We are, literally, on the eve of destruction. Now is the time for the kind of political maturity leaders rarely demonstrate.
Ballistic missile submarine USS Rhode Island returns to Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay after three months at sea, March 20, 2013. (U.S. Navy, James Kimber)
By Scott Ritter
Special to Consortium News
Wars should be avoided at all costs. Nuclear conflict should never be contemplated.
These two truisms are often spoken, but rarely adhered to. Wars occur all too frequently, and so long as nations possess nuclear weapons, their use is contemplated on a continuous basis.
The ongoing Ukrainian-Russian conflict has put the world’s two largest nuclear powers on opposing sides, with the U.S. supporting a Ukrainian military that has become a de facto proxy of NATO, and Russia viewing its struggle with Ukraine as including the “collective West.”
Since the initiation of Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine, both the U.S. and Russia have played their respective nuclear cards.
Russia has made it clear that any intervention by NATO would be considered an existential threat to the Russian nation, thereby invoking one of the two clauses in the Russian nuclear posture in which nuclear weapons could be used. (The other would be in response to a nuclear attack against Russia.)
The U.S. has made it clear that any attack by Russia against a NATO member would invoke Article 5 of the NATO charter (the “collective defense” clause), resulting in the totality of the alliance’s military capabilities, including nuclear weapons, being made available in response.
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky joins NATO meeting in Madrid in June via video link. (President of Ukraine)
So far, neither side has directly challenged the red line of the other, although the United States has edged right up to it with the provision of tens of billions of dollars of advanced weaponry, financial assistance and intelligence and communication support for Ukraine.
This material support isn’t provided for Ukraine’s defense, but rather to enable Ukraine to retake territory lost to Russia and to inflict losses among the Russian forces of such a magnitude as to weaken Russia for an extended period.
From the Western perspective, the massive infusion of military aid appears to be succeeding. Ukraine is perceived as having pushed back an initial Russian effort to capture Kiev in the opening weeks of the conflict. It is also seen as having held back a concerted Russian offensive in the Donbass long enough to deploy a reconstituted army — trained and equipped by NATO — which succeeded in recapturing the totality of the Kharkov region.
The fact that the Kiev “victory” has been described by Russia as a strategic feint, and not a defeat, and that the Kharkov offensive, together with a parallel failed offensive in Kherson, cost Ukraine so many casualties that it was more Pyrrhic than political in nature, is secondary.
The Kremlin, March 2016. (State Department)
From the perspective of both Ukraine and NATO, the Russian army is no longer viewed as invincible, but actually vulnerable. Both NATO and Ukraine appear ready to continue an aggressive military posture designed to attrite Russian forces while recapturing Ukrainian territory.
For its part, Russia believes that it has the upper hand in the conflict, having both inflicted massive casualties on the Ukrainian military and seizing control of approximately 20 percent of Ukrainian territory.
Moreover, by holding referenda in the occupied territories about joining Russia (all of which passed by an overwhelming majority), Russia has changed the very nature of the conflict, transforming it from a fight between Ukraine and Russia on Ukrainian soil, to an existential battle with the “collective West” over Mother Russia itself.
Donate to CN’s 2022 Fall Fund Drive
Russia has also ordered a partial mobilization of some 300,000 troops which, once trained and deployed into the Ukraine theater of operations, will provide sufficient military power to successfully complete Russia’s original tasks — demilitarization and denazification.
NATO and Ukraine both believe that the Russian forces, even after receiving the 300,000 mobilized troops, will not be able to defeat Ukraine. This inability to achieve the desired objectives, they believe, will compel Russia to resort to the use of tactical nuclear weapons on Ukrainian targets in order to break the will to resist on the part of the Zelensky government.
Nuclear Postures
U.S. President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin meeting at the at the Villa La Grange in Geneva, June 16, 2021, with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken on left, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, right. (White House/ Adam Schultz)
The reality, however, is that Russian nuclear doctrine does not allow for such a scenario. Indeed, there are only two conditions where Russian nuclear doctrine permits the employment of nuclear weapons.
No 1. “[I]n response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and/or its allies,” the 2020 Russian Nuclear Posture document states, or
No 2. “in the event of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is in jeopardy.”
U.S. nuclear posture, however, does allow it.
“[T]he United States will maintain the range of flexible nuclear capabilities,” the 2018 U.S. Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) declared, “needed to ensure that nuclear or non-nuclear aggression against the United States, allies, and partners will fail to achieve its objectives and carry with it the credible risk of intolerable consequences for potential adversaries now and in the future.”
It should be noted that the 2018 NPR was promulgated during the administration of President Donald Trump. Although the Biden administration initiated the NPR process in September 2021, it has yet to publish an updated document.
By ignoring stated Russian nuclear policy, and instead mirror-imaging U.S. nuclear policy onto Russian behavior, the U.S., NATO and Ukraine are setting themselves — and the world — up for disaster.
Russian bombardment of telecommunications antennas in Kiev, March 1. (Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine/Wikimedia Commons)
Indeed, using a hypothetical Russian tactical nuclear attack on Ukraine as a working assumption, the Biden administration has developed a range of non-nuclear options in response, including — according to Newsweek — a “decapitation” strike targeting Russian leadership, to include President Vladimir Putin.
According to Jake Sullivan, President Joe Biden’s national security adviser, the White House has “communicated directly, privately, to the Russians at very high levels that there will be catastrophic consequences for Russia if they use nuclear weapons in Ukraine.”
Sullivan noted that the Biden administration has “spelled out in greater detail exactly what that would mean” in its communications with the Kremlin. Just to be clear: the White House has communicated to Russia its intent to respond in a non-nuclear manner to any potential Russian nuclear attack against Ukraine.
Andrey Gurulyov
Scott Ritter and Andrey Gurulyov on “The Scott Ritter Show,” Sept. 29.
Enter Andrey Gurulyov, a former Russian general officer and current member of the Russian Duma.
Gurulyov is from the Russia United Party (Putin’s party), and is said to be closely connected to the senior Russian leadership. He gave me a wide-ranging interview on the Sept. 29 edition of my “Scott Ritter Show” (a joint effort with Russian producers of “Solovyov Live” featuring the well-known Russian commentator Vladimir Solovyov). We discussed the future of Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine in the aftermath of the referenda and partial mobilization.
Gurulyov indicated that given the reality that the Ukrainian military was operating as a de facto proxy of NATO, the “demilitarization” task set forth by Putin in invading Ukraine now meant the complete destruction of the Ukrainian military.
Likewise, given that the Russian government has labelled the government of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky a Nazi regime, “denazification” would require regime change in Kiev and Russian troops advancing up to the western reaches of Ukraine that border NATO itself.
These objectives would be accomplished through a strategic air campaign that would destroy the totality of Ukraine’s critical infrastructure, severely impacting command and control and logistics of the Ukrainian military.
According to Gurulyov, such a campaign could last up to three weeks, after which the Ukrainian military would be a sitting duck for the newly reinforced Russian military.
Russian Duma in Moscow. (Wikimedia Commons)
Gurulyov was confident that the reinforced Russian military would be able to defeat the NATO-enhanced Ukrainian armed forces without resorting to the use of tactical nuclear weapons.
Indeed, Gurulyov was adamant that tactical nuclear weapons would never — and indeed, could never — be used by Russia against Ukraine.
He was less so when it came to using tactical nuclear weapons against NATO.
Gurulyov was convinced that the nature of Russia’s military victory over Ukraine would be so decisive that NATO might feel compelled to intervene to stop Russia.
If NATO were to indeed dispatch troops into Ukraine, and those troops engaged in large-scale ground conflict with Russian forces, then Gurulyov envisioned that Russian nuclear weapons could, in fact, be used against NATO targets.
