Thursday, November 15, 2018

No, Macron, Seriously.

There are many negative qualities US President Donald Trump exhibits on a daily bases, but there are some silver linings even in POTUS being boorish--he periodically says things which describe the actual state of the affairs, such as the background to this Macron's complain.
The reason Macron's stance brings smile to my face is because the times of the Great Convention with its caveat of "the forms must obeyed" are over. I would suggest Mr. Macron acquaint himself, and learn it by heart, with Lord Ismay's raison d'etre (how' s my French?) for NATO. As you all may recall it was expressed in three short geopolitical truisms, NATO was created "to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down". Where is there anything about France? It has to be understood by Macron and any European still exercising sappy sentimental ideas of Atlantic solidarity and who try to still appeal to WW I which was dwarfed by a catastrophe and global consequences of WW II that Europe really matters--she does not. Only as a wealthy market for goods.

Speaking in broadsides, WW II outcome was about turning all European powerhouses, also responsible for unleashing WW I and laying down the groundwork for much bigger spectacle of WW II, into tamed, scared...ahem...vassals. The bigger boys came to rule--the Soviet Union by means of carrying the brunt of purely European invention of national-socialism's (and fascism) defeat in Europe, the US came on-board by defeating singlehandedly Imperial Japan (part of the Axis) and then allowing Great Britain to exhaust herself at the secondary theaters of operation before committing itself to a closing acts of WW II in Europe. At least Great Britain resisted, France...well, we know the story. As one Russian observers recently noted--WW I, which is much further removed from us in time than WW II, with this war many veterans still surviving, "was the last victory of the West". I happen to agree. Of course there could be many, and some of them will be totally legitimate both in political and military terms, justifications found for France's capitulation to Hitler but in the end it was still humiliating defeat which no amount of celebrations and remembrances of much smaller WW I can obscure the actual decline of both Great Britain (on the winning side) and France (sort of on the winning side). British didn't send British SS Divisions to Russia, France did. As did most of Western Europe, from Dutch to Spain. Tolstoy with his War and Peace comes to mind immediately, when Tolstoy described Napoleon's Grand Armee as "a force of a dozen European languages". 

So, let me play Trump and be rude here for a minute: Churchill was smart enough to understand and, in fact, demand Britain's alliance with USSR, despite being a fanatical anti-Communist (in reality a euphemism for Anglo-Saxon Imperialist). France wasn't. One lives with the consequences of such decisions. Hitler (or more generally Axis) was destroyed by the Soviet Union, United States and Great Britain (and her Imperial appendices--2.5 million Indian troops fought for the Crown in WW II). So, in all it was Soviet-Anglo-Saxon victory, with USSR playing by far the largest role against the most capable adversary in the history of the world. French, of course, through De Gaulle, who at some point complained that Anglo-American Allied press was promoting him as if conducting advertisement campaign in selling a soap, did partake but this couldn't obfuscate the fact of France departure from the status of superpower. Same went for the United kingdom and Suez Crisis merely formalized the world as the United States, distant second UK, and the rest on one side--USSR and its allies on the other. 

While the United States had people the scale of Ike, George Marshall or even JFK the forms and pretense that Europe mattered in global military-political setup were obeyed. Bundeswehr, as an example, was a pretty impressive force for an utterly defeated and separated Germany. Germans were even allowed to do some things on their own, such as tanks, not aviation, of course--for that, the NATO's only big honcho had its own plans and...well, you know the story with F-104, as one of very many other examples of Atlantic "solidarity" and values of freedom and equality. But France was American vassal since immediately after WW II and when De Gaulle, a person of a scale of several orders of magnitude larger and more courageous than Macron, decided that France still mattered he was "helped" along his way out of French and European political life. Since then, all those 1968 children-students of Paris and other French cities' riots were firmly restrained in the rigid framework of the US humanities "education" which guaranteed that the only ideas which would be allowed will be those of Egalité! Liberté! Sexualité! Largely the same set of values whose catastrophic consequences we all observe today. As a result, no political figure of true scale ever emerged in French political life again, as is the case with the Europe and the US as a whole, with her "leaders" being increasingly smaller and smaller both in human-political scale and statue. Napoleon, a man of a rather underwhelming appearance, is rotating today in his tomb at the Les Invalides. 

So, it is really funny today to hear from a practical zero in every single sense which defines great leaders and humans, complaining about France being treated as a vassal of the US. But Trump is correct--France is American vassal. France is disintegrating country in the process of fast Islamization, with elites whose roots are in the feel good "leftism" and expanded horizons of Sexualite of 1968 and still living in a delusion that French art, cinema, music and intellectuals matter--they don't. European cultural and economic policies of the last half-century are nothing short of a disaster, this is not to mention the fact that Europeans really always knew that neither Soviet Union, nor Russia wanted to invade Western Europe and they left the task of "defense" from the enemy which was thinking how to defend itself to the United States. Well, what do they expect today? 

European Army? LOL. WHO out of current European "elites" has real balls, competences and ability to create such a force? Who would equip it? France? Germany? Well, Germans, probably, given the time and space eventually would have come up with something but, calling on Lord Ismay--keep Germany down. So, seeing today all those European pathetic losers who would sell their soul to devil (together with their nations) for another term at the trough is really funny. A toy-boy asking for respect? If I would be Trump I wouldn't worry about European Armed Forces--not gonna happen, the last European human material which was capable to do something about pathetic debilitating state of Europe in general, and France in particular, was trashed out in 1968. A generation of gender-neutral tolerasts runs Europe today. Have you seen hippies and nihilists being real statesmen. I haven't and hopefully I will not have to--at least I hope so. In this sense, America, however in upheaval and declining, is still a much-much larger entity, militarily and economically, than France to take her seriously. It took uncultured Trump to merely state what everybody knew all along--vassals must behave like vassals. After all, "the forms must be obeyed".  

