring to you Sir. May you get democratized.

but which America? reports the Pentagon proxies are fighting CIA proxies in Syria aren't hard to conceive.

Putin played Bach's Chaconne in Palmyra.
David Kelly might have enjoyed that. He's dead for someone else's exercise in ultimate influence.




Blogger Phillip George September 05, 2016 7:45 AM  

Why Putin should win.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9b0hFIf4Zaw


Blogger Doom September 05, 2016 7:47 AM  

Russia alone? No. Russia, China, Iran? Maybe. Oh, I think they know they wouldn't get far. But they think, if they get far enough, together, then sue for peace? They might just rape and pillage their way out of their troubles (and before you blow... very possibly with the blessing of the major Western powers).

Yeah... I could see it. All them them, save Iran, have territory they could take, but maybe not hold well. I suppose Iraq is weak enough for an attack too. If they all did it at once, and got to a certain point, especially with the knobber in chief... Either him, or her if she wins... Even with Trump, couldn't stop them all at once. Choices, time limits, interference... Yeah.

Just a maybe, but just as good, or better, than the notion that Russia can't or won't. Or that it's military is all that good? Really? Just by comparison. Hey, time will tell. I have doubts they will all screw their nerve up together. Major risk. Could go very badly. Though, really, as economics are crumbling, it might be their last chance for a very long time... if ever. Russia will be muslim in rather short order if they don't do something, last I checked.

As for Russia having a claim? Vox says it isn't true, but a supporter suggests it was given away, while another indicates that Russia stole it in the first place, then displaced the true heirs, who are not Russian. So, really, who cares what Russia's claim is. Stolen is stolen.

Blogger Markku September 05, 2016 7:50 AM  

Considering we stole Finland from the Sámi, I'd be inclined to say, invaders keepers losers weepers.

Anonymous roo_ster September 05, 2016 7:53 AM  

Nato doesnt have enough armor to surround russia. The bitty states in e europe are correct to worry about russia swallowing them. I see the deployment of some few of natos armor units as rational and reasonable to keep russia from getting too frisky, as russia will take advantage of weakness if not run riot like the russophobes claim.

Anonymous Clay September 05, 2016 8:09 AM  

Hey Marrku....funny thing about the US, is you don't know WHAT they have!

Well, they tell you about it ten years later. Like, when they wheeled the F115 out of the garage. Or, the F-15. Or, the SR-22. Or the M-1A4?-

FY22 when they are telling you what they have, it always maens they have more,

Blogger Markku September 05, 2016 8:11 AM  

Their exact inventory, no. But I remember a news article, from an American source, that mentioned that some very large percentage of the military budget, at least 90% but could have been more, has gone to drone technolology. If that is still the course, then that is a huge mistake as far as total war goes.

Anonymous clay September 05, 2016 8:19 AM  

MMM...several Arabists might disagree with you Marrku.

Blogger Markku September 05, 2016 8:30 AM  

That is the "playing war against vastly inferior opponents" that I mentioned.

Blogger VD September 05, 2016 8:37 AM  

No military that can't successfully occupy either Iraq or Afghanistan has any business talking about a LAND WAR IN RUSSIA.

As Fred Reed has observed, there is stupid, there is very stupid, and there is INVADING RUSSIA.

Blogger Doom September 05, 2016 8:56 AM  

Hmm? Are we talking about the same Russia that couldn't hold Afghanistan alone? I see your point. :p

Anonymous 360 September 05, 2016 8:59 AM  

@VFM0265

I don't see how Russia is "the last bastion of Christendom" when they are actively denying Christians the right to evangelize.

Blogger Doom September 05, 2016 9:02 AM  

Mind you, I do not wish an engagement with Russia. I just don't want to allow them to do anything they please. All failed nations are potential conquerors. Russia is on some bad ropes. As is China.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan September 05, 2016 9:21 AM  

I'm sure the Russians and Chinese have noticed that American planners never seem to leave the year 1945, steam carriers to trouble spot, fly fancy airplanes from fancy airfields like its England 1945 and spend loads of money on fluff.

And the ground forces will be an army of internal occupation of Europe way before they march to Moscow.

Blogger JaimeInTexas September 05, 2016 9:27 AM  

Sinking a carrier is part of a shooting war between two warring state actors.
Carriers will not last long.

Blogger JaimeInTexas September 05, 2016 9:47 AM  

The Soviets were in Afghanistan for how long? No drones, no tech like what is available now. Then, we gave the tech to the jihadis to bring dowb the Soviet Hinds and gunships. How long after that point were the Soviets in Afghanistan?