Gurulyov was convinced that the United States, fearing Russian strategic nuclear-retaliation capabilities, would not unleash its own nuclear arsenal against Russia, even if NATO were struck by Russian nuclear weapons. But here Gurulyov was operating from a false premise — U.S. nuclear doctrine clearly states that “They [Russia ] must understand that there are no possible benefits from non-nuclear aggression or limited nuclear escalation.”
Indeed, U.S. nuclear doctrine emphasizes that “any nuclear escalation will fail to achieve their objectives and will instead result in unacceptable consequences for them [Russia].”
From these two fundamental misunderstandings — that a) Russia could be preparing to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine that would generate a non-nuclear response on the part of the U.S., and b) Russia believes that the U.S. would not respond with nuclear weapons if Russia were to use its own nuclear arsenal against NATO, the world now faces the real prospect of imminent nuclear conflict between the U.S. and Russia.
From the U.S. perspective, Russia’s unwillingness to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine underscores the overall impotence of Russia and its leadership, and therefore opens the door for decisive NATO intervention, including boots on the ground, in case of any Russian non-nuclear threat against Kiev itself.
From the Russian perspective, the documented U.S. reluctance to employ nuclear weapons in the case of a decisive Russian military victory over Ukraine opens the door for Russia ’s use of a tactical nuclear weapon against NATO in the case of a major NATO military intervention in Ukraine.
From this foundation of misrepresentation and misunderstanding only disaster can ensue.
Putin, in announcing the formal incorporation of Kherson, Zaporizhia, Donetsk and Lugansk into the Russian Federation, has turned up the rhetorical heat regarding Ukraine and the “collective West.” Soon words will be transformed into action, initiating the very scenarios U.S. military planners and Russian authorities such as Andrey Gurulyov have spoken about.
We are, literally, on the eve of destruction. Now is the time for the kind of political maturity leaders rarely demonstrate. The onus is on Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin to make sure that even while events on the ground in Europe devolve into chaos and violence, the leaders of the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals do not allow emotion to get the better of reason. The consequences of failure in this regard are, for humanity, terminal.
Scott Ritter is a former U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD. His most recent book is Disarmament in the Time of Perestroika, published by Clarity Press.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
Donate Today to CN’s
2022 Fall Fund Drive
Donate securely by credit card or check by clicking the red button:
Scott
I’d love to her your analysis on what stage the Ukraine war is now in from the Russian perspective. If the four regions are annexed, then I presume that they are now part of the Russian homeland from Russia’s perspective any attacks on them would be attacks on the Russian homeland. What are the implications and the expected consequences? Who will now be the targets of denazification and demilitarization?
Another question, why has Russia essentially left the Kiev airport untouched – at least as far as I have ever heard? It seems to be a place where Western weapons flow in and all manner of officials – including very high-risk Americans and Europeans – use to drop in for photo-op meetings with Zelensky? Russia must have weapons to destroy flightlines. Is this a card they are holding back fr some reason?
Thanks
War is NOT a ‘play station’ game…so careful what to wish for.
Is there anyone in the US government with enough sense and sufficiently little arrogance to understand that provoking this war was a terrible mistake and that it must be ended? If anyone knows of such a person, please come forward and tell us who he/she is. I know of o such person.
Russia and the US have the capacity to destroy the planet. The responsibility is theirs to prevent WW3 – heed the warnings of history.
If interested in reading more on this subject search: A free ebook: The Pattern Of History and Fate of Humanity
When one is confronted by a gang (NATO) you choose one likely victim and destroy it. If Russia decides to bring an end to Brussels, nuclear or not, there will be no repercussions because Russia will have her finger on the button stating “who’s next?” There will be no takers. No one wants to die especially knowing that the whole conflict was based on lies and deception. So, I have to agree with the Russian ex General.
I’m not so sure you are right on this one Scott.
I agree the natural conclusion is this shit storm should be the responsibility of these who leaders. However this incident is the result of the reality that things are not as they seem. Biden isn’t calling the shots and we all should know it. He is more likely engaging by rule by the mob. See the history of lies about Ukraine membership in NATO. Putin on the other hand is a madman much like every one else his age that has lived life as an intelligence officer. We don’ have the room for me to list them.
This situation has been created by lie after lie and innuendo. It has been driven by the same blind fury of anti-communist zealots who hijacked the U.S. government long ago just at the end of WWII.
Time to put the government on notice, for two reasons. One being that, enough is enough and our government needs to tend to business here at home. The other reason, maybe it’s time to flush the Deep government fascists out of hiding and hold them accountable.
I would highly recommend that anyone who hasn’t read this article do so immediately.
hXXps://apjjf.org/2012/10/39/Peter-Dale-Scott/3835/article.html Mr. Scott presents as coherent an explanation of our reality as anyone in government ever attempted.
Especially in light of the fact that our government refuses to tell us the truth about their activities.
Where is that mature and rational person in Washington to be found?
renate, I asked the same question before realizing that you had asked it. Thanks for asking the right question. I hope that we are overlooking, or ignorant of, this “statesman”. The US no longer practices diplomacy. Our State Department is infested with neocon warmongers who lack the most basic skills of diplomacy. All Blinken and his fellow incompetents do is threaten those who fail to obey US orders. It is the behavior of a preschool child.
Henry Kissinger. But I can’t believe I’m saying it.
I can’t believe you said it either.
Just keep looking…
Putin’s behavior has been measured and rational every step of the way. He tried peaceful negotiations many times viz Minsk 1&2 and at least 3 times post February 24, which were all sabotaged by US/NATO, even wrecked personally by Boris Johnson visiting Kiev as a peace accord seemed imminent.
Biden is demented and not a decision maker anyway. Are his rabid Russophobic neocon puppet masters sane and rational and interested in de-escalation? Experience indicates not.
A tiny handful of neocons threaten the nuclear extinction of all humanity. What to do about it? The answer is obvious.
Neither Bojo nor his successor nor any NATO “leaders” are actual decision makers, everything they do and say, even if it destroys their own European economies, are determined by the US neocons. A smart bull does not focus on the waving red flag, it targets the one holding it.
you are right with every word you typed!
“The answer is obvious.” ???
What?
Reciprocate on the Baltic Pipeline?
Raise the world price of oil to $300/b?
The neocon ideological cancer has metastasized to every institutional organ of our body politic and pop culture. Only a god … or maybe Russia … can save us now.
Continually ignored is the reason for Russia’s Special Military Operation. Putting aside NATO’s (well the US actually) broken promises about NATO expansion, the real problem started with Obama, via Cookies Nuland, and his 2014 coup in Ukraine. The official narrative, of course, is that President Yanukovych was pro-Russian. Anyone who has taken the time to understand what the EU/IMF was offering, and the economic consequences for Ukraine of accepting the offer, would understand why it was rejected. Yanukovych, like his predecessors were primarily pro-themselves. The EU deal would have smashed the economy in Yanukovych’s power base – the Donbass – and have bankrupted the country. The coup achieved the bankruptcy, but has only partially destroyed the Donbass economy. When the Donbass rejected the coup and voted to separate, the West rejected any notion of self determination for the regions along with Crimea.
Russia’s mistake was not accepting their request at that time. The entire NATO narrative is a steaming pile of male bovine excrement. Kosovo under NATO occupation, with no referendum, declares independence from Serbia. That’s OK. Scotland, with its sycophantic EU leadership can vote to separate. Quebec, in Canada can vote to separate. Catalonia after a referendum cannot. Either you have the right to self determination under the UN Charter, or you don’t. Every single “Western liberal democracy” is occupied territory of the international banking cartel. Those, such as the BRICS, who refuse to submit, are targets of their pit bull -NATO.