Wednesday, November 14, 2018

Cutting Empire To Size, Or Yet Another "National Security" Crisis.

It becomes really redundant by now and, frankly, tiresome. 
Truth is, there is no "crisis of national security" in the US--nobody is intent on attacking the US or cut vital for the US Shipping Lanes Of Communications (SLOC), other than some terrorists, but FBI can handle that; US Navy, despite all of its very real problems, is still a very potent navy, especially its submarine component, to do the job of keeping SLOCs open. Neither Russia nor China are intent to interdict these SLOCs unless the United States decides to start a war on them, then, of course, if the US, say, tries to attack Russia, things change. Other than that--there is no crisis. Russia can obliterate the US today, she could do it yesterday, and she will be able to do it tomorrow, the same goes the other way--this is MAD, folks. But Russia explicitly doesn't want to attack the US. So, what's the fuss is all about? 

The fuss is about this (from the article):
But the authors worry that the department, as it is structured both strategically and financially right now, would not be able to successfully manage two conflicts at once – or be guaranteed victory in even one, should it come down to a fight with Russia or China.
Talk about folie de grandeur of unimaginable scale (see Report). One may ask the question on how those people in National Defense Strategy Commission really envision, say war against Russia alone. It is really a fascinating, for all the wrong reasons, scenario since, I am sure, these guys (such as former CNO Admiral Gary Roughead among other 11 members of this Commission) try to play this scenario strictly in conventional framework, because otherwise the United States as a state will cease to exist. 

I was thinking about this, not to mention getting tired of reading all kinds of alarmist, justified and not, as in this case, "reports" and here is my simple take. 

1. United States never fought against first-rate, well-trained, equipped and determined adversary which can match US capabilities across the whole spectrum of modern warfare. US fought in Vietnam where it lost to determined but largely peasant force with only some very few capabilities of a first world army, it fought in Korea where it ended with bloody stalemate and, of course, US had its turkey shoot against grossly incompetent Saddam's Army. US armed forces never fought in their modern history against the adversary capable to strike (conventionally) to the strategic depth. That means under no conditions were US troops, their rear services, bases, strategic command and control assets, ammunition stocks etc. subjected to a serious (and sustained) fire impact since one day Pearl Harbor affair.  Of course, we do not even talk about US proper.

2. United States doesn't have effective battle field air defense capable to prevent such a (stand-off) impact--no US AD complex is capable to reliably intercept most Russia's stand-off weapons thus exposing every single US combat asset on the theater of operations. 

3. A painful issue of US air assets--good luck dealing with the best air-defense in the world. A single regiment of S-300 PMU2 in Syria shut down Israeli Air Force (equipped with much vaunted F-35) operations over coastal Syria. 

4. Ground forces? Another wowser since nobody knows how US ground forces will fare against steady and fast attrition of its assets against arguably best anti-armor and area-impact weapons in the world. US simply has no historic experience with that under the conditions of very limited resources and manufacturing base being destroyed (conventionally) domestically. 

So, how this Commission envisions such a war is a really funny question. They do state, however: 
We recommend that DOD more clearly answer the question of how it intends to accomplish a core theme of the NDS—defeating major power rivals in competition and war. Without a credible approach to winning a war against China or Russia, DOD’s efforts will befor naught
Apart from fluffy (and expected) pseudo-military BS, I have question to this Commission--do they have any idea how it will feel, if they imagine a set-piece (totally unrealistic scenario) battle at Russia's borders in purely conventional way, to lose, say, 150,000 KIAs alone just within one-two months of "fighting"? You say impossible? I would say I am being way too cautious. After all, this is US Army Colonel speaking in 2012 BEFORE certain events unfolded:

This should be emblazoned on every wall of any US military-related "think-tank" or "commission" because reality will be even grimmer once one understands that in order for US (NATO) to fight Russia they will need to come into Russia's backyard (Russia is not going to occupy or attack anyone unless attacked first) and people way more capable strategically and tactically than those in Pentagon tried it, not for once, and ended losing not only wars but their armies and  states. US military "thinkers" evidently have no grasp of what even conventional war with Russia may bring to the American side--the scale of attrition which will make Vietnam an easy stroll in the park in comparison, albeit Americans who fought there were tough soldiers and good leaders on tactical level. This is not the case today. But General Van Riper's lessons still must be studied to avoid a catastrophe which expects any adversary deciding to fight Russia in her vicinity. 

But what is this "crisis" really about? It is actually about not willing to face reality and fight a real war (it is scary and is pregnant with major political consequences), as opposed to comfortable rolling over grossly inferior adversaries. It is about constantly diminishing military capability margin, which was grossly inflated to start with in the wake of the Soviet collapse, and which now is getting to be more proportional to the Empire which is being "cut to size" by geopolitical, economic, military, technological and human reality. So, no--United States is not capable to fight either Russia or China separately, let alone those two simultaneously--this delusional idea was born out of ignorance, hubris and, frankly, lack of knowledge of the real warfare with capable adversaries. Projecting (lack of) "lessons" from Iraq or Afghanistan occupations and (not)fighting there in what is a medium to low intensity conventional (COIN) conflicts onto modern 21st century warfare against nuclear superpowers--it is either, indeed, folie de grandeur or a sign of a mental disorder among those who have to face reality of American very real economic and, with it, military decline. United States either learns to live within its by far not limitless means and accepts the new geopolitical reality, thus preserving own status as one of the few true global superpowers, or it will destroy itself completely trying to retain which it thinks, wrongly, a providence-bestowed crown of hegemon. I feel it is time to address some issues of possible casualties in a conventional conflict. I will do it later.