Blogger VD September 05, 2016 9:49 AM  

Hmm? Are we talking about the same Russia that couldn't hold Afghanistan alone? I see your point. :p

Do you seriously not understand the difference between defending home territory and occupying enemy territory? We're not talking about Russia's ability to invade and occupy the USA, we are talking about the USA's ability to invade and occupy Russia.

Blogger JaimeInTexas September 05, 2016 9:51 AM  

And us doing as we please, is that a problem?

Blogger Lazarus September 05, 2016 10:07 AM  

Assessing the Russian Military as an Instrument of Power

If Russia is allowed to break free from the Empire, then this means the end for the Empire’s global domination project as other countries will inevitably follow suit. Not only that, but this would deprive the Empire from the immense Russian resources in energy, potable water, strategic metals, etc. If Russia is allowed to break free and succeed, then Europe will inevitably gravitate towards Russia due to objective economic and political factors. Losing Europe would mean the end of the AngloZionist Empire. Everybody understands that and this is why the ruling 1%ers have unleashed to most hysterical full-spectrum russophobic propaganda campaign in western history. So yes, Russia and the Empire are already at war, a war for survival from which only one side will walk away while the other will be eliminated, at least in its current political form. This war is a new type of war, however, one which is roughly 80% informational, 15% economic and 5% military. This is why the ban on the Russian paralympic team is every bit as important as the delivery of US and British counter-battery radars to the Nazi junta in Kiev.

Blogger Doom September 05, 2016 10:16 AM  

Markku,

Keepers? That's all of history. I have no problem with it, but either way. Though they stole it more recently, so the ball is still in play.

Vox,

Now THAT is true. Something about Russia... just... hard target geographically... or more by weather really, having little to do with the inhabitants. A few took it on and won, just harder barbarians. Aye, yeah, I get that. Actually I realized that when formulating. Still... had to check. Good answer, Other Tanto.

However, containment doesn't have to involve war. Or much war. I still think we should arm up the little countries, attempt to create alliances, and let them know we are gone in five, four, three, two, one. Let NATO, Europe, stand or fall on it's own. Though bigger/richer countries have to pay, but little nations I think we should arm. More expensive up front, cheaper in the long run.

Of course, doing that might just as well lead to them wanting to use their new toys and attacking Russia. Rarely works. But Europe is nuttier than we used to be, if not quite as bad as Russia and China.

Blogger Markku September 05, 2016 10:24 AM  

Though they stole it more recently, so the ball is still in play.

They originally stole it from Tatars, and kept it for a really long while. Then they donated it to what they expected to be their puppet state, that really had no claim to the area at all. It was all political theater. Then, they took it back when the supposed puppet became uppity. So, who has the most legitimate claim to the area? Tatars probably. But who's number 2? I can't really say. On one hand, Russians did give it. You shouldn't be able to take gifts back once they become inconvenient. On the other hand, the population is still overwhelmingly Russian, and THEY wanted it to return to Russia. However, it is my understanding that the remaining Tatars strongly preferred Ukraine. Because of what Russia did to them waybackwhen.

So, it's a mess. Hence, my reaction is, whoever can keep it, deserves it.

Blogger Minecraft Chuck September 05, 2016 10:38 AM  

Free East Prussia!

Blogger pyrrhus September 05, 2016 10:39 AM  

The USA's military posturing on the borders of Russia is simply an attempt to distract the booboisie while continuing to milk the US and EU populations before the Empire collapses. The US couldn't defeat Russia or China in a conventional war, and Russia has lots of tactical nukes, so nothing will happen except the continuing downward spiral of western civilization.

Blogger ZhukovG September 05, 2016 10:48 AM  

@46 Given that 'Evangelical Christian' missionaries have at best acted as enablers for pro-Western 'fifth columnists' and at worst worked as CIA assets. I fully believe Russia should deport every last one of them, but Putin tends to be a bit more tolerant of some things than I would be.

@7 George Soros either must not pay very well, or you are intentionally insulting our intelligence.

As for the Russian military, it is competent to do the job that it exists for; to defend the Russian Federation. While our society is feminizing our boys in public schools, Russian boys learn marksmanship. If a boy qualifies, he can go to one of the many 'cadet schools', for free. Not only will he get an education but also learn hand to hand combat. The Cossack cadet schools will even teach a boy horsemanship and sword juggling. Our 'Soccer Moms' would not approve.

Slava Bogu; Slava Mat Rossiya.

Blogger Doom September 05, 2016 10:50 AM  

Well, but the puppet state hasn't been a puppet state for far too long to... call it a puppet state. If they had done that right as they were breaking up, maybe. But too late now. The divorce was settled.