I’m a Canadian, lived in Europe 50 years ago – when only Germany was completely occupied by the bankers/US – and traveled there many times in past. I have also traveled to the US on countless occasions. Today, it would not bother me one iota if all of the capitals of the “Western liberal democracies” vanished from the planet. The rot would, hopefully, be removed. All of these governments have sacrificed the well-being of “the nation” on the altar of the vampire squid, aka finance capitalism and their war machine. The like of Putin, Xi, and even Meloni scare the crap out of them for stating the obvious.
hxxps://projects.iq.harvard.edu/futureofmedia/index-us-mainstream-media-ownership
If you care to know who owns your mainstream media please see the link above. No wonder Americans can’t think for themselves – all these rich folk and their embedded “journalists” telling us what’s what – such a sham!
Mr. Ritter,
Thank you for an excellent analysis of the extremely dangerous situation in Ukraine. It is, indeed, “…the time for the kind of political maturity leaders rarely demonstrate”. The question presented is whether the US has leaders with that political maturity. I do not see any such leadership on display in the White House or the State Department. I know of no reason to expect such leadership to come from the “intelligence agencies”, the credibility of which has been reduced to a level hovering near the zero mark. The military? It seems to me that most of that leadership is more interested in promoting weapons sales on behalf of their past or future employers than actually concerning themselves with exercising whatever leadership skills they may have in the interests of the people. Biden has filled the State Department with neocon warmongers who have no diplomatic skills. All Blinken and his fellow incompetents know to do is threaten those who fail to follow US orders, the essence of the illegitimate “rules based international order” concocted by the US. It appears to me that the US “leadership” is so blinded by arrogance and false belief that the US is invincible as to make it impossible to even consider the exercise of diplomacy and compromise. I hope I am wrong.
until wars cease to be money makers for govts,they will not end. nukes are a fairy tale. no one would use them unless its to self destruct. destroying the present corrupt humanity sounds like a good idea though ,to start over.
Putin’s behavior has been measured and rational every step of the way. He tried peaceful negotiations many times viz Minsk 1&2 and at least 3 times post February 24, which were all sabotaged by US/NATO, even wrecked personally by Bojo the clown visiting Kiev as a peace accord seemed imminent.
Biden is demented and not a decision maker anyway. Are his rabid Russophobic neocon handlers sane and rational and interested in de-escalation? Experience indicates not.
A tiny handful of neocons threaten the nuclear extinction of all humanity. What to do about it? The answer is obvious.
One factor left out of this geopolitical imbroglio has been the Russian people. First time around the Ukie army invaded in 2014. They were in high spirits and certain of victory. But things didn’t quite work out. A new airport had been built in 2012 for the European football championships and it was here that the Ukies were stopped in their tracks by the rag-tag Donetsk militias. The Russia authorities were somewhat dubious about getting involved but eventually popular opinion in Russia forced the hand of the government. Volunteers from inside Russia and local areas in the City began to build up their defences. Guns and other equipment also began to cross the border.
The Ukies got stranded and surrounded and a long way from home. A familiar tale about invasions of Russia. First came the battle of Ilovaisk and then an encirclement at the rail junction of Debaltsevo which put the Ukies in full retreat. All of which reminded me of the American civil war and the battle of Bull Run or as it is sometimes called, Manassas.
Wars against Russia seem to have a habit of turning out badly for the invaders. Charles the III of Sweden, Napoleon and his Grand Army, and the Hitler’s wehrmacht.
Biden is almost certainly too far gone in his dementia to be able to deal rationally with Putin, and even if he were mentally able he is not psychologically able, and would also be under enormous pressure from his State department warmongers to escalate or push Putin too far. Therefore, there is virtually no chance of any ‘political maturity’ coming from the US, in my view.
Equally, and possibly more, problematic is the US’ attitude to the Russian nuclear doctrine. It seems that they refuse to accept it, projecting their own posture onto the Russians in order to justify their own more aggressive position. This is in itself a form of escalation, and could well be the key to the problem. But there is no way Russia can demonstrate this fundamental difference in doctrine to the US.
The Russian position/belief/hope(?) on believing the US would not use (any kind of) nukes against Russia if Russia used tactical nukes against NATO forces in Ukraine, has some merit as there are cooler heads in the Pentagon that would be extremely reluctant to use nukes in any scenario barring a direct attack on the US itself – but it is an impossible gamble for Russia to take because the deranged neocons in Washington might just call their bluff and strike without considering the consequences.
The US has demonstrated many times that it believes it can handle the consequences of its actions – and in recent years has moved away from the mutually assured destruction belief to one that postures that it might be survivable, or even winnable. It is this change in thinking that poses the largest threat, and underpins the US belligerence and recklessness that might get us all killed.
Everyone should read the statement by the Secretary-General of the United Nations regarding Russia’s annexation of four regions of Ukraine. Next, listen to and read accounts by Russian soldiers who have called home to their families from Ukraine or posted on social media regarding what they have seen, heard and learned from their invasion of Ukraine. You may need to find a speaker of Russian to translate for you, but it’s worth listening to first-hand accounts from people on the ground, not from the “media”.
“We are, literally, on the eve of destruction. Now is the time for the kind of political maturity leaders rarely demonstrate. The onus is on Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin …”
Rarely demonstrate? If you take into account all the wars from the Trojan War in 1299 BC all the way up to and including the Russia-Ukraine war of 2022 AD, the political maturity of the world leaders in all that time counted for nothing. To think, or even hope, that it’s going to be any different this time makes no sense at all. Unless, of course, Scott Ritter inserted it as a bit of dark humor, which makes it very funny indeed.
For the most part, humanity’s process of education has been towards destruction or maintining a status quo, instead of keeping from blowing ourselves up or how to be creative. It’s why we seem to be adrift with the idea of peace in the world. We believe a world of peace would be a boring and colorless world. On the contrary, peace would be revealing, exciting, creative, surprising, engaging and dynamic. Those who have built a world for war, conflict and scarcity are having a terrible time letting go of their greed, hate and rage–an undeniable urge toward extinction. We must continue to build a world of our own despite their brutally insane decisions. Life is amazing. The universe is amazing. Right now, we are going through the most difficult existential step in our evolution as humankind. How do we resolve the end of the world? Through beginning from the start, from the point that has served us well for thousands and thousands of years. –Nelson Betancourt
I think it’s incorrect for Ritter to say that the Ukraine or Washington “believes” something just because they say it.
I do believe Ritter was wrong about this proxy war which was never a war between Russia, and Ukraine and if it was, it would have ended a long time ago. It was a war between the US, and NATO against Russia using Ukrainians to be slaughtered for their sake.
Zelensky has no will of his own, he is an imbecile who chose to side with the West against his own country, and to benefit hugely in financial terms, there were many traitors like that in history where for the sake of Dollars will sell their mothers in the slave market.
100% correct, no need to say more
That was a powerful comment. You are absolutely right on the nature of the nuts at the helm in both Ukraine, U.S. and, I suspect, most of NATO too. Ritter states beautifully”to allow emotion to get the better of reason”; this is something the “collective West” is routinely guilty of. Rational Putin kept it in check for over 8 years allowing Western leaders time to grow up, but sadly so far to no avail ! When leaders are ready to sell even their mothers for a quick profit, reason as much as emotion naturally take a backseat !
So according to our government if a nuke explodes in Ukraine it is worth having millions of Americans die in a nuclear exchange with Russia. I am so happy to see how my government is willing to destroy America over an igsnificant NAZI INFESTED bed of corruption known as Ukraine…..this is the kind of mentally challanged nitwits we have in America, the bottom of the barrel!