Tuesday, November 13, 2018

It Begins To Sink, Finally, But Too Late.

No, really.
This situation, which passes as a surprise in the US only, augments well Ron Unz' yesterday's excellent summary of Trump Presidency.
Difficult to argue, because in terms of what really matters, that is tangible economic results, Trump has very little realistically to show for it. As Ron Unz continues:
For foreign policy reasons, I had strongly favored Trump both in the primary and in the general election, but I hardly regarded him as a thoughtful vessel for the positions he claimed to espouse. To put it bluntly, he struck me much like a highly-opinionated construction worker, angrily spouting off on politics in his local neighborhood bar, being right on some matters and wrong on others, but with none of his views based upon any deep understanding of the issues. I suspect that even many of Trump’s strongest supporters have gradually come around to a similar appraisal of their idol.
So did I, but hopes were dashed really fast and as Fred Reed in a moment of utter sheer brilliance observed about Trump he was First Transgender President, Trump Became Hillary. Trump simultaneously became also W and in terms of foreign policy, which in reality matters for the United States way more than it is traditionally credited with, Trump became a neocon in a sense of fanatically following an aggressive dogma and "weaponizing" US economy. So, the world learned fast that the economic war was declared on it and it started acting or, rather, counter-acting and most important strategic move was, inevitably, to slay a holy cow of America's economic "development" (or otherwise) of the last 70 years or so--the US Dollar. 

This is what Trump and people on the American "top" do not recognize, while the US still remains an economic powerhouse:

1. American Deindustrializtion hasn't been stopped while Reindustrialization requires a volume of the investment (money) which simply cannot be printed anymore nor could US treasuries be viewed anymore as a trusted instrument, because...

2. A main pillar of these treasuries--the US military power and ability to control the empire, apart from being grossly inflated to start with, diminished greatly in the last 20+ years and continue to decline because...

3. The actual size of the US economy is much smaller than those proverbial $22 trillion and China outproduces the United States by a great margin in many critical fields and catching up in others. As an example, one of many, the US commercial shipbuilding doesn't even register (0.35% of global tonnage) in this industry, never mind nauseating mantras about US being "largest economy" in the world--it is not, China is. One can review Chinese commercial shipbuilding here, or can review who is a real mover (a hint--they are a gas station) for satellite-constellations in space.

4. Removing, or bypassing, US Dollar as the only global reserve currency--the process which is ongoing and accelerating as I type this--inevitably will cut the US economy "to size" and will accelerate the process of "landing" greatly, hopefully not crash-landing which may force desperate US "elites" unleash a global conflict. 

Trump's trade wars are a good indicator of desperation and these wars only accelerate dedollarization and there is nothing the US can do about it short of unleashing a global military conflict, as I said earlier. Some people in D.C. think about it. Iran's SWIFT snafu is just the latest in a row of the geopolitical and economic prescriptions which do not work and, in reality, harm the United States itself. Well, Trump is correct in one thing for sure--if not for the United States China would have never become what she is today and for that, as the saying goes, United States has only itself to blame. In the end, if not for the way the US treated Russia in 1990s there would have been no fundamental rethinking of Russia's foreign and defense policies. But here we are. Trump merely, rephrasing Clausewitz, continues American aggression by other (economic) means and we are in the brave new world where nobody takes American words and promises seriously anymore. In related news, last week:


This Is Not Good.

WSJ reports:


Boeing Withheld Information on 737 Model, According to Safety Experts and Others 


This is more than just "not good", this is down right scary.
The automated stall-prevention system on Boeing 737 MAX 8 and MAX 9 models -- intended to help cockpit crews avoid mistakenly raising a plane's nose dangerously high -- under unusual conditions can push it down unexpectedly and so strongly that flight crews can't pull it back up. Such a scenario, Boeing told airlines in a world-wide safety bulletin roughly a week after the accident, can result in a steep dive or crash -- even if pilots are manually flying the jetliner and don't expect flight-control computers to kick in. That warning came as a surprise to many pilots who fly the latest models for U.S carriers. Safety experts involved in and tracking the investigation said that at U.S. carriers, neither airline managers nor pilots had been told such a system had been added to the latest 737 variant -- and therefore aviators typically weren't prepared to cope with the possible risks."It's pretty asinine for them to put a system on an airplane and not tell the pilots who are operating the airplane, especially when it deals with flight controls," said Capt. Mike Michaelis, chairman of the safety committee for the Allied Pilots Association, which represents about 15,000 American Airlines pilots. "Why weren't they trained on it?"
Make no mistake--I am all for automation, where it is needed. But I am also, and primarily so, for high level of professional training of personnel which provides a set of fundamental skills allowing professional pilots, mariners, surgeons, what have you, to be independent of "technology" in critical situations while deciding when and how to engage it. We just saw another example of a loss of a situational awareness and of extremely low level of fundamental professional skills here:


At least in Norway no people got killed, in case of Indonesian Boeing every one on board died. Somebody at Boeing has to answer for this major FUBAR and higher-ups there at least may try to remind people who write all kinds of software for commercial aircraft that it is not a freaking video-game they are coding--people's safety is at stake. But that opens another can of worms altogether--technophilia taken to the extreme in a firm conviction, primarily among people who do not have required complex skills such as piloting, that machines can do everything for us. They can't, and they shouldn't. In the end, the Miracle on Hudson occurred primarily for the reasons of Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger and his crew's superb professional human skills under the conditions of almost complete failure of technology. In the end, I would be extremely apprehensive while being flown in the aircraft in which pilots are merely operators of the cockpit at the service of main on-board computer, or to be driven in pilot-less cars--another wet dream of office plankton who thinks that human lives can be described in Java or C++. 