Blogger Doom September 05, 2016 10:58 AM  

ZhuhkovG,

Most Russians are poor beyond poor. The few that have children are unlucky or wealthy. Dying nation. You are right about the US. Which, in real terms, is also dying. I can't quite get numbers I fully trust, but constitutional Americans are all but done. It doesn't matter what a nation with the gdp of Alabama, which is depopulating in a massive hurry... or a nation that has surrendered... everything and now is trying to make the males too weak to resist in time... decide to do. One is irrelevant to the future, and one is working it's ass off to join it's bear faux enemy. I don't think it matters a bunch either way.

America might be salvageable. Russia not so much. They best get used to burqas, a ban on vodka, and beards. We mostly just need to prepare for laxity in law, morality, work ethich, and all else... worse than what is now apparent.

Anonymous Rezny September 05, 2016 11:17 AM  

@55
Tatars came in 1220'ies, we were in Crimea from 970'ies.

Look, Markku. This Russophobia only tells of your collective Gamma-ego wounds to approximately 130 million Russians just across the border, and nothing else. You don't achieve security by radiating insecurity even in sci-fi author's personal blogs, much less international diplomacy.
This whole "Russia to brutally invade and totally destroy X, Russia stole it's own patrimony Y" reeks of your leaders' and people's insecurity, these miasma of your fear make even reading what's going on in the West a daunting task because somehow half the commenters go batshit insane the R-word is uttered once.

I suspect it will only get worse once the certain insecure and fearful Black will be exchanged for a crazy old Woman of all possible options, the stench of your insignificant peoples' screaming for Hillary to spill our blood for your fears will make reading Western Internet impossible.

Tend to the Groids in your very countries for once, they are a larger threat Russia ever was to anyone for the past three decades.

Blogger Markku September 05, 2016 11:28 AM  

Go fuck yourself.

Anonymous David-093 September 05, 2016 11:31 AM  

Rezny's comment is a helpful reminder of why Russians are so disliked and distrusted by pretty much everyone.

Anonymous tublecane September 05, 2016 11:44 AM  

The Ukrainian Whatever hit when I happened to be in a particularly anti-war mood, so I was paying attention, and for the first time I noticed how dishonest were our government, media, think tanks, etc., foreign policywise, in real time. I already knew how much deception is required to run a modern democratic ("democratic") empire, but hadn't ever seen it play out before my eyes like that.

Funny thing is they are stunningly incompetent at it. But it doesn't matter, because people aren't paying much attention. A certain portion will guess, but even they will assume the "truth is somewhere in the middle."

Blogger pww September 05, 2016 11:47 AM  

As someone who's been living in Poland for 20 years I understand why people in this part of the world are very scared of the Kremlin. I can only imagine how Estonians, Latvians and people right on the Russian border must feel. History rhymes and the invasions will happen again, it's just a question of when. The Russians still believe that the Baltic states are legitimately theirs, and they only thing stopping them from invading is lack of resources. So thank God for the pummeled Russian economy.

Blogger bob k. mando September 05, 2016 11:49 AM  

51. VD September 05, 2016 9:49 AM
Do you seriously not understand the difference between defending home territory and occupying enemy territory?


to acknowledge the obvious would be to admit the point.

therefore, the obvious will be disavowed or, even better, ignored.


55. Markku September 05, 2016 10:24 AM
the population is still overwhelmingly Russian, and THEY wanted it to return to Russia.



funny how eager people are to disavow THIS part of the Declaration:
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"

because, of course, this would highlight Lincoln's role as the first American Tyrant.



58. ZhukovG September 05, 2016 10:48 AM
but Putin tends to be a bit more tolerant of some things than I would be.



damn hippy liberals.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents September 05, 2016 12:07 PM  

The idea of a bridge across the Kerch strait is interesting. The Wehrmacht constructed something kind of like an extended amusement park ride or reallly long ski lift in order to get some logistics over to the Taman peninsula. It isn't deep water, so technically there should not be any great challenge, the Japanese could do it in a couple of years.

However it would require a whole lot of basic materials such as steel and cement that would be diverted from other projects in Russia. But such a bridge, especially if there was a railroad deck, would integrate Crimea into Russia economically, and afford commercial use of the Crimean ports as well as make it trivial to roll heavy equipment from the mainland to Crimea.

Strategically such a bridge makes sense. Economically maybe not quite so much. Psychologically it makes a lot of sense. So we'll see if the Russians follow through on such a plan.

Blogger Unknown September 05, 2016 12:10 PM  

The most likely scenario is a repeat of the 2008 Russian invasion of Georgia. Russians promptly defeated Georgians but did not occupy the country. Instead, their armored columns drove around the country wreaking havoc, mostly by destroying Georgian military bases.

It is likely that such scenario would be repeated in Ukraine and in the Baltics.