I agree, Russians know that Americans have used nuclear weapons against Japan when they had already won the war, they also keep modernizing nuclear weapons while they have enough to destroy the planet several times over. Now Russia is faced with a senile irrational old man, able to do anything as the blowing up of the pipelines against a loyal NATO member proves.
While it might sound perverse and illogical I see some hope in two events/changes that happened in September. Firstly there was the new propaganda meme that “Russia has lost” subsequent to the Ukrainian counter-offensive. Secondly there was the sabotage of Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2.
My hope is that with the propaganda loss and lack of gas pipelines between Russia and Germany the stage is set, in US/NATO favour, for a ceasefire agreement acceptable to the US/NATO.
Why would Russia try to satisfy the Satanic Beast NATO and the related Axis of Evil (London-DC-Tel Aviv) and Evil Empire? Those psychopathic monsters can’t be assuaged, only totalitarian global hegemony will satisfy them, but that only for a brief moment because they can never have enough power. Murdering millions of babies a year in their abortion factories brings them great joy and satisfaction but they always need new victims. For centuries these blood-thirsty monsters have ruled the Empire and it is about time someone is standing up to them, the cowardly slaves that occupy the Empire and support the murderous fiends that rule it certainly never will.
On the contrary!
The alleged Ukrainian battlefield success against Russia is a PR move to justify further arms supplies to Ukraine, since it creates the illusion in the Western public that Ukraine can actually win this war, which always was absurd. That will prolonge the war, but will not help Ukraine win. On the contrary, the longer the conflict, the more Ukraine will lose until there is nothing left to lose. Russia cannot not win this war on its doorstep, just like the US would not accept to lose a war against China on the Mexican/US border.
The destruction of the NordStream pipelines is to burn the bridges and make it impossible for Europe to turn back and seek accommodation with Russia. Without the prospect of Russian gas, Europe is now firmly in the clutches of its US masters, who will put on the thumbscrews mercilessly while bleeding the European economy to the last Euro.
Thus, both events are very dangerous and bring us very close to nuclear annihilations. Lets’ not fool ourselves. It’s as serious as it can get. Neither Russia nor Nato can afford to lose.
Dear Scott! I listen to you/read your articles from time to time. I’ve been interested in humanity’s future since 1955 when an old peasant in Europe told me that somewhen in the 20s there will be a terrible war engulfing or affecting the whole world. When I asked him for the cause of the war – his answer was: fight for the Faith…
Well, in any case the goal is just deep de-population and deep de-industrialization of the planet. Everything else is of secondary importance!
Wish you well.
Ironically the United States people and Russian population share a common enemy whose persona is represented in part by Nuland, Blinken and other neo-cons who hate Russia and continue to prod Russia. The terrorist act against the Russian pipeline was a very evil act that went far and above 9/11. The cabal is playing one side against the other and I envision an October catastrophe. That means no Nov. midterms unfortunately. They false prophet is that tube in the living room which will soon go blank.
The first thing Putin did when he became president was to remove the oligarchs from power; the oligarchs that had robbed Russia during the Yeltsin presidency under the guidance of the Washington. The West never forgave him.
The US needs a Putin-like figure to remove the oligarchs from power in Washington. Until that happens, mankind will be in danger of annihilation.
As we are witness to the US proxy Ukraine driven by the other US proxy NATO as they play their games, one has to ask why it is that Americans as a whole cannot see the obvious diminished mental capacity of the USA President Biden as he takes to the podium to explain the US position on any subject. The man is not able to be convincing on any subject, using bluster and threats to make what he sees as valid arguments for his country’s continuation on its primary objective, world domination…at any price.
Biden is well past his prime, is bumbling in his ability to make a valid point and will continue to deteriorate as each day passes.
Having the future of the globe in the hands of such a person is bordering on madness.
The US choices of a Biden or a Trump did indicate the state of play at the last election unlikely to be any better with a likely Trump / Clinton face-off at the next electoral circus . We will know then, even more so than now, (if that is possible) that the world is doomed.
I am hoping that Trump is in prison before the next election and that Clinton just shuts her foul mouth and goes back under her rock with the rest of her fellow vermin.
Carolyn
Clinton. Perhaps the most dangerous person on the planet with an ego to match. Out here in the colonies, one hears little about her plans but I am assured by those who know that she is planning a run. As you know Democrats seem to have a wealth of NEOCON talent at their disposal and of course, Jewish shekels by the bucketload . So as that is all you need to get to be a president in the USA, or so it seems to me, plus a little kelp from the Vanguards and BlackRocke based on their control of the military weapons industry, the major US export (plus sanctions), she has a good chance.
A frightening thought.
The other option….just as scary.
Well Rex I feel your first error here is assuming a significant number of these “exceptional Americans” as a whole are not the victims of the same, very substantially diminished mental capacity that has afflicted the current POTUS. Coupled with the fact a significant number of “exceptional Americans” who possess significant mental acuity fail to actually possess enough knowledge and understanding of how the government, in reality, works and who is actually controlling policy, to contribute educated dialog to this conversation.
If you think not take a look at Florida. It should be no mystery to anyone now how DeSantis got elected very similar to the situation in Texas. Seems to me I’m witnessing a serious lack of mental acuity in both places but I digress.
I agree with your assessment of Biden but only if you include, LBJ, Nixon, Ronnie Raygun, Bush 41, Slick Willy, and Bush 43. Obama was nothing more than a pawn who got played and damned well knew his place in history and government. Then Trump, no explanation necessary. Save Obama and Carter all despots. Carter was a naive peanut farmer who was had by the democrats themselves and the DC machine. Plenty glad to escape D.C. And then we have Slick Willy, Slick Willy who was smart enough, and from prior experience, to know who called the shots and was so terrified of them he did their bidding. All the while taking great advantage of his position.
You write, “Having the future of the globe in the hands of such a person is bordering in madness.” I agree with you without a doubt however, I think I’ve made the same case for ever individual I mentioned . Interesting your choice of terms above, “bordering on madness”, I mean after all MAD is the acronym, buss word, that was supposed to keep us all safe. So much for that BS. The world has become a mad place much of which the good Ole US of A is responsible for.
We Americans exceptional or not need to hit the streets a demand Biden cut the bullshit! Waiting for the next election is a fools errand when one considers the caliber of individual likely to run in the next presidential election. Especially when we review most of our past presidential talent since November 22, 1963.
I for one have seen more than enough this bull shit charade called “Democracy in action”.
From November 22, 1963 to this point it has all been down hill for the quality of our government and I’m damned sure I know why.
We see here day after day, folk sitting wringing their hands together worried that the end is near. For damned good reasons, # 1 our planet is in serious peril , #2 All the religious nuts believe in a preordained end and are counter productive to finding peace at this point in time because they would rather pray for a self fulfilling prophecy. #3 with a bullet, we have a very dysfunctional government.
In the end we do have some options, Ms. Taylor has a valid point, do we want to end up “toast” or do we collectively turn up the heat on our over fed fat assed Congress by hitting the streets. This comes from a 73 year old man who has kids, grand kids and a great grand son and they are no different than children the world over, they simply need a chance to fix what we have allowed to become totally screwed up.
As the “Dude in the shed” would say, “it’s just a thought”.
Y’all have a good evening.
Thanks CN
Therein lies the FACTS. It matters nought, who is at the helm of the U.S. as has been clearly demonstrated over the last 30 years, it is NOT the captain at the helm who makes policy or decisions, he’s just a sock puppet, (very clearly demonstarted by Biden, over and over again) reading, (or trying to) his instructions on the teleprompter, and even then, quiet often, straying from the script.
It’s amazing, that the American people have failed, (and continue) to recognise this FACT.