Most of all, I  would be very, and I am, apprehensive of exclusion of a human professional from the decision loop in Combat Informational Control Systems (aka Battle Management) responsible for the use of sensors and weapons because in this case a Skynet scenario becomes not only possible but reasonably probable. In warfare, I am all for networks and AI but only under conditions of a human having his hand at the switch. I really hope that Boeing learns its (tragic) lesson because I like Boeing's aircraft but the idea that those could become simply uncontrollable pieces of metal with no ability to get them under control is, frankly, terrifying.   

Friday, November 9, 2018

When You Have A Cigar And A Real Blues.

Cause it's Gary, late Gary... 


Lenochka Fischer.

Is she German, is she Russian? Well, I guess she is both. She sure as hell was born near where my wife was born--Krasnoyarsk. She packs stadiums in Germany. 


Time for her come home and rock the hell out of Russians, or Germans, of whoever the hell populates Russia. And, of course, who would forget this, LOL. 


Now, Everything Is Clear;-)

Because nobody got killed, thank God, and it is Friday--the cause of Norwegian frigate sinking has just been revealed. Thanks to "intelligence community", you know, the one which fights Russian meddling in US elections and Brexit. 


Plus, of course, Russians "jammed" GPS. How "jamming" GPS may affect radar and visual tracking of maneuvering targets is not disclosed but, anyway, blame it all on Russians. And we are not into the tax time yet, can you imagine what Russians could do to IRS, thus gaining love and adoration of most Americans;-)


Realism?

I finished latest book, The Great Delusion, by John Mearsheimer recently. I will review it later, it is not that important to do it now, I have to say, that while being sympathetic to the so called Realism in general, and some points Mearsheimer makes in this his treatise, it seems that he himself still resides in a delusion. Mearsheimer repeats, with conviction, some beaten to death cliches of American exceptionalism, such as the myth of "liberalism defeating Fascism",

Liberalism "defeating" Fascism
or stressing Soviet Union's "humiliating defeat in Afghanistan". Unlike Mearsheimer, who has very little knowledge of Russia, Colonel Lester Grau long ago addressed this issue. Unlike Merasheimer, who, despite his USMA West Point background, is a political "scientist", Grau is an authority on Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan. I will repeat his conclusions yet again: 
"There is a literature and a common perception that the Soviets were defeated and driven from Afghanistan. This is not true. When the Soviets left Afghanistan in 1989, they did so in a coordinated, deliberate, professional manner, leaving behind a functioning government, an improved military and an advisory and economic effort insuring the continued viability of the government. The withdrawal was based on a coordinated diplomatic, economic and military plan permitting Soviet forces to withdraw in good order and the Afghan government to survive. The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA)managed to hold on despite the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Only then, with the loss of Soviet support and the increased efforts by the Mujahideen (holy warriors) and Pakistan, did the DRA slide toward defeat in April 1992. The Soviet effort to withdraw in good order was well executed and can serve as a model for other disengagements from similar nations."
In what can only be described as an empirical middle finger to Mearsheimer's assertion about "humiliating defeat" (and I get it where he comes from in his assertion, but about this later), we get today these news. You don't need to read Russian, just go directly to CNN video embedded in article (which is a transcript of the video) and listen. 

Defeated, especially "humiliatingly", nations do not host in their capitals meetings of parties involved in the war in which the host supposedly was defeated. Obviously, even after this "humiliating defeat", Russia continued to exert an immense influence on Afghanistan both indirectly and directly, including, of course, arming Northern Alliance. "Humiliatingly defeated" nations do not behave like that. I will omit here the whole issue of Taliban being officially declared (in 2003) in Russia a terrorist organization, but times and things change. As in Syria, where Russia was forced to clean a mess created by NATO (US), Russia will have to make arrangements in Afghanistan. After all, we know by now how ISIS was defeated in Syria. 

The United States has been in Afghanistan for 17 years--with zero results to show for it while redefining military common sense (and science) in terms of victory being "just staying there", and, of course, having a good PR machine, which can spin a defeat into victory. This is not how Russia works and that is what parties in Afghanistan know. The prime task is to prevent ISIS from reconstituting itself as a major player in Afghanistan. If it takes Taliban to help deal with this scourge--so be it, let's talk. In the end, the fate of a huge region is at stake, including Russia's "soft underbelly". And here we come to this "realism" thing; while I still would recommend a book by Mearsheimer to be read, it is really about time that many (not all) American "realists" followed Mearsheimer's advise and stopped living in delusion, no, not the liberal one, a "realist" one, and finally face geopolitical reality of a tectonic shift in power balance in the world in which real realism, capable to operate with tangibles, not simulacra, triumphed. In the end, one has to operate with reliable data, not propaganda cliches. Victory in war is defined by attaining war's political objectives. We know how that goes for the US lately. 