Anonymous Rezny September 05, 2016 12:23 PM  

@68
Quite unlikely. The current plan seems to be just waiting.
Ukraine is rapidly disintegrating on its own. In a year or so there won't be a state to invade nor an army to fight.

Baltics are troublesome but didn't yet go full retard on its Russian half of population, so no DNR scenario. Best course of action always was to let the dogs bark at the empty place, so as the master would finally forget about them like we did.

Remember that Georgians attacked Russian troops first with heavy fire. And it occured that US were never eager for Georgia to attack Russia ever, it was all Saakashvili's creative statesmanship misenterpreting some NATO's vague reassurances.

Anonymous dagwood September 05, 2016 12:30 PM  

"Might as well give San Diego to Aztlan or Pearl Harbor to Japan."

Well, in effect, a) has already happened, and b) can be argued to be a fait accompli at least from certain perspectives.

re Crimea, after what the Tatars did to the Russians (can you spell "slave raids", "(((sale)))" to the Ottomans, and "galleys"?), they deserve whatever comes their way. If nine-year-old white boys in 2016 can be held collectively accountable for things that were done 150+ years ago by entirely different ethnicities, I see no reason for the Russkies not to extract a leetle payback. Besides, Black Sea fleet = more power for Russia = less power for (((Empire))) = good.

"I can only imagine how Estonians, Latvians and people right on the Russian border must feel."

Better a Russian occupation of the Baltics (which after all won't happen) than an invasion of "diversity", which is right around the corner. The latter will erase the Baltic peoples; the Russians might make them miserable, but they won't eradicate them.

The US is already laying the groundwork to push diversity, "tolerance," "inclusion" and "integration" (translation "where da white wimminz at?") on tiny little Estonia, one of the last nearly all-white countries left. ((( Guess who wants this so badly? )))

If you want to know the future, picture Club Swagga stomping on a white girl's face, forever. Or at least until they run out of white girls.

Blogger kurt9 September 05, 2016 12:34 PM  

Blogger "Al Fin" often blogs about Russia as well as China.

https://alfinnextlevel.wordpress.com/

Russia's problems are existential whereas China's are merely serious.

Alfin is, by far, the best "right-leaning" blog on the internet. I like his "dangerous children" idea.

Anonymous BGKB September 05, 2016 12:47 PM  

vast amounts on "techno-fluffy" stuff, but all that aside, carriers are king

Lets hope that Russia didn't by any of those US Carrier Killer Missles from China.

thinks Wahhābism, Quṭbism and all violent jihad are a result of an Anglo-Zionist conspiracy to engineer a clash of civilization

Everyone knows its a Zionist-ShabbosGoy conspiracy

3) The Ukrainians stopped them cold in the Donbas

The US Soros backed mercenaries stopped them cold in the Donbas FIFY

16 Outside of any contrived or highly specific definition of "best", every generally accepted measure of military capability favors the USA.

The Queen Berets and Tranny Portly ParratroopNigettes might have a something to say about that, or you can look at Col Tom Kratman's articles over at everyjoe.com

Russian capabilities. They design to make war. We design to be techno-fluffy.

We now design to have non Asian minorities not get lost in the woods.

varying opinions that the USA was behind the 9/11 attacks.

No one believes the US was behind 9-11, they think that jews did it given that every Israeli national miraculously managed to survive/skip work.

Anonymous Philipp September 05, 2016 1:02 PM  

@60: Actually Russia is not dying. Its birth rate has been going up again since 2000. There are now more births than deaths in Russia.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1e/Natural_Population_Growth_of_Russia.PNG/450px-Natural_Population_Growth_of_Russia.PNG

Anonymous BGKB September 05, 2016 1:03 PM  

I don't see how Russia is "the last bastion of Christendom" when they are actively denying Christians the right to evangelize.

Are they denying Christians, churchians, or NGO entryists? They don't need a Temple of the Gay Bacon Eating GRINDR Rabbi.http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/31/meet-the-grindr-rabbi-who-says-the-gay-sex-app-can-bring-jews-together.html

Blogger VFM #7634 September 05, 2016 1:07 PM  

re Crimea, after what the Tatars did to the Russians (can you spell "slave raids", "(((sale)))" to the Ottomans, and "galleys"?), they deserve whatever comes their way.

@70 dagwood
Similarly, I don't feel too bad about the brutal French occupation of Algeria considering the Barbary pirates.

I don't understand this penchant for always feeling bad for Muslims when they're beat up upon, without considering what they had done in the past that made people hate them.

Blogger Technomad September 05, 2016 1:13 PM  

You mean the Ukrainians don't like Russians? Gosh, what a surprise! I'd never have thought of such a thing! After all, the Russians were always so very good to them...