It is NOT the W.H. making these decsions, but the Global Elite who have total control over the U.S. WHICH DOES THEIR BIDDING. So changing the entity inside the sock, makes no difference whatever, it will still be, Business as usual.
Biden hasn’t got anything in his hands. he is like most US presidents just a puppet. An empty suit. A figurehead. Biden hasn’t got any say in anything, nor for that matter did Trump, or Obama. I’ve seen all three overridden by Pentagon and other forces now many times.
It’s a lose-lose situation, where the sorry excuses for our country’s leaders are concerned
Red Terrier has the salient question: “How does such a system come to an agreement that prevents nuclear annihilation of humanity?” Something obvious is to let Russia have some land. What great moral principle should we be following if it will get us annihilated? I’m fine being cowardly. It’s not a level playing field. We’re dealing with an insane person. Let him get pissed off enough to make us toast? What does he care about Russian agreements? That seems like comedy to be resorting to that as what will keep him in check. I hope you don’t take me as a fool. I don’t think that whatever we concede to Putin – TO SAVE THE WORLD – is foolish. Call it appeasement, but this is circa 2022 when we have the capacity to blast humanity into extinction. We don’t have a handbook for dealing with madmen, so can’t we come out from the idea of even a remotely equal playing field and talk turkey?
Suzanne, I don’t agree with your characterization of Vladimir Putin as “insane.” In my view, he is far more sane than our own war-hungry leaders. I suspect that you are getting way too much of your news from the war-propagandistic Western mainstream media, which has incessantly misportrayed Putin as a monster.
What makes you think Putin is a madman, other than corporate media propaganda?
“We’re dealing with an insane person” – it’s more than one – it’s the entire class of barbaric psychopaths that rule the Empire. Look in the mirror and the profound evil you enable – the greatest on the planet by far – before criticizing others. The entire rest of the world combined does not come close to the brutality, terrorism, murder, destruction and plundering of the Empire YOU support. So look in the mirror, dear, look in the mirror closely, and see what is really there, not what you wish were there.
If you think Putin is insane, then you are. Biden is demented, many of his cabinet are insane but neither Putin nor the Kremlin is crazy. They never wanted land, they want security. Ukraine was a threat to that, due to US instigation since they did their violent coup and regime changed the place. For Russia this is an existential fight.
He is not insane, he is senile.
2. Biden is duplicitous and self serving, and devious, but he’s not insane . That’s who you refer to correct? (Because Putin in nearly the only adult in the room.)
3. Saying, “… but this is circa 2022 when we have the capacity to blast humanity into extinction” is illogical, because the nuke threat, both it’s size and it’s instability were far worse in 1960, or 64, or 68, or 70, or 74 etc.
The nuclear weapons situation (policy and technology) today is far more under control and reliably safe than when these weapons were first introduced under Red Scare. So I have to conclude you have not looked into the actual history of the technology or policy.
It’s not about “letting the Russians have some land.” They don’t want land, they want security. They are faced by psychopathic criminals in Washington with a huge nuclear arsenal, who are willing to do anything to achieve total world domination. They don’t care if they have eliminate a few billion people if that is what is needed to achieve their aim.
Putin rejected the demand for recognizing the republics of Luhansk and Donetsk for 8 years. He wanted them to stay as autonomous regions in Ukraine as stipulated in the Minsk II peace accord and UN resolution 2202. He wanted to remove the Nazi threat to the Russian-speakers in Ukraine and the US’s threat to Russia’s national security. It’s Ukraine and the US that refused the peace because they wanted war. This is America’s war to destroy Russia. Don’t buy the Western propaganda. Even if you don’t have access to independent sources, it’s easy to see the contradictions in the Western propaganda. There is no excuse for believing Western propaganda.
Believe it or not, the only “adults” in this administration are in the Pentagon. As the media has a meltdown on Putin’s supposed nuclear threats, it was Austin who publicly stated that “At this stage, I do not see anything that leads me to conclude that [Russian President Vladimir Putin] has made such a decision.” And that was not the first time the Pentagon contradicted the hysterical media.
Scott, working from the assessments you have made initially and incessantly about each side’s strength on the battlefield (which is overwhelming advantage Russia; only outside chance Ukraine), should not the most rational move by each be Ukraine surrenders ASAP (to minimize casualties, damage to infrastructure, and loss of territory) and Russia continues to decimate Ukrainian assets until it achieves the goals it has proclaimed. If it does not achieve those goals, does it not place itself at greater risk from the US and Nato in the future? So, logic would dictate that Russia cannot quit just because it is presently ahead, and Ukraine would be suicidal to continue fighting and losing lives in vain, would it not?
These assessments assume that Nato and the US do not become active belligerents in the battlefield action which is now basically a tête-à-tête between only Russia and Ukraine, although with a substantial amount of sideline kabitzing with one side and frantically working the refs (world media) by the US. The destruction of the Nordstream pipelines by the US (there is no logical refuting this) may actually represent the entry of Washington as an active combatant, opening the door for much greater escalations even to possible nuclear exchanges. That would be a highly illogical choice by the US which has really not much to gain from “winning” this conflict, as it is not existential to them (and Russia is not truly the source of any of its own dire problems), but it has everything to lose if further choices even allow the possibility for nuclear Armageddon.
Ukraine is fielding a NATO army. NATO equipment, NATO trained and NATO led.
We all know those things are currently being done in a limited and furtive manner, but Scott has never suggested that such aid (meddling) has ever given Ukraine a realistic chance to win or to even approach parity with Russian forces. With Nato formally in the war they would introduce hundreds of thousands of new combatants plus their weaponry with the potential to take the battle anywhere they choose within the borders of Ukraine, or within Russia for that matter.
THAT would escalate the challenge to Russia’s military exponentially. It would open up all of Europe and North America as potential battlefields and targets, as well as introducing the slippery slope of using nuclear ordnance. This is why even the world’s biggest bully and aggressor, the United States, takes pause before rushing into such a thing–though they’ve been walking the edge, especially with their recent caper in the Baltic Sea.
A more assertive Russia–if IT were really the warmonger–would claim that Washington had entered the hostilities by destroying the pipelines and would counterattack however they saw fit. But neither side yet wants to play that card. Everybody still pretends that Washington and Nato still have “plausible deniability” although the relevant logic has been rigorously gone through many times by now. The duck not only quacks but it bites.
Nobody really believed that Ukraine could win against Russia. The assumption was that the Russian economy would be so weak that it would crumble under the sanctions, which would lead to popular discontent and Putin’s removal from power. The subsequent power struggle would allow the US to interfere and split the Russian Federation into 34 independent states, which would then be guided by Washington to open up their resources for exploitation by the West.
The NED and the Soros Foundation have funded the Free Nations of Russia Forum which was recently held in Warsaw and Prague. It’s aim is to split Russia into 34 states. It was attended by representatives from the UK, the US and Ukrainian, Lithuanian and Polish government ministers, etc. Their aim is to “prepare the elites for the imminent collapse of the Russian Federation”, which will “help the West to recover”. Note that the West is in a deep debt crisis from which it can’t recover. Access to Russian resources would throw the West another life-line.
Is that evil? Yes, but that’s how our leaders are. What’s more worrying is that they are also incredibly stupid because the sanctions actually benefit Russia and threaten to destroy Europe, where one government after the other may soon be tumbling under popular unrest.
“The ongoing Ukrainian-Russian conflict has put the world’s two largest nuclear powers on opposing sides, with the U.S. supporting a Ukrainian military that has become a de facto proxy of NATO, and Russia viewing its struggle with Ukraine as including the ‘collective West.'”
The wording here is somewhat misleading, IMO. Russia is not on any political “side”; it is a victim that’s been forced into defending itself and its legitimate interests against a deadly, implacable, existential enemy.