Thursday, November 8, 2018

He Does It Again.

It is Russian (as in Russkii, not Rossiiski) Sobor (Council). Turn on CC. 

 

What Can I Say.

The first rule, a golden one, of the watch (officer) and, in case of ships of such rank, combat informational center, is this: BE CONSTANTLY AWARE OF THE SITUATION AND ACT ACCORDINGLY. The rest, COLREGS, maneuvering boards, collision avoidance means and protocols, professional knowledge of maneuvering characteristics of own ship, navigation--all that comes after constant maintenance of situational awareness by all: electronic, optronic and other means at the disposal. But all this, becomes irrelevant when you are, well, let the press talk:
COPENHAGEN, Denmark — A Norwegian Navy frigate was rammed by a tanker while it was docked in a harbor on the country's west coast Thursday, the military said. The crew of 127 was evacuated amid fears the ship will sink. Eight people on the KNM Helge Instad were slightly injured when the accident occurred at 4 a.m. local time in Sture, north of Bergen, the Joint Rescue Coordination Center for southern Norway said. The military said the ship, which had recently taken part in the vast NATO drill Trident Juncture, is taking on water. Eirik Walle, with the rescue center, told Norwegian news agency NTB that the collision caused an opening in the frigate's hull and "it is taking in more water than they can pump out. There is no control over the leak and the stern is heavily in the sea."The Maltese-flagged tanker, Sola TS, was not damaged and its 23-man crew remained on board.


You can see the damage which immediately brings up the issue of: what were they thinking at the bridge of a tanker? Tankers are big, stupid and barely maneuverable. 



At least nobody died in this 5,300 tons of displacement against 120,000. You know, Geo Metro against 18-wheeler semi fully loaded. Here is this Sola TS. She is big.


We'll have to wait for more details coming out soon.    

UPDATE: In related (naval) news. 

Officials: Ronald Reagan LSD probe bigger than you think, 14 nuke sailors snagged

Holy shit! 

A Confusing World Of Labels.

So, this is how it goes now--one of the last remaining true American journalists and public thinkers is being accused of hate.
An anti-fascist group swarmed the Washington, D.C. home of Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson Wednesday night ordering him to leave town. In a video, shared on Twitter, the group, known as Smash Racism DC, can be seen crowding around the doorsteps of the Tucker Carlson Tonight host’s residence, holding signs. At one point the clip, a member of the group yells, “Tucker Carlson we are outside your home to protest fascism and racism,” through a megaphone. “You promote hate and an ideology that has led to thousands of people dying by the hands of the police to trans women being murdered in the streets,” the protestor continued. “Your policies promote hate and we want you to know we know where you sleep at night,” the protestor added before the crowd began chanting “Tucker Carlson, we will fight! We know where you sleep at night!”
I do not want to go into the political theory of Fascism and what it stands for but in an ironic twist, American so called ANTIFA is precisely a fascist group (mob) under the control of some higher positioned so called liberal nutjobs. First, I hope that the issue of threats to Carlson's family and him will be addressed by law enforcement but here is a real issue--most in those so called "anti-fascist" and "anti-hate" (LOL) groups in the US are, with some minor exceptions, a collection of young delinquents who think that they can start a revolution. And here is the problem, they don't understand that people who really care about preserving what's left of the US at this point can also easily learn where those ANTIFA activists live. What is most important, among those people, very many are people with actual military, intelligence and law enforcement experience and that brings forth purely tactical and operational issues--not political ones.

This "anti-hate" groups at some point point of time will spark something which will involve just a teeny-weeny more than shouting slogans, assaulting people and fighting children, and when the hell will break lose, together with inevitable loosening of "camaraderie" inter-group connections (acting in mob is always easier and less scary than standing your ground alone) with people who actually can shoot, kill and who actually know how to fight entering personal lives of all those "activists"--things will go down the hill for this fascist anti-fascist groups dramatically. As I stated not for once, while GOP is a pathetic joke for a political party with cowards (mostly) pretending to "serve" people, very rich and influential people, that is, Democratic party and its ideologists are fast becoming agents of chaos and, as James Kirkpatrick noted, a Post-American Party. As such, they should take a very careful look in the mirror and ask themselves a question what happens when they overreach.

Monday, November 5, 2018

There Is Always A Price To Be Paid.

We have been over this in this blog several times. It is good to repeat it yet again.
I don't know if Iranians learned their lesson, after all Russian proverb the orient is a very delicate business applies fully here, but it is about time they started making some proper decisions. Especially with this in mind:
Most modern commercial planes have more than 10 percent in U.S. parts, the threshold for needing U.S. Treasury approval. But Russian officials have been reported as saying Sukhoi is working on reducing the number of U.S. parts in the hopes of winning an Iranian order for up to 100 aircraft. 
Big power politics does not work on mere trade contracts, however important they are.
Bloomberg gives a decent representation of Iran's main export's (oil) distribution:
As you can see, if push comes to shove--new "instruments" or not, the United States can "kill off" Iran's deliveries to Europe and Asia easily. I do not have any faith with EU, which, I think, can be forced to do US bidding, especially when one talks about "defense" issue, which are important to Europeans (after all, aggressive Russkies are planning to harm Europe for...no apparent reason). This could be a disaster for Iran but... enter Russia. 