Anonymous Rezny September 05, 2016 1:18 PM  

Those pesky Americans always keeping Mississippi down. If only we would shell whites and invite China to come, surely Mississippians would be Kangs, not some Anglo-Hibernish pirate horde.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash September 05, 2016 1:23 PM  

#issues wrote:The USA wastes vast amounts on "techno-fluffy" stuff, but all that aside, carriers are king. They allow the rapid deployment of firepower that tilts the battlefield in almost any conflict.
Carriers are useless against any country that has cruise missiles and satellites. They'd be gone within the first hour of a real war with Russia. Or China, Britain, or France for that matter.

If Russia decided to "do something" about Ukraine, I would think they'd provide a few precision bombing runs to take out Ukie artillery and anti-aircraft, strike the presidential offices in Kiev, and force a negotiated settlement between the Ukrainian government and the Novorussian partisans.

I don't see that happening, however, because the US wants Ukraine destabilized and reflexively supports the least sane of possible options in the East.

Anonymous Jared September 05, 2016 1:55 PM  

"Carriers are useless against any country that has cruise missiles and satellites"

Totally true. But carriers are useful in other capacities, insofar as most countries don't have cruise missiles and satellites. If we had wise leadership (which we don't), we'd use this leverage to our advantage, instead of turning ourselves into (((Darth Vader))) needlessly.

Carriers are also good for soft power, since they can bring humanitarian relief in many forms. Also, they train lots of people in precision high-tech teamwork, which is useful in itself. Also, impressive to look at (moon landing was the greatest soft power coup in history), which is enough to make a lot of less advanced countries step back. And again, if we used this wisely, it would redound to our advantage. But of course we don't do anything wisely. But you're right, in a war against a major power, they're sitting ducks.

Blogger Were-Puppy September 05, 2016 2:45 PM  

@28 Philipp
Thus I hope that Trump will get a elected. A Trump administration is far less likely to start a war with Russian than a Clinton administration.
---

He's also more likely to keep kicking the globalist hornet nest, which might begin to untangle the US from all this crazy NATO/UN/EU insanity.

A big first step is a warrant for Soros.

Blogger Yvonne Lorenzo September 05, 2016 2:48 PM  

Christianity is returning to Russia; that will be her great strength. Will the West follow her in time?

http://thesaker.is/something-truly-amazing-happened-today/

"To see this Tuvan Buddhist make the sign of the Cross in the Orthodox manner sent an electric shock through the Russian blogosphere: everybody felt that something amazing had happened.

"I can only imagine the horror, outrage and despair Shoigu’s gesture will trigger in the pro-Western Russian 'liberal intelligentsia' and in the western capitals. In placing himself and all of Russia in God’s hands, Shoigu declared a spiritual, cultural and civilizational war on the Empire. And just for that, he will go down in history as one of Russia’s greatest men."

Anonymous David-093 September 05, 2016 2:52 PM  

DC HAS kept Mississippi down. It took the South a century to get back on its feet economically after the War for Southern Independence. They have no more love for DC than Ukraine has for Russia, and rightly so.

Blogger Were-Puppy September 05, 2016 2:53 PM  

@52 JaimeInTexas
And us doing as we please, is that a problem?
---

Yes. Especially when we are being used as the hammer for the NWO.

Blogger Were-Puppy September 05, 2016 2:59 PM  

@63 David-093
Rezny's comment is a helpful reminder of why Russians are so disliked and distrusted by pretty much everyone.
---

It's amusing he thinks Markku is American

Blogger Were-Puppy September 05, 2016 3:11 PM  

@77 Rezny
Those pesky Americans always keeping Mississippi down. If only we would shell whites and invite China to come, surely Mississippians would be Kangs, not some Anglo-Hibernish pirate horde.
---

Now you're just blather stupidly. Going to call Mississippians yanks next?

Anonymous Rezny September 05, 2016 3:40 PM  

@82
The Ukraine means Borderland, you dense burgerman. You know nothing about us yet pretend to judge.
Do you know how many Ukraines there were in Muscovy?
Five.
Five Ukraines.
Nemets Ukraine with Livonia and Sweden, Oka Ukraine with Crimean Khanate, Lithuanian Ukraine with Lithuania, Ryazan Ukraine with Nogays and Volga Tatars and finally the Polish Ukraine. Yes, the current one - a small piece of it along the Dniepr. Literally borderland region. You have at least two Ukraines already, burgerman, with Canada and Mexico.
And that's only Russian Ukraines, don't let me started on Croatian-Bosnian-Serbian dozen Ukraines.
Gogol, Chekhov, Korolev and others were Malorussians aka Small Russians. And that's considering Kiev region was Malorussia, Ukraine was to the east and south of it. Calling Galicia Ukraine would be like calling Massachusetts the Rio Grande frontier.