Luckily for Russia (and every decent person on earth for that matter) Vladimir Putin seems to understand what many people in the West don’t: The U.S. “government” (and those of its European client states) are run by a cult of demon-possessed theistic Satanists who’ve launched a spiritual war against all of humanity, the apparent objective being to impose decadence and corruption everywhere on earth. Russia is resisting and thereby threatening the whole Satanic project and must therefore be destroyed at any cost.
Agreed, I presume God(I may presume too much) may prefer to allow Russia overrun the European Continent if Putin being a Christian(albeit flawed) crushed the woke sickness infecting all of Western Civilization, the alternative is Russia is defeated and woke satanism is forced upon the Russian population & result in plundering Russia’s endless resources. God uses all sorts of flawed people to do great works. Gen Patton abused his men, US Grant was a drunk, King David a murderer, Oskar Schindler a drunk womanizer.
There is no such thing as God. End of.
If only you could convince the Satanic cult running the U.S. “government” of your belief that God doesn’t exist, maybe then they would give up trying to usurp him.
Germany tried to crush that sickness once.
What is “woke satanism”?
You are indeed presuming too much.
I agree! The Western claim that Russia has imperial ambitions is absurd. The Russians know that they don’t have the means to maintain a global empire. Their stated aim is a multipolar world of sovereign states which don’t have to fear political extorsion or military threat from Washington.
What would you have Putin do differently than he has been? He’s been as clear as it’s possible to be. It’s the U.S. that keeps (intentionally) misconstruing everything he says and escalating the situation. The onus is on Biden/the U.S./NATO and cheerleaders for all of the above to sit down and shut the hell up before they get us all nuked.
“What would you have Putin do differently than he has been?” – I am constantly asking myself the same question.
Arguing with Chomsky, Lieven and others diplomatic solutions could have been still pursued by Putin.
Perhaps some unorthodox path could have been sought out:
e.g. going public in the West, explaining to the peoples in Europe what is going on in Eastern Ukraine and very strongly approach and involve India, Brazil and other countries outside NATO in diplomatic networking and building up public pressure on Kiev with a PR-campaign. Just like the Ukrainians have done since february, with slick modern state of the art advertising.
Doing this with the risk of leaving Russia´s border exposed to the Ukrainian army. In other words, lure and provoke Ukraine. But then international law would have indisputably been on Russia´s side.
That´s how PLO did it when Israel attacked them in Lebanon in the early 80s. By not letting themselves being provoked PLO was eventually rewared with being accepted by the UN as a diplomatic entity.
Arafat´s great victory. Through absolute self-restraint.
But this probably was not the KGB way of doing things, which is a very pragmatic one and certainly not always wrong.
Besides after 8 years the Russians were probably running out of good will. Which was their sore spot and the State Department was counting on this.
But turning the world public against Ukraine and the US in some unprecedent „Un-Russian“ way and force UN-presence in Ukraine – for instance – could have been an option.
Even if I am absolutely wrong and naive – the invasion now eventually only moved the red lines and borders of the conflict parties by a couple of Hundred miles. How is Russia with East-Ukraine under its control safer from NATO? Sry for this overlong comment.
Putin was asking for diplomacy for years and was ignored by the U.S. and NATO.
“Arafat´s great victory” – The Palestinians are slaves ruled by ZioNazi barbarians. Victory? Russia doesn’t want your “victory”.
Great victim-blaming, by the way. Why didn’t he beg harder and expose himself to more danger? Not like Russia tried for 30 years to make peace with the Empire whose only goal is to destroy everything good and noble – the family, the nation, religion and private enterprise. The Empire is true Communism – the USSR (and all other) variants didn’t even come close to the doctrinal purity of destroying all four of humanity’s most important institutions.
Read Part II of the Communist Manifesto, and see “wokeness” and the “Great Reset”.
There is no greater evil than the Empire and there has never been. You cannot compromise with such momentous evil – it will always seek to destroy you. Putin bought as much time as he could, he struck when Ukraine was about to invade Donbass with a massive army, which would have resulted in huge numbers of dead and made liberating the Russian areas from the Satanic Empire’s grip almost impossible.
Instead of critiquing Putin for not capitulating enough, better do something useful yourself – fight the Evil Empire every chance you get, every moment of every day.
In addition to what, e.g., Maté outlines below, rather than launching a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the Russian government could have also stationed forces or nuclear weapons in a sympathetic Western Hemisphere state (e.g., Venezuela or Cuba) in order to reach a negotiated quid pro quo with the United States and NATO much like the resolution of the Cuban Missile Crisis (e.g., if you stop proposing or contemplating NATO expansion into Ukraine, Georgia, etc. and help us implement the Minsk Agreement, we will not encroach upon the Western Hemisphere), even though I am wary of the dangerous escalatory potential of that sort of strategy as well.
Aaron Maté: “I have a friend from Kharkiv who says that, in attacking a place like Kharkiv, Russia is shelling its own people. And he himself is, understandably, very angry about Russia’s invasion, and it has gotten him to rethink his views about Russia.
[…]
When I speak about this war, I cannot fathom that Putin had no other option but to launch an invasion. If his concern was protecting the people of the Donbass, who have been under assault for eight years with the help of the US government which has been arming and supporting the Ukrainian military, then he could have just gone into the Donbass, and not the rest of the country. He could have proposed a peacekeeping force, or he could have tried other forms of non-military leverage like [limiting or stopping the flow of?] his pipelines that have fueled so much of Europe. He also had Germany and France effectively on his side – certainly, they were not excited about Ukraine joining NATO. So I do not understand the argument that he had no other options but to launch this full-scale catastrophic invasion creating over one million refugees, killing civilians. It just does not fly with me.”
Source:
“The Ukraine Tragedy, From US-Backed Coup to Russian Assault” (Interview with Dr. Nicolai Petro of the University of Rhode Island), PushBack with Aaron Maté on The Grayzone, March 10, 2022
—
David Swanson: “I get arguments by email, phone, Zoom, and in-person all the time, and have for months now, [asking] what possible choice could Russia have had, and what else could Ukraine possibly have done? […] I cannot make sense of either one, because there are always choices, there are always options – there are options on a huge scale.
You look at a country like Lithuania that actually put in place, through its government, plans to organize mass unarmed civil resistance to Russia, principally, and you can imagine a world in which governments […] use nonviolent action, which gains the support through video [and] through communication. You look at people in Latin America who have resisted corporate takeovers of their land through nonviolent action and skilled videography of their own actions. [For more examples, see “Growing List of Successful Nonviolent Actions Used Instead of Wars,” on the World BEYOND War website.]
Russia was in a position of taking the moral high ground of resisting the abuses of the Ukrainian government with NATO backing it up, and having these bodies like the United Nations on its side. Instead, it did exactly what it was predicted to do, exactly what – if you believe that the RAND Corporation perspective was influential – exactly what those sorts of people wanted it do [to further and provide a greater rationale for an agenda of Russian “Balkanization”]. It played into those people’s hands by engaging in massive violence. Yes, the other side has been horrendous, and yes, the other side has resisted negotiations and settlements, [but] so has Russia. And Russia is now declaring new standards for what it will accept and threatening nuclear war as an alternative. I do not take anything the US government does lightly, but I do not take that lightly either.
[…]
The reason that we look at stories like the one from Bougainville of the unarmed peacekeepers going in with guitars in place of guns, and ending a war that armed ‘peacekeeping’ had failed to end over and over again, and creating a lasting peace there in Bougainville, is to suggest that there is a different type of peacekeeping, [comprised of] groups like Nonviolent Peaceforce and others that go and do unarmed protection, unarmed resistance, and who are organizing just this right now in Ukraine, have a record on a much smaller scale of accomplishing vastly more for vastly less expense than armed, so-called ‘peacekeepers.'”
Source:
“Online Debate: Can War Ever Be Justified” (with David Swanson and Arnold August), World BEYOND War, September 21, 2022
I agree.
Joe Biden is the antithesis of maturity. He has a knack for making the worst possible choice whenever faced with any major or minor decision. Biden’s reactive lizard brain is entirely predictable. No one knows that better than Putin. The U.S. with NATO and Europe, holds the advantage of the dominant mass and power of the U.S. over the world economy. Putin has major advantages over Biden that have not yet been utilized effectively. Putin can wait to see if Biden’s wings will be clipped in starting in November and completed by January 2023. The winter months are more helpful to Russia than Ukraine. It is Ukraine and Europe who will have to deal with shortages of fuel, electrical power and food. The media will try to drown out dissent but where are the anti-war protests in Europe? German industry is shutting down over fuel price increases. At what point will inflation, devaluation of the Euro and Pound, and all of the various hardships being endured in Europe drive people to the streets to demand an end to the conflict? How long will Europeans believe the propaganda that Ukraine is winning the war? Russia still holds the 15% or so of Ukraine that it acquired in the first few weeks of the war. Putin can be expected to wait out the Winter months and hold onto his gains while all Biden can do is wait for his power to be eroded at home over the same period of time. All while Europeans grow more weary each day of the misery in their lives all for the glory of Joe Biden and the virtue-signal of Von der Leyen and Michel toward Ukraine. Ukraine has beaten the odds so far. But only a series of major blunders by Russia can prevent the odds from evening out in favor of Putin over the next half year.
what in the world makes you think the republicans are any different than biden and the dems?
THEY ARE NOT
Republicans are far from perfect. As are we all. Biden and Pelosi have wrecked the world economy. That takes a special talent. U.S. policy in Ukraine under Obama and Biden has created this war. We didn’t have two million people enter the country illegally under Trump. The world was a safer place and the U.S. did not have Russia and China united against us. Those are a only few things in the world that show a difference. Biden has never been a leader, ever. And now he gets lost on the world stage after speaking gibberish. Incredibly, Harris is even more incompetent than a demented 80 year old. All the Democrats have achieved at home is a growing horde of homeless addict camps in cities they run. They are on a path to destroying the country and taking the world down with them.
Rhetoric aside ,the situation the world is in today is due to the US administration planning regime change in Ukraine and actually do it in 2015 .This is Nuland F**ck the EU fact. The Minsk accord was an effort to stop the blood flow in the streets of Eastern Ukraine which was ignored by the West .The last move on the chess board is the annexation of the territories of the Donbass into Russian territory.
If the world body really wanted peace ,it would move to promote peace between Russia and what is left of Ukraine but a slim chance of this happening as it looks today .Now the West has doubled down by destroying any further supply of natural gas to the EU by blowing up Nordstream 1 and 2 .This has not been confirmed because the US /NATO would then be accused of international terrorism .
We do need mature leadership and in my opinion there is something very odd with how the EU is behaving as they are the big loser .
I will go out on a limb and suggest that there is presently a push for a world wide economic crash that has been planned and orchestrated in order for a reset of the financial system that is presently broke / insolvent especially in the Western world .
The nuclear issue is probably a red herring IMHO as everyone is aware ,nuclear war means the end of humanity and a habitable planet.
The crash will come, but it wasn’t planned. Never underestimate the stupidity of our leaders. They really believed they could crush the Russian economy with sanctions and have the Russian people rise up against Putin. The fact that they didn’t understand that the sanctions benefited Russia by creating a supply shortage and risk destroying the European economy is final proof that our leaders are indescribably ignorant.
All of that doesn’t help, because they can’t admit that they were wrong. They can only double down and escalate to the point of no return.
Putin I trust – Biden I do not. As a Canadian friend of mine keeps saying: Russians play chess; Americans play poker. To me, America is the bully, ill mannered kid on the block.
I agree and I’m American.
Biden is an empty suit, Obama, Susan Rice & Victoria Nudlebaum are in charge. Most Americans are blind.
What would it take, DaisyMae to get the attention of Americans.? Many years ago, I can recall seeing a figure stated in a then responsible publication that mentioned that in the state of Arizona, the turnout for voting in a primary was just 29%. It was an electorate where a very senior politician (now deceased) was standing. It struck me that in my country where voting is compulsory, whether that was a better solution than leaving it up to each person as to whether having an opinion on their candidate, their representative, was better being compulsory.
Would it be different, do you think, if war zones, well isolated from the US at the present time, if closer, would attract more attention in times like these.
Care t comment?
When Andrey Gurulyov discussed NATO “setting a foot” in Ukraine he said, best as I can make out the translation into English “if any troops of NATO set their foot, you know they will probably get a strike against their head, that’s what our President has said, that’s the essence of his statement”
I don’t know the reference to the Presidential statement, but in the past the Russian President has referred to a reply being not to those who fired the missile, but to those who ordered it. Which, from the 2018 video announcing hypersonics etc, would be the command and control centre in USA.
And that brings up the second point. Russia has stated it non has a non-nuclear strategic defense – hypersonic missiles. They can carry nukes, but the kinetic force of a conventionally armed hypersonic is such that the explosion is not dissimilar to a tactical nuke.
Therefore a ‘strike’ on NATO forces setting foot in Ukraine may be referencing a hypersonic strike on NATO headquarters or US command and control in Florida. Or both.
There already have been major demonstrations in Prague (70,000 people) and in Germany. The media are covering them up. Also, alternative media are being shut down: MoonOfAlabama is inaccessible as of this morning Paris time.
That’s correct. To match the US’s installation of missiles systems in Poland and Romania, Russia would have had to topple the Canadian or Mexican government to install Russian missiles near the US border. Since that is unlikely to succeed. The Russians used a “technical response” by developing new hypersonic missiles that can’t be intercepted by Western ABMs. They have been used to knock out Ukrainian munitions depots and the like, probably as a demonstration to show the West that they work. I don’t think they would be used against a Nato army in Ukraine. If Nato were to intervene, Russia would knock out Nato command centers in Germany, Poland or the UK with the hypersonic missiles. There is nothing Nato can do about that.
A very somber article. The so called decapitation strike (which of course all those neocons would love to launch) would be a very difficult operation indeed. Since Soviet days and in particular the days of Yuri Andropov, the leadership has prepared for just that. Apart from the obvious (radar detection, etc.) a “doomsday” scenario was put into place called “perimeter.” It includes an underground railroad to a sunken city far from Moscow. And then of course there are the seismic movements emanating from a major explosion that would trigger immediate nuclear riposte: à la Dr Strangelove. I wonder if Joe Biden and the americans really want to go down into human history (if there is any) as the greatest mass-murderers of all time.
“Joe Biden and the americans,,,”
are already
“…the greatest mass-murderers of all time”
The problem all along seems to have been with NATO and its eastern expansion, the latest expanders being Finland and Sweden. NATO has now achieved its aims to conscript the whole of western and central Europe and of being right up against Russia’s western borders with, as Putin remarked, five minutes flight time to Moscow. Put that one down to James Baker and the ”not an inch to the East” cliche. Moreover, the demented regime in Kiev, not a member of NATO – but a sort of associate member – also took a page out of the NATO military manual invading the two DonBass eastern oblasts, first time around in 2014. The objective was to overrun the two republics with a view to exterminate the indigenous largely Russian population and site American nuclear rockets ready and primed for an attack on Russia. I would have thought that this was common knowledge, but it seems that the collective west and NATO have egged on their pet rottweiler (Ukraine) and have a rather novel notion to add Donbass to their scalp.
To repeat, the expansion and construction of NATO was all along, aimed at the breaking up of the Russian Federation. (Next step – China).The Warsaw Pact was dissolved and Russia’s borders were left wide-open for an expansion of the US into Russian territory with the enthusiastic revanchist attack dogs in the shape of Poland and the Baltic states (the less said about the Baltic states and their dalliance with the German Nazi regime in 1941 the better).
So the given the current standoff with Russia we can surmise that the Russians are not going to let NATO and particularly the United States to further impinge on its western borders. The Russian objective is to construct a cordon sanitaire somewhere along the River Dnieper. Whether the NATO and the American war machine is going to allow this seems a moot point. And of course then there is always China to consider. The Americans (or rather the neo-cons) do not seem to have a reverse gear. Chances of Peace? I would say not much better than 50-50
What unknown group will without warning hack the nuclear sites and unleash the big war in Europe and America? Not even Stephen King knows. But thanks to readily available and advancing computer science it is a real and ever expanding danger.
I cannot accept, that ANY nation having nuclear defences would allow connection of those defences to the internet. How suicidal would such a connection be ? So, if your not connected to the internet, explain how such Hacking would be conducted.
Putin – we won’t be swallowed, Biden – we will swallow you. There is no “maturity” to be had with the latter.
The fact that the use of nuclear weapons is even being discussed, by both sides, is another indication that, with few exceptions, people in positions of political power demonstrate an acute lack of maturity and vision. Anyone paying attention can see the planet is overheating at a frightening pace, but that fact has fallen off the radar screen, so these jackasses can send more people to their destruction, all the while filling the skies with more greenhouse gases, courtesy of their war machines.
Good display of their concern for the planet, by exploding and releasing methane gases into the atmosphere we’ve been told for the last 40 years is a No, No. Yet here we are, and the release was planned and deliberate.
Biden’s is senile and not in charge of his own regime’s foreign policy, but even if he had full possession of what few marbles he had, he would still be highly unlikely to back away from nuclear confrontation. The boy is and always has been incredibly stupid. He is a child who has failed in every capacity that matters to grow up, and the neocons with whom his handlers have surrounded him are equally as infantile. They are betting that Russians prefer permanent humiliating subjugation to death and will somehow back down once they see how willing Western leaders are to terminate the entire human species rather than give up total domination of the planet. It’s a bet the neocons are going to lose, to the detriment of all.
I agree fully with your assessment. Moreover, this would be but a hypothetical victory by Washington, certainly not a given one. Indeed the entire war, including merely all the inflammatory rhetoric were maniacal conflicts that Washington never needed for any rational purpose, other than to gloat over its own self-importance and impose its will on every last corner of the globe. For Russia, it always was and remains an existential threat at the hands of the most hypocritical, deceitful, and barbaric warmongers to come down the pike in this century, after spoiling most of the last century for millions of human beings in 3rd and 4th rate powers it reveled in beating up.
Saving face when confronting defeat will be so traumatic to the American psychopaths that they actually seem poised to destroy the entire planet rather than admit defeat on any issue at any level. Their vassals in Nato never did humanity any favors by routinely rolling over to the self-destructive demands of their unhinged hegemon. Things might have been better, or at least not quite so bad for so many, if Europe had learned to say “no!” to crazy immoral and unethical orders, as the Nuremberg tribunals identified as everyone’s responsibility when given such illegal orders. Germany in particular might still have a functioning economy, world-leading industries and a content citizenry if they were allowed to pursue their own best interests instead of acting as Uncle Sam’s hatchet man, required to shiv Russia for their master. You fools in Europe should understand that your abuse by Washington is never going to stop until you stand up to the villainous lunatics.
Do you recall, during the 2020 election, that there were campaign posters, evidently put up by people who opposed Trump, that supported “Any Functioning Adult for President”?
I do not believe that civilian command of the military exists within the United States of America. Biden’s job is to read the teleprompter and try not to drool or talk to dead people. I do not believe that Joe Biden sets policy in any meaningful manner.
Actually, to me it has been quite questionable whether civilian command of the military has existed in the USA for quite some time. There are noticeable occasions where the military does not follow commands. Trump’s ordering CV’s to North Korea only for them to be seen going in the other direction was one such. As far back as Pres. Eisenhower, Daniel Ellsberg recounts (‘The Doomsday Machine’) that the civilians were banned from seeing the nuclear war plan. That’s with a former general and national hero in the oval office.
Another notable occasion was when Sec State Kerry negotiated a cease-fire in Syria, which ended when the US Air Force openly bombed a Syrian military position, followed by an IS attack that at least had the fighters looking skywards and saying “Thank You”, even accepting the statements that the two were not coordinated. The Syrians lost any faith they had in an already shaky cease-fire.
Presidents don’t publicly challenge the military very often, so its hard to tell on a ‘normal’ day. But, there seem to be occasions where the military ignores orders they don’t like from the democratically elected officials.
Doesn’t seem like anyone can be too sure of who is actually in charge of things in the USA. Things seem to go in a certain direction, no matter how elections turn out. And, even worse, as is typical in past fascist regimes, it seems at times that various power centers within the regime are competing against each other, and thus not exactly harnessed into a team under the command of a national leader, even assuming they have the wisdom to be negotiating. That’s a tendency in DC even with a strong, popular President. If the President is taking a nap, it will likely be even worse. In such a case, even if one portion of the establishment is able to reach an agreement, such lax control means the more extreme factions can try to scuttle such an agreement, most likely with explosives.
Hmm, I wonder how much of the chain of command knew the Nord Streams were about to blow up? Everyone from the President down, or only a faction who’s arranged it to force events in a certain direction?
The ‘detente’ of Henry Kissinger was strongly opposed by the Cold Warriors of that era. A second detente would likely be the same, given the proclivity for politicians to ‘talk tough’. At least in the 70’s under Nixon, if the President ordered it then it was the policy and the country did go that direction. There was political debate and military grumbling, but those orders were followed. Or at least the military agreed with them at the end of Vietnam. Would the same be true today? Is the system that loyal to President Biden?
Is there a pool on the date for when Biden does his LBJ and announces he’s not actually running again? (Can I get some money down?). If so, how much of the government actually cares what a soon-to-be-departing old President actually says? If you know the Boss is a short-timer, usually the organization is already thinking beyond him. How many of the courtiers in the Imperial Court are betting their futures on a Joe Biden second term?
So, how does such a system come to an agreement that prevents nuclear annihilation of humanity?
Consider geography if you will…
The American Continent surrounded by vast water bodies… Eurasia shared by multiple nation states.
US can posture… Russian threats… if Actual… Are illogical in reality!
*Note: Agree w/Red Terrier as2 policy cooption by largest $$$ US entity
“From the Russian perspective, the documented U.S. reluctance to employ nuclear weapons in the case of a decisive Russian military victory over Ukraine opens the door for Russia ’s use of a tactical nuclear weapon against NATO in the case of a major NATO military intervention in Ukraine.”
This is a distortion. Putin and virtually every serious official in Moscow has repeatedly stated that Russia will only resort to using its nuclear weapons as a very last resort, if the people and territory of Russia were under imminent threat of death and destruction.
The only onus on Putin’s back is to defend his border regions and therefore the Russian people from the biggest and most violent imperialists the globe has ever seen: the Washington-militarist empire.
This is going to sound simplistic and, in many respects, it is but… O O What he said.
PS to my previous comment: neither Bojo nor his reptilian successor the Liz-ard, nor any NATO “leaders” are actual decision makers, everything they do and say, even if it destroys their own European economies, are determined by the US neocons. A smart bull does not focus on the waving red flag, it targets the one holding it.