First, the reason Iran is still not bombed, as many in Tel Aviv (and D.C.) sleep and (wet) dream about, is because of, no, not China, but Russia. After all, even Iranian assets in Syria are breathing much easier as member of Knesset's Committee on Foreign Policy and Defense Xenia Svetlova (obviously of Russian Jewish descent) admitted today (in Russian). 
Since Russia supplied S-300s to Syria, Israel didn't fly a single mission into this country and this delivery changed the balance of power in region. 
Isn't it what I preach for years now? How many more empirical evidences are needed before people start to take in basic facts of great power behavior. Especially if this great power (or superpower) is Russia who loves peace and quiet. Iran, sure as hell, now better start thinking very clearly regarding her trade relations with Russia, because it is her who is selling this most important and desperately desirable product in the world--political stability. Hence the question: can Iran be slightly more patient for Russians finishing SSJ-100s to fully Russian specs, same goes to MC-21, which goes into series production next year, and so on? There is, after all, another dimension to this whole regional dynamics once one considers that almost 40% of Iranian population are ethnic Azerbaijanis and that brings into focus the issue of Caucasus and Turkey, which herself is somewhat in limbo right now, albeit I expect her to fall back into the NATO fold eventually. In the end, Iranian oil deliveries also rest on arrangements which Russia, who doesn't really gives a damn about sanctions, will make. 

So, no matter how important for Iran her regional ambitions are, she will have, at least for a little while, to dance a little bit to Russian tune, whose music sheet ranges from trade to military assistance to the alternative to SWIFT which eventually will be killed by the US, to...well, guarantees of Iran's safety which is a direct function of Russia's military might and geopolitical weight. It is what it is and for the time of this great turbulence, Iran will have to do a slight accommodation with Russia who is sincerely interested in keeping Iran stable, prosperous and peaceful. In the end, it was Iran who, once sanctions have been lifted, immediately signed contracts for 200 commercial aircraft NOT with Russia, who at that time hoped that Iran will consider Russia's support. But, as they say in Russia the orient is a very delicate business. It looks like Russians finally learned their lessons and that is what matters most at this point of time.

Trump Is Not Racist.

I may, and justifiably so, criticize DJT, and there is a lot to be said about his style and world-view, but what Donald J. Trump is not for sure--he is not a racist, he is race realist. As am I, btw. 

Here is yet another belch of CNN on the issue of immigration.


But, whoever this deranged bimbo Navarro is, DJT is absolutely correct when he calls Salvador, let alone Haiti, shitholes--they are shitholes and they will never be anything else. And if this Navarro gal learned a bit about Mexico's immigration laws she would probably shut up about "racism"--the only trick American "progressives" know. Now, one day before mid-terms Democrats, who are responsible for turning the US into the increasingly multicultural cloaca, are desperate to do anything to prevent Trump's GOP retain majority in both houses. 

Republicans are disgusting, at least most of them, but at least they do not want to give up their own country to ethnic mafias immediately and if Navarro disagrees with this policy, she can go back to the shithole she came from to the US--the name of this shithole is Nicaragua and I am sure, political system and people there are not racist. Yeah, right. Navarro can wax moralistic whatever she wants but she lies when she puts on this insulted innocence look for the consumption of CNN audience. She should know, and she has degree in Latin American Studies (whatever that is),  that truth is very simple--with or without interference of the US historically, Latin America had never put its act together and for that there are many substantial reasons other than political and economic issues. She may take a look at Brazil, for warm up.

Trump knows, as know I, or anyone who doesn't drink "progressive" Kool Aid--no white christian America, no United States of America, which, for all its faults, has a lot of good in it still left too. Multicultural societies DO NOT work without core cohesive nation, otherwise--civil war and violent disintegration follow. For Navarro, who comes from Latin American background, term Balkanization means absolutely nothing, because she thinks that Latinization of the United States will be just dandy and all those "racists" (like Trump) will be driven out of power. Well, with that the ideology of political correctness, which forbids to call shitholes what they are, or which forbids viewing racial distribution and proportionality of violent crimes as FBI presents, or which forbids calling a spade a spade, will reign supreme, as it begins to happen now. I have some news for Navarro--Blacks in US do not really want to integrate, nor huge swaths of Latino population really care that much about integration (granted, they do still better than blacks)--this all precisely for the reasons of being "racist" but, somehow, nobody calls them that at CNN. So, whenever white person points out to his (her) own rights--it is racist, when blacks or Latinos want to reshape the United States in their own image which, frankly, is the end of the United States, it is OK. But it is not.

I also have some news for Navarro--nations are defined, among few prime things, also with their national borders which MUST be protected. So the march of this migrant "caravan"--an obvious dangerous provocation concocted in the inflamed minds of American "progressives" threatens to unleash an extremely damaging forces within the US. I said it many times before, I'll repeat it again--while GOP is the party of old money and is filled with scumbags (such as Navarro--a GOP "strategist"), who will wreak the country eventually anyway, they are still less dangerous in a short run than Democratic party and its "progressive" wing which has nothing, zero, to do with American Old Left. It is this party which sees NO value in America's white culture and history and it is this party which is plotting a violent demise of America by turning it into the battlefield of racial groups, with eventual clean up of white culture from the map and memory of a shithole which will emerge under the tutelage of new US. This is racist and it is also extremely dangerous but it is difficult to explain this to such ignorant bimbo as Navarro.  After all, why the man with intelligence on the orders of magnitude more powerful than Navarro's and who is absolutely NOT a "racists" speaks about the fate of white Christian America. 