And a circus of freaks with ambitions were Ukrainians, castouts from Russian culture eagerly waiting for some Turkish or Austrian paycheck for a failure. Like blacks dreaming of some New Africa from Arkansas to Virginia or something, instead of integrating and contributing.

When you'll have a coup from your ultra-proggs and they tear a good chunk of the South and Mid-wWest and make it into a New Africa, with Ebonics as state enforced language, your children perhaps will understand why nobody in Russia was keen on burgermen interfering in strictly Russian business. And why seeing thing like Kyiv instead of Kiev or Da Hood instead of Atlanta burns one's eyes.

Especially why you can't really tolerate this New Africa that imagines itself as far as Alaska, while killing normal American people there with rocket artillery and terror squads of useful idiots, while China and Russia totally approve and send more weapons.

*84
It's amusing you believe me to mistake a Finn for an American. Americans aren't as irrationally scared of Russia as the border peoples.

Blogger Were-Puppy September 05, 2016 3:48 PM  

@86 Rezny

Ok, my bad. I misunderstand your posts.

Blogger justaguy September 05, 2016 3:50 PM  

The modern CVBG is a technological and warfare integration wonder of the modern world. Technology has not rendered it useless. The ocean/air interface is not transparent and satellites do not automatically find everything in the ocean over tens of thousands of square miles. With a nominal several hundred mile radius for air operations and about 30 knots constant speed, finding the carrier and its escorts by satellite depends far more on weather than technology.

After the CVBG (carrier battle group) is found, then the problem of getting enough non-nuclear missiles to target it to overwhelm the advanced air defenses and combat air patrol. Lots of theory and war gaming in the 1980s when US strategy involved taking carriers against USSR in war. The basics still hold today, how to target and get enough weaponry to target—think in terms of at least hundreds and hundreds of accurately targeted missiles—fleets of missile launching aircraft etc.

Technology on both offense and defense for the CVBG is always changing, but sinking a carrier with today’s non-nuclear technology is a very hard problem. Places where there is limited sea space or operations that limit timing makes carrier operations more difficult or allows better targeting/concentrating missiles at the CVBG, but the modern CVBG is not just a soft target mobile airfield if it has room to run.


After the CVBG (carrier battle group) is found, then the problem of getting enough non-nuclear missiles to target it to overwhelm the advanced air defenses and combat air patrol. Lots of theory and wargaming in the 1980s when US strategy involved taking carriers against USSR in war.

Technology on both offense and defense for the CVBG has changed, but sinking a carrier is still hard problem. Places where there is limited sea space or operations that limit timing makes carrier operations more difficult, but the modern CVBG is not just a soft target mobile airfield.

Blogger Dire Badger September 05, 2016 4:03 PM  

The Neocucks are desperate to restart the cold war, because Russophobia is better than people noticing what they are turning America into.

Blogger Dire Badger September 05, 2016 4:06 PM  

@75-
One could say the same thing about Dajoos

Blogger ZhukovG September 05, 2016 4:24 PM  

@60 As Rezny can confirm, yes the average Russian does not enjoy as materially wealthy a standard of living as the average American. However, Russia isn't dying, they are not doomed. Frankly they are doing pretty well for a country that endured 70 years of Soviet Socialism and then 10 years being gang raped by Wall Street.



Blogger Azimus September 05, 2016 4:49 PM  

1. Markku September 05, 2016 4:56 AM
Can confirm. The news that I hear from them indicate that all the time. Their internal cohesion is hanging by a thread


Markku, as a Finn, this all is a lot more "real" to you than it is here in the Upper Midwest of the US. But from where I sit, I would make two observations: 1) you're probably correct that Russia is an internal mess, and 2) the people who have been saying this for the last 60 years are also right - and nothing comes of it.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash September 05, 2016 5:44 PM  

Rezny wrote:. Americans aren't as irrationally scared of Russia as the border peoples.
Why on Earth would the peoples that border Russia be afraid of Russia? No possible answer but irrationality!

justaguy wrote:After the CVBG (carrier battle group) is found, then the problem of getting enough non-nuclear missiles to target it to overwhelm the advanced air defenses and combat air patrol. Lots of theory and wargaming in the 1980s when US strategy involved taking carriers against USSR in war.

You're cute. Why non-nuclear, pray tell? Russia has already declared their intention to use tactical nukes in the event of war with us.

Anonymous BGKB September 05, 2016 6:20 PM  

88 getting enough non-nuclear missiles to target it to overwhelm the advanced air defenses and combat air patrol

The 80s called. Someone missed the news about China making a missile specifically to kill US carriers. http://thediplomat.com/2015/04/confirmed-china-deploys-new-carrier-killer-missile/

Do you think Russia could afford a few?

