Tuesday, December 31, 2019
Here is the post which I will try to keep sticky for people to ask questions and share their thoughts which are not on topic. This, I think is known as Open Thread. Fire away.
Monday, February 18, 2019
I think that is the only way nowadays to communicate with the "West" and its sewer aka MSM, especially such rags as NYT, WaPo etc.
In related news.
As the piece states:
A study finds that the same Russian troll accounts that attempted to influence the U.S. election are also tweeting about vaccines. The study published by the American Public Health Association found that automated bot accounts, and trolls - who are human but have their own hidden agenda - are pushing false information about vaccines on social sites like Twitter.The researchers studied tweets from 2014-2018. The study revealed a significant amount of the debates online were generated by these fake accounts. David Broniatowski, a professor at George Washington University is one of the authors of the study. He says the bots and trolls are about 22 times more likely to tweet about vaccinations on both sides -- both pro and anti-vaccines. The researchers found the fake accounts originated in Russia with a goal of creating distrust and discord with the vaccination debate.
Here is the "scientist" who headed such a research. Mr. Broniatowsky.
He has a Ph.D in something from MIT and evidently is working in the field, such as "decision making" which, evidently, is not very developed in the the US judging by the outcomes. But never mind, I am sure more and more academics will continue to develop all kinds of theories of how, say, Russian bots and trolls are also responsible for Mr. Broniatowsky having, symptomatically and coincidentally, a collection of mental disorders which today are a defining characteristic of what is left of American republic.
Saturday, February 16, 2019
Recall a week or so ago US media based on some "sources" claiming tests of unlimited range cruise missile with nuclear power plant only "partially successful". Well, here are better sources.
MOSCOW, February 16. /TASS/. The tests of the compact nuclear power unit for cruise missile Burevestnik have been successfully competed in Russia, a source in the missile producing industry told TASS."A major stage of trials of the cruise missile of the Burevestnik complex, the tests of the nuclear power unit, were successfully completed at one of facilities in January," he said. The trials "sustained stated specifications of the reactor ensuring the missile’s unlimited range," the source added.
I do not take ANY Western MSM "sources" seriously, on the other hand big Russian news movers, such as TASS, developed a rather impressive record of real trustworthy news and reporting facts even when making such, traditional in business, statements as:
No official confirmation of the information provided by the source has been obtained by TASS.
Truth is, the dynamics of geopolitical re-balancing after Putin's historic March 1, 2018 Address to Federal Assembly, where he revealed weapon systems which already revolutionized warfare, changed dramatically--the United States literally went berserk in her desperate attempts to arrest own decline, including framing Europe by means of installing US intermediate range missiles, aimed at Russia, there in a futile (and really stupid, honestly) attempt to recreate conditions for American revival akin to post-WW II situation when the devastating war happens elsewhere and the US enters the stage after the war to collect on restoration. I kid you not--many in D.C. think like that, they really live in a delusion.
Success with Burevestnik (Petrel) unlimited range cruise missile, capable to loiter for days (or weeks) before striking from the most vulnerable directions, has a major ramifications for people in Washington who do believe that the US proper can be defended. But here is my thesis from two years ago:
There is a popular point of view in some of Russia’s political circles, especially among those who profess monarchist views and cling to a famous meme of 1913 Tsarist Russia development statistics, that WW I was started by Germany to forestall Russia’s industrial development which would inevitably challenge Germany’s plans on domination of Europe. A somewhat similar argument could be made for the WW II, but, in general, preventive wars are nothing new in human history. While “preventive” argument may or may not be a valid one regarding WW I, there is no doubt that it could be used, among others, when explaining the origins of a war.
US now is in full blown "preventive war" mode against Russia and, to a large extent, China. I would, however, state that Russia stands as number one in this list precisely for the reasons of Russia redefining warfare, blowing out of the water myth of American military omnipotence. Hysterical reactions, including trying to label Russia a state sponsor of terrorism (LOL) in latest Graham-Menendez bill, are excellent signs of a complete state of "losing it".
Introduction of Petrel into service will additionally create an enormous cognitive dissonance for US "elites" who will have to contend with new warfare reality of swarms of really "smart" missiles simply hanging "out there" while deciding what and when to attack. This brings another interesting twist to the dynamics of escalation to a nuclear threshold. Because Petrels have unlimited range they will be deployed in places where they will be beyond the ranges of US intermediate range missiles deployed in Europe (they will be deployed)--in other words, there will be more than enough time to launch them in case of US attack. How many? I don't know--20-30, maybe 100. After that--good luck catching them somewhere in Patagonia, over Brazil or in Africa, that is until they begin to converge on US targets. Well, you get the picture... I sense another "Star Wars" coming. That, plus other economic and ideological warfare means and, of course, increased doctrine-mongering. As per Petrel-Burevestnik, for people in D.C. who never read Maxim Gorky's Song of Burevestnik, they should really update themselves on what this poem is about and why Russians voted to name this weapon system Petrel, especially closing lines:
- -Tempest! Soon will strike the tempest!
-That is the courageous Petrel proudly soaring in the lightning over the sea's roar of fury; cries of victory the prophet:
- -Let the tempest come strike harder!
Friday, February 15, 2019
He died 10 days ago, a genius who wrote this masterpiece to another masterpiece. The era of titans is passing... I can not watch any adaptations of War and Peace, especially by gift-less BBC. I wish Fridays were more fun.
Pay attention to chandelier shots, then google Beauty and the Beast by Disney. 25 years later.
Just as I finished my expose' on all kinds of Russian military so called "experts" (pardon me--frauds) nine days ago, Tucker Carlson started asking those most important, bottom-line, expertise questions about America's very own military "experts" such as Max Boot and Bill Kristol in The American Conservative. Tucker gets to heavy artillery really fast:
One thing that every late-stage ruling class has in common is a high tolerance for mediocrity. Standards decline, the edges fray, but nobody in charge seems to notice. They’re happy in their sinecures and getting richer. In a culture like this, there’s no penalty for being wrong. The talentless prosper, rising inexorably toward positions of greater power, and breaking things along the way. It happened to the Ottomans. Max Boot is living proof that it’s happening in America. Boot is a professional foreign policy expert, a job category that doesn’t exist outside of a select number of cities. Boot has degrees from Berkeley and Yale, and is a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. He has written a number of books and countless newspaper columns on foreign affairs and military history. The International Institute for Strategic Studies, an influential British think tank, describes Boot as one of the “world’s leading authorities on armed conflict.” None of this, it turns out, means anything. The professional requirements for being one of the world’s Leading Authorities on Armed Conflict do not include relevant experience with armed conflict. Leading authorities on the subject don’t need a track record of wise assessments or accurate predictions. All that’s required are the circular recommendations of fellow credential holders. If other Leading Authorities on Armed Conflict induct you into their ranks, you’re in. That’s good news for Max Boot.
The very notion that one must have academic (yes, military sciences are really physics-mathematics and engineering sciences in the foundation) and military, especially command, experience to even utter a sensible word on anything related to armed conflict, somehow doesn't exist in modern, post-truth, world. I remember one humanities-"educated" hack who saw weapons only in pictures and who wouldn't know the difference between attrition models on the land and on the sea, preaching to me that cadre officers cannot have good understanding of strategy. So, today, it seems, in order to become a military "expert" one needs a degree in economics or sociology, or in theater. So, Tucker hits target here really well. In general, it is an excellent piece by one of few remaining sane voices in D.C. But in the end Tucker gives a grim assessment of the situation, same way as I am trying to make a case for the last few years: the state of American military science, strategic assessments, military analysis, military history is dire--the field is occupied by insane and illiterate people who pass judgements on subjects they have no clue about and they really don't care. As Tucker notes about another mindless and illiterate war-monger Kristol:
By the spring of 2018, Kristol was considering a run for president himself. He was still making the case for the invasion of Iraq, as well as pushing for a new war, this time in Syria, and maybe in Lebanon and Iran, too. Like most people in Washington, he’d learned nothing at all.
As I said many times, political "scientists", lawyers, most journalists and political "strategists" do not make good "experts" in armed conflict or any other field which requires serious effort in obtaining actual applicable skills. This especially rings true for ones who exist in a Washington's echo chamber which increasingly begins to look like a padded room for violent patients in the asylum.