UPDATE: Ahhh, things getting slightly clearer. Here is the deal:

New 'The View' Co-Host Has Been Announced

So, a collection of ignorant under-educated gals with zero skills who provide "social (or political) commentary". Sure, as much as Trump is headless, what's the difference when he is discussed by other unhinged and headless people. Boy, talk about lose-lose situation. Yep, Ana Navarro will be "commenting" there, I assume as "conservative", that is Latino open borders "conservative", which is not really a conservative or whatever other monikers are used nowadays in a confused and chaotic American "political commentary" universe. Sheer mad house.

Friday, November 2, 2018

Magical Thniking In Magical Land.

Utah's own Deseret News published yesterday a long overview of US Ambassador to Russia, also Utah's very own, John Huntsman's life as an ambassador in Moscow. As expected, it is filled with ad nauseam propaganda cliches about "democracy", "Russian meddling" and other journo fantasies about both United States and Russia. But the thing which attracted attention in Russia was this passage:
For those who need semantics of "intractable", here is Merriam-Webster:
not easily governed, managed, or directed; not easily manipulated or shaped  
Immediate question which arises is: what did he expect? The United States, by circumstances and Russian naivete, were given about 20 years to show everyone what this promised New World Order is going to look like. The presentation is over, everyone saw it. US "World Order" means: "humanitarian bombings", support of terrorism, color revolutions, violent invasions, millions of people killed, maimed, displaced, economic sanctions and degenerate culture being exported everywhere among many other things. Add here a total elimination of diplomacy as a statecraft in the US, represented by grossly under-educated and uncultured aggressive people, and... Well, did Mr.Huntsman study Russian history? Obviously not. In fact, John Huntsman is case in point of this US foreign, so called, policy fallacy. He is a specialist in China, he speaks Chinese, and moving him to Russia, a country with radically different from China's history, culture and psychology is akin to asking a surgeon design a jet aircraft. The record of US "diplomacy" (euphemism for postal service delivering US ultimatums) is easily accessible, the same as Trump's ideas on international relations--a sublimation of NYC real estate business experience. 

Now, Mr. Huntsman has his face soured when he doesn't get his way. It is, of course, a truism in current US magical thinking that everybody in Russia admires the US, or is desperate for US economic aid--another made up shit from Washington, Russians were really surprised to learn about this from Trump--the idea that Russia is not Iraq, or even Iran, and is a global power with her own national interests somehow escapes US establishment. Of course they are frustrated, it is so difficult to make those nasty Russkies dance under the Washington's tune after a decade of 1990s having own stooges in Kremlin, that faces do sour. My suggestion to Mr. Ambassador would be, of course, to get acquainted with the real Russia, her real economy, her real defense capabilities, her real people--maybe it will help relieve the souring from Russian intractability. I do not hold my breath, though. After all, it is a magical thinking in the magical land of Russia which exists only in the fantasies of US "diplomats".

Thursday, November 1, 2018

Russia's Non-Jewish History-3.



Imagine, if you can, yourself losing a leg as a result of gangrene due to deep multiple shrapnel penetrations, which, in itself was a result of the shell explosion, say at Mukden in 1905, then see hundreds of your fellow soldiers killed or maimed in the extreme. Imagine, if you can, the level of pain and traumatic stress, with allowance for the medicine of circa 1900 and then imagine what will you tell your sweet-heart in the village somewhere in Russia when you will get back from the front. Imagine you, illiterate, now facing some grim options related to survival, with some of them including highly probable one of ending up begging for pocket change and food at the stairs of some church. This is a reality which very many faced during Russo-Japanese War. At least, since Crimean War the use of ether became a norm and one could survive a pain shock during amputation or extraction of the bullets or shell fragments from the body. You are not alone in this, thousands upon thousands like you flood Russian villages and cities in 1905 after a military disaster at the Far East of Russian Empire. Of course, you have a story to tell and, while walking on crutches, a blame to blame. But that is not all, by far not all. In fact, Japanese propaganda in 1905 nailed it perfectly. Having a hindsight it is easy to see that, as much as it is painful to Russian heart to admit, Japanese were well aware (well, partially thanks to British intelligence) of the state of Russian Empire. 


Now imagine, if you are a low level, literate, clerk in some Russian town and you read newspapers, supporting Russian Army and Fleet with all your heart, about, first, a disastrous attempt of Russian Pacific Squadron to break out of the blocked by Japanese Navy Port Arthur, with the death of Admiral Vitgeft (Withoft) and effective loss of the squadron of 6 battleships as a combat formation in a show of a decisive advantage of Japanese gunnery and seamanship. But if that is not bad enough, enter Battle of Tsushima. In unprecedented in modern history battle, Japanese Navy's Admiral Togo and his squadron, at the loss of three small torpedo boats (total 450 tons of displacement) annihilated Admiral Zinovy Rozhestvensky's 2nd Pacific Squadron (combined 127, 000 tons of displacement sunk) in the most lopsided naval battle in history. No matter how one interprets this—there is absolutely no other way around it, Japan triumphed on unprecedented scale. Even Western World was sent into shock by this development. What was happening in Russia? Do you have an idea? Can you imagine what was happening? Remember Grand Duke Konstantine's bitter admission after conclusion of the Crimean War?

 We cannot deceive ourselves any longer; we must say that we are both weaker and poorer than the first-class powers, and furthermore poorer not only in material terms but in mental resources, especially in matters of administration.   

This time, 50 years later, it was Asian power which bested Russia. Now, if you were what I suggested you to imagine in the beginning--would you ask the question why all this happened to you personally and the country as a whole? Yes, yes, we all know that all kinds of Russian faux "patriots", such as Solzhenitsyn, complained that Russia sent not the best troops to fight at the Far East, yes, the half-world around of Rozhestvensky squadron's voyage was perilous and difficult, but have Mr. Solzhenitsyn heard (after all he was presented in the West as Russia's "historian") about this slight "problem" of Russian shells not exploding even when they were hitting Togo's ships at Tsushima? Have he ever elaborated on the issue of substandard powder and, in the end, for some reason higher humidity under which it was stored which had a disastrous effect on Russian guns? Why Stessel literally sold Port-Arthur to Japanese and instead of being shot as a traitor was pardoned by Nicholas II? Nah, details, tactics, operational art, strategy, industries—it is all for losers. Yet, if even the Western World was shocked, in Russia, outcome of Tsushima and of the whole war created a state of utter national agony. NO lessons have been learned since Crimea and even formal "liberation" of serfs, in reality did little to improve (in many cases it made it even more difficult), didn't help much in Russia's quest to stay a premier power of the age. So, enter first Russian Revolution of 1905-1907. Catastrophic national humiliation in Russo-Japanese War was one of the major factors, in fact—a match which lit already heating up powder keg of Russia's problems. Word Tsushima entered Russian consciousness and culture, till this day, as a euphemism for catastrophe Were Jews involved in this Revolution? Yes, they were, but they were just one "problem". The most important one, which also allowed many competent Russian historians (such as Elena Prudnikova, among others) call this Revolution a first Peasant Revolution of Russia, was, in the words of a very prominent, fervently anti-Bolshevik, Russian politician, Pavel Milyukov a failure of "emancipation", courtesy of Russian, oh, so admired, landowners class, which made famine a normal state of Russia:

The insufficiency of food is thus … associated with an abundance of working power. To find additional food and to spend additional work in producing it, two methods are possible: either to increase the productivity of the given plot, or to increase the plot itself. But the productivity of the soil cannot be increased without new investment of capital, if even we admit, what many writers do not grant, that such increase is possible at all on lands in communal ownership and in precarious possession of the single cultivator. Now the peasant in distress does not possess any capital, and rural credit for improving land does not exist in Russia. The other, and, under existing conditions, the only possible, method, is to buy or rent additional plots of land. This has always been the most ardent desire of the peasants, and a real struggle for buying or renting land has been going on during the whole period under consideration. Owing to the large number of estates of nobles offered for sale, and also to the material help of the Peasants' Bank (since 1883), the agriculturists have succeeded in increasing the property of the peasant communes since 1875 by 10 per cent. But even though we add such land as has been purchased by individual peasants, independently of the communal allotments, which would increase the amount by another 13 per cent., this general increase of 23 per cent does not prove equal to the increase of the peasant population during the same period, which was 48 per cent, or more than double. As a result, the holdings have constantly decreased and it became necessary to rent neighboring land. This necessity has been so great, and opportunities for renting land have been so comparatively few, that rent has risen enormously. Contrary to the laws of classical economy, the rent has not only reached the amount of the "unearned increment," but has far exceeded it, swallowing up the profits and, very often, the very wages of the tenants. Such exorbitant rent may be compared to what is known to have been the case in Ireland before the great famine of 1846-47, when the competition among the tenants "reminded one of a struggle for food in a besieged city or on a ship in open sea." The same kind of competition is going on among the Russian peasants owing to the absolute insufficiency of their plots for mere subsistence. Of course, no profits are looked for from such renting, the only aim of the peasants--and the only economic explanation of the possibility of such a rent--being to apply their own and their horses' gratuitous labor to produce some more grain for their sustenance. Otherwise this possibility of subsidiary work would be lost, and both man and horse must starve. No wonder that they count their work as nothing.

Russia and Its Crisis by Paul Mileiiukov, Crane Lectures for 1903, Chicago, the University of Chicago Press, London T. Fisher Unwin, Paternoster Square 1905, pages 450-451.



What is interesting in all that is the fact that still by 1905 a dominant Russian way of agriculture was a Three-Field System—a medieval way of growing food stuff, especially in the age of serious mechanization unfolding in the West. So, it matters really that Russia was not just humiliated militarily and politically in 1905. It matters that she was humiliated while being illiterate and constantly hungry, with wholesale and local famines being a permanent occurrence in Russian countryside. In the end, overwhelming majority of Russian Army and Navy recruits tasted the meat for the first time in their life on the military service. As Nikolai Nekrasov wrote in his 1864 "Grandfather Frost the Red Nose" (in Russian), Part: Death of a Peasant:

На эти рыданья и стоны Соседи валили гурьбой: Свечу положив у иконы, Творили земные поклоны И шли молчаливо домой. На смену входили другие. Но вот уж толпа разбрелась, Поужинать сели родные — Капуста да с хлебушком квас.

I am not in the position to translate one of the greatest Russian poets but highlighted reads:

The Dears sat for the dinner—cabbage, bread and kvas.

But never mind, those were "enemies" of Russia, who "lied" about the state Russian people were forced into by all those magnificent Russian nobles who knew from the get go that it was "Jewish conspiracy" to expose Russia's peasantry calorie intake and then try to stop never-ending Russian hunger. Other than that, life in St. Petersburg or in vast landowners' mansions in country side was swell and champagne was flowing, under the sound of a crunch of French baguette…


To Be Continued….