Anonymous Rezny September 05, 2016 6:48 PM  

@93
Indeed irrational.
One might say joining an anti-Russian alliance and persecuting local Russian minority while simultaneously bordering said nuclear power and being a country 1/200 of territory, economy and military power of Russia would be a plain suicidal behaviour. Not any country can allow itself a privilege of suicide by Russia, but some try hard to, inviting American troops in.

Supposedly USA risks its very existence to allow countries the like of Latvia or Poland to talk big and drag it into a MAD situation.
Supposedly. It reminds me of some Anglo behaviour. http://i.imgur.com/2CK7MvC.png

Blogger Snidely Whiplash September 05, 2016 7:37 PM  

Let's just say it, @Rezny. Any country that borders Russia fears Russia, and justly so. There are no countries bordering Russia that have not been seriously invaded, and with the exception of the Finns (depending on how you score the Finnish war and annexation of Finland). conquered by Russia.

Fear of Russia is the sanest aspect of Baltic politics. Latvia knows they would not last a day in the event of a war with Russia. You may claim, and I actually believe, that Russia is not a current threat, but they are a perennial threat, and it's not a bet Latvia or Lithuania can afford to lose.

Blogger Matamoros September 05, 2016 8:18 PM  

A lot of disinfo in this one by Sakar.

#13 Crimea was first settled by Russians after Sviatoslav destroyed Khazars back in 968.

I'm pro-Russian on many things, but there is an awful lot of disinfo from the Russian side on this that inverts the truth. In fact, the Russians have always been masters of disinfo.

Here is some real history for you:

In 968 there was no Russia. Crimea belonged to Ukraine then. They are the Rus who defeated the Khazars. The Muscovites were renamed by Peter the Great the Russians to tap into Ukrainian history.

http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/05/14/how-moscow-hijacked-the-history-of-kyivan-rus/

Blogger Markku September 05, 2016 8:22 PM  

Azimus wrote:the people who have been saying this for the last 60 years are also right - and nothing comes of it.

Yes, they are used to it and consider it normalcy. In a way that USA never would. So, the nation will not tear itself apart because, well, what would that look like? They are a single people. They have no further division to make. In similar circumstances USA would divide along many lines. Northeners, southeners, blacks, Mexicans. Each group would think it can govern itself better than the collective of them can.

The point is just that this is not the time of Russia to do any actions that decrease the internal cohesion even further. To invade in order to permanently annex, wouldn't make strategic sense.

Blogger Matamoros September 05, 2016 8:29 PM  

There is a lot of talk about NATO & Russia. Here is another interesting article: HOW PUTIN KILLED NATO’S AGREEMENT WITH RUSSIA

http://www.newsweek.com/how-putin-killed-natos-agreement-russia-466262

Blogger Kona Commuter September 05, 2016 9:10 PM  

I'm not ex military, nor am I an armchair General. I just like to read from a wide range of sources and opinions about diverse subjects and I like to think that I am able to think for myself and form my own opinions

From what I can gather Russia isn't the USSR. So all the Cold War rhetoric should be cast aside. "We" won. USSR is no more. I've read that Russia's military is set up for defence. They don't have the resources to have it otherwise even if they wanted to. I believe that setting up solely for defence makes it difficult for belligerent powers as no resources are wasted on ability to deploy forces to the other side of the globe.

I just don't see Russia as threatening anyone other than saying "If you wanna fight we're not going to fuck around". Further, I'm surprised that no Russian tech has shown up in Afghanistan or Iraq.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash September 05, 2016 11:13 PM  

Matamoros wrote:There is a lot of talk about NATO & Russia. Here is another interesting article: HOW PUTIN KILLED NATO’S AGREEMENT WITH RUSSIA

http://www.newsweek.com/how-putin-killed-natos-agreement-russia-466262

Newsweek? Really? I thought they had finally died of nobody-reads-this-piece-of-crapitis.

Funny how an article listing all of Russia's violation of the "spirit" but not the letter of its treaty obligations, never once mentions the US (not NATO. NATO is not an independent thing) interfering in the affairs of Russia's neighbors, violating both the letter and the "spirit" of the accord.

And, of course, a demand to permanently station troops in the Baltics. What could possibly go wrong?

Blogger Ken Prescott September 06, 2016 12:25 AM  

@93

"You're cute. Why non-nuclear, pray tell? Russia has already declared their intention to use tactical nukes in the event of war with us."

Why non-nuclear?

Because there is no guarantee of a successful attack against a Carrier Strike Group even if you use nuclear weapons. And that's the biggest damn deterrent to nuclear warfare at sea.

