Two days ago The Guardian posted the article about a very dear and respected by me man. At my time in 1980s, a superintendent of my naval academy, Vasili Alexandrovich Arkhipov. When I started my naval military exploits in 1980 he was a rear-admiral, later, in 1981 he was promoted to the vice-admiral and, of course, we all knew his story. I had an honor to know, as many our naval cadets and officers, him personally and serve aKVVMKU--my years. nd study under his outstanding command.
“The Future of Life award is a prize awarded for a heroic act that has
greatly benefited humankind, done despite personal risk and without
being rewarded at the time,” said Max Tegmark, professor of physics at MIT and leader of the Future of Life Institute. “The lesson from this is that a guy called Vasili Arkhipov saved the
world,’’ Thomas Blanton, director of the National Security Archive at
George Washington University, told the Boston Globe in 2002, following a conference in which the details of the situation were explored.
It couldn't have been awarded, however posthumously, to a better man than Admiral Arkhipov. Some photos of Vasili Alexandrovich.
Arkhipov and Admiral Kosov, Chief of Naval Aacdemies of USSR--both graduates of our academy.
He surely portrays himself, and I quote from his biography, as:
I'm a defense writer, avid gamer and history buff. I'm currently a
contributing editor for Foreign Policy Magazine, a writer for the War is
Boring defense blog and of course a contributor at Forbes. My work has
also appeared in the Washingon Post,Slate, Defense News, USA Today, the
Philadelphia Inquirer and other fine publications. I'm a contrarian, an
iconoclast, and I know that not everyone will agree with me. That means I
must be doing something right.
He holds some degree, in what else--Political Science--and that is about the extent to which his actual competencies stretch. Obviously, if being a "contrarian" and "history buff" are qualities required for speaking out on some serious military issues, then, as I pointed out not for once in this blog--there should be no surprise with US "achievements" in geopolitical and military spheres. This is not to mention that someone who thinks WaPo or Slate to be "fine publications" has to really create an immediate alertness to a possible BS. And BS Mr. Peck produced aplenty in his, yet another, ignorant piece titled:
And here is the issue immediately--there is nothing misunderstood about that Battle. It was studied in so much detail by now that no amount of Peck's BS can obfuscate the fact of him lacking even remote knowledge of the basic facts. Of course, he covers his BS with this:
Pointing this out takes nothing away from the bravery and skill of
the Red Army, any more that it disparages the Western Allies to point
out that the Soviets fought and destroyed the bulk of the German army.
But today, as America and Russia confront one another, it is worth
remembering there was a time when both nations cooperated to save the
world from a new Dark Ages.
It is a load of patronizing BS not because it takes anything away from the Red Army, which Peck does exactly(I'll show it below) but because, most likely, he knows it. If he doesn't--then he should stick to writing for Papua-New Guinea's (nothing personal per se against this fine country) publications. Here is a first "bomb":
On July 10, Anglo-American troops landed on the beaches of Sicily. Two
days later Hitler informed his generals that he was canceling the
offensive and transferring the SS Panzer divisions to Italy, to repel
any Allied landings on the Italian peninsula.
Obviously it is a complete crap since WW II has NO recorded facts of transfer of SS or Wehrmacht combat units from the Eastern Front to the Western one, the other direction? All the time. But here is what really happened:
Western historiography would continue to quote in unison
Mainstein's assertion that allied Operation Husky,
as Sicily landing was known, would force Hitler to shift some of his crack
divisions from Kursk area to Italy. What was omitted, of course, was the fact
that the only division which actually made it to Italy, completely without its
heavy equipment which was transferred to Das
Reich and Totenkopf SS Panzer Divisions, was Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler Division. Both Das Reich and Totenkopf were never
transferred to Italy and were redeployed to the so called Mius-Front, which was
a heavily fortified German defensive line along the river Mius in Southern
Russia. There they would face another Red Army offensive. Moreover, Leibstandarte
SS Adolf Hitler Division was deployed to and then remained stationed in
Northern Italy mostly for garrison and punitive functions, which could hardly
be called combat tasks. This Division would find its end on the Eastern
Front, with some remnants of once crack unit surrendering to the US Army in the
West.
Damnfacts!! Oh am I being a "contrarian" or an "iconoclast"? The offensive was stopped because a Husky? Dir Mr. Contrarian even take a look at what Mius-front was, or what was transpiring there and why those 2 crack SS Divisions were sent namely there? Then, of course, our "iconoclast" comes up with another trivia.
Military theory holds that the attacker should outnumber the defender
three-to-one, and that fighting through dense fortifications will render
an attack ever more costly
Well, military "theory" holds that one calculates a required force and "designs" its structure often with the use of serious staffs and long and tedious calculations and "modelling" which was done even in WW II times and in reality was about same ol', same ol' ability to mass (concentrate) its forces on a key axes. Obviously Mr. Peck never learned that at proverbial Schwerpunkts the ratio of forces could reach sometimes 20 to 1 but here we are getting ahead ourselves and getting into serious operational issues which even for WW II could be fitted into C3ISR. But the real wowser from Peck comes here:
7. Kursk was an Anglo-American victory as well as a Soviet one:
Just as the SS Panzers were about to achieve a decisive breakthrough
-- or so Von Manstein claimed -- an Anglo-American amphibious force
landed on Sicily. Hitler called off Operation Citadel and transferred
the SS Panzer divisions to Italy. The timing was coincidental. The
Anglo-Americans didn't land on Sicily to support the Soviets at Kursk,
nor could they have mounted a large amphibious invasion on such short
notice. But the practical effect was to draw German troops from the
Eastern Front at a critical time.
You see, friends, what was a real contribution of the US 7th Army of 66,000 men lead by
Patton or Montgomery's 115,000 men facing about 60,000 German troops in Sicily, most of
them later successfully evacuated, to a titanic struggle on
the Eastern Front is difficult to comprehend. Of course, those crack SS divisions factually never fought Allies in Italy, but that, as you can see, doesn't bother Mr. Peck in the least. In this case, I agree with Peck's assertion--Battle of Kursk is the most misunderstood battle by Michael Peck. In fact, I have reasons to suspect that he knows shit about it, as well as about Eastern Front, as well as about WW II in general. Highlighted in yellow is a completely contrived, counter-factual BS. I guess that is what one gets when one becomes a military history "buff", or maybe it is a buffoon?
Putin nails it in two phrases at Valdai. 1. Our main mistake was in trusting West too much;
2. West's mistake (???) was in viewing Russia's trust as a weakness.
The pp.1 is long ago not an issue--overwhelming majority of Russians doesn't trust the West. The West in general is viewed as not treaty-worthy party, which it is not, indeed. Any agreement with the West today is not worth the paper it is written on. P.p.2, however, is more important since is one of the pillars on which this West's treaty untrustworthiness rests upon. There are still many people in European and, especially so American, elites who think that Russia still resides in 1990s, when the West loved to wipe its feet on her. This is not the case anymore and it is not the case since long ago. This whole blog from the inception is dedicated to this fact. The West has committed a gigantic mistake, but nowhere this mistake is more pronounced than it is in the US. By alienating Russia, the United States lost the ONLY potential geopolitical ally which could ensure the US' remaining relevant in new global configuration and, yes, in balancing out China. Now it is too late, even with Putin still, as usual, offering an equal dialogue with the West. Russian-Chinese economic, hence military-technological and, possibly, military-political alliance is now gaining a steam. This trade will reach $80 billion by the end of this year. But these are long term infrastructural projects which make it remarkable, from the Power of Siberia pipe-line to Russian-Chinese long range wide-body CR-929--all that has massive strategic ramifications and the Europeans are beginning to feel the itch from the outside. Inside European problems can not any longer be described as an itch, they are a major pain. Yet, the most important thing to be taken away from Valdai's revelations are that even Igor Shuvalov, a long perceived liberal pro-western lawyer-turn-economist strategist suddenly started talking about economic planning and massive national projects. Even Alexander Prokhanov was pleasantly startled by that--Russia's Economic Ministry, after moving into one of Moscow-City's skyscrapers will have a Planning Department. A sign of further departure from mindless and inhumane libertarian experiments. There is something huge afoot in Eurasia and it is being felt all over the world. Today it is impossible to deny anymore. Recall my almost three year old conclusion:
I
observed for decades now a consistent pattern of the wrong assessments,
loony strategies and deliberate misrepresentation (lies?) of facts
coming from the top of US establishment, which since 1991 lives in the
make-believe world built by the triumphalists. It is difficult to
explain to the average Joe that Baseball World Series, or Superbowl
"World Champions" have no relation to the World and are purely internal
American affairs. That there is a huge wide world outside and that it
lives and moves not in accordance to the American narrative. Explaining
to American "elite" the fact that US didn't "win" the WW II, that
"winning" the Cold War came about because Soviet people simply decided
to end it, that Wall Street "economy" has no relation to real economy
and that real wars produce misery and destruction on a scale which is
incomprehensible for the "populace" of the Washington D.C.
"strategists", it is not just difficult--it is next to impossible. So,
the events must run the course. But it is already clear that by failing
to achieve any sensible political objectives in Ukraine and in Russia,
and, by this, starting a massive global re-alignment, the United States
sustained a defeat. What will be the consequences of this defeat? I hate
to speculate, I just know that they are already big and that the moment
of facing the reality is coming. My suggestion to those who are still
making decisions--open and start reading War And Peace by Leo
Tolstoy. I don't hold my breath, though. The moment US handlers of their
Kiev puppets conceived that Ukrainian Army can "win" in Donbass, the
stopwatch started.
I think the moment of facing reality has arrived. Have a nice Friday.
Robert Bork, should he be alive today, would feel himself vindicated. Defending White Christian European Civilization openly? I can see Hollywood screeching and US Congress doing a seppuku... ah, wait....it usually takes honor to splash your entrails.
While the whole Trump Russia Gate contrived story goes nowhere with dramatically increasing velocity, that is acceleration, other story seems to be making some circles on the water--that is the story of... read The Hill:
If one asks me if this whole thing could be a real deal, I can definitely say that I can envision the whole network of bribes, kickbacks and other, rather very personal, favors which Russians might have provided to a... drum roll...drum roll... still drumming and rolling... to the US Democratic Administration of Barack Obama. Is it possible? Yes. How probable is that? Surely way above zero. But the question here is not the fact that Russia bought 20% of US deposits of uranium. US' plunder of Russia in 1990s could be briefly reviewed here. There is very little real "national security risk" in that, but what is remarkable, of course, that Russia was in cahoots with Clinton (and Obama) clans which makes this whole story of Trump being Russia's Manchurian President a complete baloney even for the armies of Hillary's worshipers from the very sleazy and revolting DNC, media and slime Hollywood to a completely brainwashed masses of SJWs. That is if they will be able to survive a brutal cognitive dissonance without overdosing on the antidepressant. Most of them have to be on them anyway. If anything else, Russia "financed" Hillary, who, obviously, continues to "project" on The Donald her own, rather murky, operations with Russians and a very real financial and other gain for hers and her pervert hubby's little "charity". While the whole business of Uranium One purchase may be questionable, actions of The Clintons may amount to a very serious bribery and corruption accusations and, hopefully, charges. Man, this dish goes so well with this whole Hollywood feminazis now, apparently, being fvcked non stop for the last 20 or so years by all kinds of perverts, such as this low life Weinstein, for their movie roles and none of them biting off Weinstein's dick or kicking him in the balls to defend their human honor and integrity. Well, Hollywood doesn't have any. We all know whom the Hollywood supported in all of the last several election cycles in the US and that ain't Donald Trump. For Russians this whole situation is the second best thing. Obviously, there will be always non-stop bouts of anti-Russian hysteria from all corners and Russia will be blamed no matter what, but, at least, this whole story has a potential of damaging the cesspool which Beltway has become to such a degree that some, maybe not visible initially, movements will begin in a direction of removing a completely corrupt, degenerate and criminal US "political" elite. It is the only way the United States will survive as a whole nation with some, not entirely bleak, future.
So you know the rest of this famous expression. But here is my conundrum, I never hid my warm attitude to American people, nor my love for the country which became our home in a very difficult time for us and, apart from being madly in love with the American West in general, seemed to give a moral meaning to life. So, comes the moral issue--yes, I was and continue to be outspoken against actions of the American political, that is power class, since the start of a criminal adventure in Yugoslavia and then Iraq, and then, well, you know... But at some point one has to ask the question: is this now really that bad, is this becoming a complete madhouse? As painful as it is to admit it--yes, there are many people in US power-media elite who are going off the rails in a major and a grotesque way. It would have been funny if it wouldn't have been so damn serious since most of those people truly are mad. Get this:
Russian cyber experts created a Pokemon Go game as part of their attempts to meddle with the US election, according to an investigation by CNN. Under the banner of Don’t Shoot Us, a collective that seemed to share the aims of Black Lives Matter but which is now believed to be run by Russians, the game was created to inspire online participants. Users
could visit sites where police brutality had been recorded, and were
encouraged to give their Pokemon characters names of real-life victims,
such as Eric Garner, who died on Staten Island. The winner of the Pokemon contest would receive an Amazon gift card, the Don’t Shoot Us site said. CNN said it had no evidence of anyone actually claiming the prize.
A sheer idiocy of these claims is such, that many, following Goebbels's dictum, will believe it. Thankfully, the comment section to this news piece (of shit) provides enough antidote to start smiling and eventually laugh one's ass off. The best comment (out of which I managed to read) was this:
There, there, Hillary don't feel bad. Democratic Senator Adam Schiff has
subpoenaed Pokemon to testify in front of the Senate Lack Of
Intelligence Committee. lol
This one is good too, LOL--here is a nation of Mark Twain and O'Henry still alive and kicking:
The Chinese were trying to meddle also, but they used Harry Potter magic
and that’s where they failed, everyone know brooms are old technology.
In related news of some going off the rails completely are the news of Ukrainian patriot farmer deciding to settle this shit with Russian T-14 Armata MBT once and for all. After all, as we all know, Russia maintains in Ukraine (after invasion, of course) several tank armies with thousands of T-90s and Armatas, so the time came to counter those damn Russkies. The sheer idiocy of the whole thing is not in the contraption this Ukrainian farmer constructed, however hilarious it is, it is in the fact of enthusiastic report on that by one of Ukrainian TV Channels. You don't need to know Ukrainian to really appreciate the magnificence of the technological achievement in the armored warfare. But, obviously, Russian commenters had a field day in comments section and some of those are beyond hilarious. Friday, the 13th, what can I say and you can not treat stupid, I guess.
P.S. The title of this thing? Tortilla and, of course, and I quote, "there is nothing comparable to this technology in any army in the world." With that, I have to agree completely. I need a drink, LOL.
Not that I think too much of myself, but if one recalls this blog was started precisely as a herald of a complete degeneration (not that it was that good to start with) of an American so called "Russian Studies" field. I even gave the title of Sand Castle Geopolitics to some of my posts three years ago. Since then I continued and never stopped in pressing the main point--American Russia's "expertdom", with some minor, however notable, exceptions is a collection of badly educated, non-erudite, myopic products of US so called "political science" field which is anything but science. The main purpose of science is an objective search for the truth, in order to find this truth, which is knowable, one has to have a very good cognitive apparatus capable to establish the most important, principal, thing--a causality. The connection between the cause and effect is crucial, without it there is no science nor knowledge. US "Political Science" field has none of it, preferring to pursuit of a truth a pursuit of demagoguery, sophistry and mental constructs which look elegant on the surface without having any depth or being in touch with the reality. This assertion is supported by overwhelming empirical evidence. Yet, these completely discredited political, so called, "scientists" continue their convulsions with parading themselves as ignoramuses by reinforcing their "methods" and assumptions which far from getting any realistic picture of Russia are also in the foundation of an American decline. Here is one such recent "optimist".
Timothy Frye starts his piece immediately with a whopping fail:
The only problem is that Russian studies is thriving, at least in
Political Science, the field I know best. Consider the flagship journal
in the field—the American Political Science Review (APSR). It
publishes about forty articles per year from all four specializations in
Political Science, including American politics, comparative politics,
international relations, and political theory and it has an acceptance rate
of 8 percent. That is, 92 percent of submissions are rejected. This
figure is especially impressive since scholars tend to only send their
best work to the APSR for review.
Well, I have news for Frye--it is not "thriving" in the most important metric--delivering a truthful picture. If he thinks that "studies" of Russia such as:
In work posted on the APSR
website, Bryn Rosenfeld from University of Southern California
identifies an important caveat to the oft-cited thesis that a strong
middle-class promotes democracy. Using a clever statistical method and
large surveys from Russia, she finds that the middle class is likely to
protest against electoral fraud, but not if they work in the state
sector.
really add anything of value to understanding (which there is none) or knowing Russia, without studying things which really matter to the majority of Russians, not to some self-proclaimed "experts", I have a bridge to sell to him. The Modus Operandi of the overwhelming majority of the US "political scientists", intelligence people, journalists etc. when dealing with Russia is described by these four points:
1. Always remember that you are superior in every single aspect and that you know better, even if you don't speak Russian and never read more than couple of books on Russia (Pasternak and Solzhenitsyn are a must);
2. Once in Russia, find immediately a nearest pro-Western liberal nest, preferably with people fluently speaking English and being published in media supported by US State Department or any other NGO (if connected to CIA--even better). Take information and opinions on Russia from these people and media;
3. Concoct a "study" which shows how American "democracy" is superior to anything ever created in universe and why Russia and Russians must earn the right to be even considered worthy of such a system;
4. Always remember that you are superior and because you are from America--you know better and you don't need those Russkies to point out to you that for the most part you have no clue and your "research" is not worth a paper on which it will be printed.
You may say I exaggerate. No, not by much anyway. But even Frye admits that:
Certainly the academic study of Russia faces many challenges and we can
use more experts in the field, particularly in the study of foreign
policy. But the lack of nuance in public discourse about Russia is not
rooted in the low quality of academic research in Russian studies
No, Mr. Frye, au contraire, it is rooted precisely in a low quality of the so called "academic research" since it is for the most part is done based on a complete lack of understanding of Russia's culture, history and psyche. "Studying" this in Brooklyn's so called "Russian" community of immigrants is not a good idea. This "research" is also based on a pervasive and prevailing arrogance of American intellectual elites and messianic view of the outside world and that is the main problem--it creates a myopia which doesn't allow to see what is "hiding" in a plain sight. No knowledge, let alone cogent policy recommendations could be drawn from such a "research", especially in the country which considers Russia an existential threat and makes it normal to call for killing Russians or calling them genetically inferior in national media. Why doesn't Mr. Frye do an "academic research" on the role of "political science" in fanning the flames of American elites' Russophobia the likes of which the United States never witnessed before? After all, very many of those in US political and punditry class have their "academic" backgrounds precisely in "political science" field. Judging by the atrocious results, domestically and globally, of their activity in the last 20 or so years one is forced to conclude that either they were shitty students or that political science is not science at all. I tend to believe both conclusions are true. Will Mr. Frye "study" or "research" those?
I will abstain from commenting on the horror in Las Vegas, I will just say that I feel sorry for people and my thoughts are with innocents, alive and those, sadly, dead. But what I will comment on, though, is this: American (or US-associated) celebrities--just shut up. You ignorant, uneducated (look at Clooney's or Damon's academic records, not to speak of this no good bimbo Rhianna) no good pretentious dweebs--put a cork in it about guns. Lose your bodyguards and go preach to South Chicago or Detroit, see what happens next. Nobody gives a shit about your "opinions"--you are freaking entertainers who fake human emotions to get paid, that's the range and scope of your competencies. All this "progressive" cabal is disgusting. This, however, is below anything.