All war is politics by other means. The political price tag of launching a conventional attack on a carrier strike group within the context of a Russo-American war is nil, even if you fail. The political price tag of launching a nuclear strike is YUUGE, even if you succeed; if you fail, you pay an even higher price tag, because you have thrown you Sunday Punch and come up short--that's not a recipe for defeating the enemy's will. Additionally, you've just managed to show that (a) you really are the Crazy Mofo everyone says you are and (b) that you are a menace to any and all shipping.

The flag of the Russian Federation, for all the international goodwill Pooty-Poot would get in this scenario, might as well be the Jolly Roger.

Finding carrier strike group: hard. Finding a known site on land: easy-peasy.

The US would be able to lob nukes at Russian Naval Aviation and Long-Range Aviation airfields until the cows come home, and the rest of the world would either just not give a damn or loudly cheer.

And China would be able to simply walk into Siberia after that.

More to the point: America would be perfectly copacetic with China doing that.

@94

"The 80s called. Someone missed the news about China making a missile specifically to kill US carriers. http://thediplomat.com/2015/04/confirmed-china-deploys-new-carrier-killer-missile/

"Do you think Russia could afford a few?"

Sure. They could afford a few. Hell, they could afford the entire production run. Problem is, over-the-horizon targeting is a non-trivial problem, even for the YJ-18. That's because you aren't shooting at a target, you're shooting at a POSSIBLE future target position; you firing tactics will need to account for multiple potential future target locations.

Antiship cruise missiles are not Brylcreem; just a dab ain't gonna do ya. You need hundreds of the damn things just to have one effective salvo with a reasonable chance of putting steel onto the target. Multiply by the number of salvos needed. Count out how many of these alleged wunderwaffen are actually in existence. Notice that there are insufficient missiles of this category available worldwide for more than one salvo. (Indeed, at the lower estimate of warshots built, there may not be enough for one fully-effective salvo.)

Antiship missiles have been retreating from OTH ranges for quite some time for precisely this reason; firing even a not-fully-effective salvo means having a very high chance of not hitting the enemy, and firing a "reasonably effective salvo" is self-disarmament, with a non-zero chance of either missing the intended target, or failing to penetrate its defenses.

Blogger Stephen Davenport September 06, 2016 1:09 AM  

Nothing wrong with the Crimea before the Russkies stole it.

The Crimea is Russian. It has been since 1783. If you want to be taken seriously, you should probably not lead with silly falsehoods like that.

Hmm, seem to recall VD, that a treaty was signed stating Crimea belonged to the Ukraine and not Russia, get your facts straight. Russia STOLE it from the rightful owners son.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash September 06, 2016 3:50 AM  

Stephen Davenport wrote:Russia STOLE it from the rightful owners son.
Who is the rightful owner?
The man who can take it and keep it.
Ukraine doesn't like it, they can take it back.

Blogger JaimeInTexas September 06, 2016 12:02 PM  

@83. Were-Puppy

I also see as a problem. It was a badly constructed rhetorical question on my part.

Blogger Eric Johnson September 06, 2016 2:37 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Eric Johnson September 06, 2016 2:47 PM  

To say that Ukrainians were brainwashed into being Russophobes is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard. I understand why a lot of people don't want to goto war with Russia. It is strategically unfeasible what with the current condition of the U.S. military and the fact that NATO "allies" (Briton is a good example here) keep slashing their defense budgets. It will take a good 3-5 years to get the U.S. military back into proper shape and on that I am being very optimistic. The only way to really deliver a blow right now would be to crank up oil production to the point where the global price of crude drops to $20-25 a BBL.

All of this ignores how actions of the past shape our current attitudes on things. Stalin murdered over seven million Ukrainians through forced starvation. That happened in less then a year. Death Camps run by the SS couldn't move that fast. Stalin then ordered the NKVD to go out and deal with all the homeless children produced by his Harvet of Sorrow by having them dragged off the street and shot. Ukrainian solders drafted into the Red Army was used as cannon fodder. From the time of the Czars to the fall of of the Berlin Wall, the Ukrainian people have lived with Moscow's boot pushing down on their neck. At worst genocide, at best second class status in the Worker's Paradise. No wonder these people hate Putin and anything that has a slight connection with the Kremlin.

To blame Ukraine's overthrow of a pro Moscow dictatorship on supposed EU globalists just shows that the new masters in the Politburo still has a few useful idiots they can count on.

Blogger Mark Citadel September 15, 2016 12:13 PM  

What Russia wants most is for America to start worrying about its own sphere of natural influence (i.e - the abuse of America by Mexico and its souther neighbors) rather than starting up wars and maidans across the world at the behest of Israel and John McCain.

There should not be American soldiers in Europe, and Soros needs to be extradited to face the court order outstanding against him in Moscow.

Post a Comment

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

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts