Considering The Fact...

That SU-35's avionics suite has a lot in common with that of SU-57, one can only speculate on the ability of SU-35 to control such weapon system as Okhotnik (Hunter) as does SU-57 as is shown in video released by Russian MOD. 

Rumor has it that a single SU-57 can control a group of such UAVs, not just one. So, if SU-35 can do this--this means a dramatic synergistic effect for Russia's VKS strike capabilities. Of course, it is worth noting that in 2018 Popular Mechanics (as is totally expected) put in doubt capabilities declared for Okhotnik, but by now we should get used to this MO of Western media. The MO is an attempt to control narrative.

In related news, Russia confirmed (in fact it was already tested), 800-km range Onyx (P-800) missile, so, one should expect even longer range dedicated anti-shipping missiles of this type coming soon. In the end, nobody knows exactly what is in R&D phase in defense industry of Russia. Same Popular Mechanics, through world-renown "specialist in military affairs" Kyle Mizokami (yes, yes, he is an "expert" with degree in history and editing texts) proclaims this:

The Russian Navy will be the first to field a hypersonic weapon system, according to a prominent military analyst. The navy will test its new Zircon missile sometime next year, a missile that can allegedly fly at speeds in excess of 6,000 miles per hour. Zircon could be used to launch lightning fast strikes against targets on land or enemy battle groups at sea—including U.S. aircraft carriers—knocking them out in minutes. Naval authority H.I. Sutton, writing at Forbes, reports that the first launch of the Zircon missile from a submarine is set for next year. The test will take place onboard the Russian Navy’s new submarine K-561 Kazan. Sutton believes Russia is sufficiently advanced in hypersonic missile technology that it will be the first to field operational hypersonic weapons.

I don't know why it took both Sutton and Mizokami that long to figure this out but Russians reported on coming of a variety of Zirkon (3M22) types more than 8 months ago. But Mizokami, in the great tradition of humanities-"educated" military "experts" continues to repeat an utterly ridiculous and illiterate self-medicating BS such as that:

All is not lost, however. Defenders can buy back time against the hypersonic threat by placing their radar at a higher altitude, detecting missiles like Zircon at greater distances. Another helpful measure would be to automate the ship’s defense system, allowing an artificial intelligence to respond to threats automatically and without a “man in the loop,” which is a risky proposition if fighting takes place where civilian ships and planes might be present.  

I already "slightly" elaborated on this topic when commenting on another, The National Interest fame, fine "expert" Michael Peck's  delusions, that unless one can understand what dynamic loads will be required from the interceptor to even have a fleeting chance to stop 3M22, any talk about intercept by existing means is nothing but a kindergarten talk. Do those "experts" even understand how the triangle of velocities will form and what kind of energy will be required to hit 3M22? I don't think so. This is not to mention the fact that we still do not know, and, most likely, will not know for a while all flight profiles of Zirkon. Is there a sea-skimming mode there? Something tells me that there is--good luck intercepting this. 

When France Was Still France.

Jacques Chirac, France's last true statesman RIP. Age 87.  After him--only parade of globalist colorless shills who sold France's sovereignty and finished turning her into multicultural cloaca and a door mat for the United States. 

© AFP / GEORGES GOBET

I can remind you what a hysteria France's position against Iraq 2003 criminal invasion created among American neocons. They even wrote this shit, stating that France (to who the United States owes her early existence) is America's Oldest Enemy. 

I also remember stickers on the bumpers then: Down with France. It was due to Jacques Chirac's principled position. Today, France is run by plastic bankster boy at the service of globalist "elite". What a contrast. France was sterilized to such a degree that the only person of any qualities required for preserving what's left from France, Marine  Le Pen, will be sabotaged and not allowed to enter decision-making positions. Sad story. One of Europe's last great man is gone.  

The West Is Finished.

Well, that was known for a while, but here we have the most serious manifestation of this finish so far in this:

Millions of people filled the streets in cities around the world in a massive collection of protests aimed at forcing political leaders to take drastic steps to avert the urgent risks of climate change. While climate activism has been around for years, the effort has recently been reshaped and reinvigorated by an infusion of vocal young people who have quickly become the face of the movement. The most prominent of these young activists is Greta Thunberg, a 16-year-old from Sweden whose one-person strikes on Stockholm inspired last week’s worldwide demonstrations. Last week, she chided U.S. lawmakers to “listen to the scientists” warning about climate change. On Monday, she gave an emotional speech at the United Nations climate summit where she tore into world leaders for their inaction. “How dare you continue to look away and come here saying you are doing enough,” she said. Her speech was enough to draw the attention of President Trump, who mocked her on Twitter. She used his gibe as the inspiration for a new Twitter bio.

The issue here is not the climate change protests, by now one can expect it from primarily "Western" so called dopamine-driven humanities "educated" youth. The issue here is that no one pointed out that exploitation of autistic, suffering from depression and Asperger's, semi-literate teenager is a full blown child abuse by low-lives constituting "progressive" public. Not only Greta's parents are irresponsible, typical, Swedish upper-class cucks who exploit their daughter for obvious gain:

Thunberg says she first heard about climate change in 2011, when she was 8 years old, and could not understand why so little was being done about it.Three years later she became depressed and lethargic, stopped talking and eating, and was eventually diagnosed with Asperger syndrome, obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD), and selective mutism. While acknowledging that her diagnosis "has limited me before", she does not view her Asperger's as an illness and has instead called it her "superpower". For about two years, Thunberg challenged her parents to lower the family's carbon footprint by becoming vegan and giving up flying, which in part meant her mother had to give up her international career as an opera singer. Thunberg credits her parents' eventual response and lifestyle changes with giving her hope and belief that she could make a difference. The family story is recounted in the 2018 book Scenes from the Heart. 

We literally are witnessing a collective West's madness reminiscent of massive hallucinations of middle ages. As Yakov Kedmi characterized it--it is a political pedophilia. I concur. Oh boy, but can you imagine how much money could be made from this child abuse and pedophilia. That is unless Western economies meet what everyone with even fleeting acquaintance with political economy expects--a major economic shitstorm. The clouds are on the horizon and increasingly irrational and real anti-American activity by Democratic Party and its minions in mass-media sewer are just private manifestations of a massive political and economic crisis of the so called West. I begin to notice evaporation of the remainders of rational thought, adherence to which was always praised as West's fundamental value, even in the places I thought would be the last refuge--I was wrong. 

It is then not surprising to read in Sergei Lavrov's latest article what I am writing about for years:

It is regrettable that these obvious truths are being deliberately silenced or ignored by certain influential forces in the West. Moreover, some have intensified attempts at privatizing the Victory, expunging from memory the Soviet Union’s role in the defeat of Nazism, condemning to oblivion the Red Army’s feat of sacrifice and liberation, forgetting the many millions of Soviet citizens who perished during the War, wiping out from history the consequences of the ruinous policy of appeasement. From this perspective, it is easy to grasp the essence of the concept of expounding the equality of the totalitarian regimes. Its purpose is not just to belittle the Soviet contribution to the Victory, but also to retrospectively strip our country of its historic role as an architect and guarantor of the post-war world order, and label it a “revisionist power” that is posing a threat to the well-being of the so-called free world.  

For people who read my latest book it will be surprising (or maybe it will not be at all) to see how much what I wrote as a sharp criticism, in fact, condemnation of the so called "liberalism" and its primitive instruments of power, corresponds to what Lavrov expresses in his program article. But it has to be understood clearly--the West as it exists today is not Russia's long term interest or goal. In fact, in some sense Lavrov's article is a declaration of this fact. Not only Russia has a bigger fish to fry, but she is in a direct contradiction to increasingly degenerate contemporary Western "culture" and in this sense Russia is not a Western country in terms which define the West of today. In fact, there is no West anymore. There is, also, no Europe left in any meaningful form. Globalist project annihilated last vestiges of European thought through bringing up degenerate and, frankly, dumb political class and "intellectuals". Parading sick and unfortunate child in a front of the whole world as a messiah for globalist agenda is a major sign of a terminal illness. And then, of course, there is American political panopticon. Will we see someone from DNC behind bars? Hope dies last, I heard.  

UPDATE: some advantages of writing things in the evening (I am sick as a dog), when life only starts in Europe. Lavrov, just now, verbatim (in Russian): European Union is not a reliable partner.

Shoigu Speaks Out.

Sergei Shoigu, Russia's Defense Minister, gave a large interview to MK in which he makes some extremely important admissions and statements. The full interview in Russian is here, while RT gives a gist of it and singles this out :

We need the means we could use against the enemy’s carrier strike groups should our country come under attack. They are far less costly and more efficient. 

This, and many other insights are in this interview and a lot of it is a confirmation of numerous points I make in my latest book. Yeah, let me claim some credit in knowing, and describing, some key points of formation of military and geopolitical balance. Here is what Shoigu states and I was at it for years and years:

При сегодняшнем уровне информатизации и автоматизации высока вероятность ошибки в системе управления вооружением. Именно поэтому в последнее время на первый план вышли вопросы обеспечения информационной безопасности. Когда ты осознаешь свою уязвимость и заинтересован в сохранении баланса и всеобщей равной безопасности, это заставляет тебя включать голову. А когда ты считаешь, как это по инерции продолжают считать в США, что баланс сил сложился в твою пользу, в голову могут прийти самые разные идеи, включая не самые разумные. Именно в этой ситуации я вижу сейчас главную угрозу, и не только для России.  

Translation: With modern level of informatization and automation, the probability of the errors in weapons' control system is fairly high. That is why issues of the informational security came forth recently. When you are vulnerable and is invested in preservation of the balance and all around equal security for everyone, you have to use your head. When, however, you think, as the United States continue to do so out of inertia, that the balance is in their favor, you may have all kinds of ideas, including not very good ones, coming to you mind. It is this situation which carries the main threat and not for Russia only. 

Damn right!  

I Knew Someone Will Do This.

I have a discussion on Stephen Cohen's article about Russia and the West. I am also writing a piece on that, hopefully Ron (Unz) will accept it for publishing, but my point is very simple: and normal Russians (I am not talking about cretins from Russian kreakliat) want to go to the "West" exactly why? Here are some pictures from Nevsky this summer. I wrote about it in 2018, here is Nevsky and other St. Pete, Leningrad, Petrograd's avenues in 2019. 

 It is Friday......

Why? Would You Ask?

Very simple--embarrassment. 

MOSCOW, Sept 20 (Reuters) - Russia on Friday accused the United States of brazenly threatening it after a senior U.S. general said Washington had drawn up a plan in case it needed to destroy air defences in Russia's Kaliningrad exclave in Europe. U.S. General Jeffrey Harrigian said on Tuesday that "If we have to go in there to take down, for instance, the Kaliningrad IADS (Integrated Air Defense System), let there be no doubt we have a plan to go after that," the Breaking Defense magazine reported. Kaliningrad is a Russian region that lies on the Baltic Sea between EU members Lithuania and Poland. Moscow captured the region from Germany towards the end of World War Two. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova criticised the comments by Harrigian, commander of U.S. Air Forces in Europe, at her weekly briefing in Moscow. "Firstly we consider this a threat. Secondly, we consider such statements to be absolutely irresponsible," she said. Russia's Ministry of Defence rejected Harrigian's assertion and said the region was well defended."The region of Kaliningrad is reliably protected from any aggressive 'plans' developed in Europe by U.S. generals passing through," it said in a statement.

Actually, the response in Russia was much harsher than reported and included this:

Поставленные в Турцию зенитные ракетные системы С-400 способны «десакрализировать» американские истребители F-35, заявили в Минобороны России. Ведомство заявило, что Калининградская область надежно защищена от любой агрессии, подчеркнув, что возможности системы ПВО «хорошо известны всем натовским пилотам, приближавшимся к воздушным границам РФ на Балтике», передает РИА «Новости».«В полной мере это касается и «невидимых», только для американских налогоплательщиков и зарубежных покупателей, американских истребителей 5-го поколения. Трепет и волнение Пентагона по поводу вероятной десакрализации истребителей F-35 турецкими же расчетами ЗРС С-400 небезосновательны», – отметило ведомство. 

Translation: "S-400 systems delivered to Turkey are capable to desacralize  American fighters F-35 was stated in MoD of Russia. MoD stated, that Kaliningrad Region is reliably defended against any aggression and underscored that capabilities of Air Defense System there are known to NATO pilots approaching Russia's air border over Baltic Sea, RIA News reports. In full measure this also covers "invisible", primarily for American taxpayers and foreign buyers, US 5th generation aircraft. Pentagon's trembling and worries about possible "desacralization" of F-35 by Turkish combat teams operating S-400 are not without justification."

But why such a spike of militant rhetoric? Here is why:

courtesy of Ria.Ru

The area of oil refineries had a complete radar field with excellent overlap (redundancy) by: Patriot PAC-2, PAC-3 and Aegis. Not a single missile was launched at relatively slow (subsonic) and fairly conventional drones. Not a single one! OK, I get it, I am not politically correct and I never hid my contempt for Saudi military and their modern war skills or, rather, lack thereof. But there was a number of modern detection and AD systems in the area which failed to react!!! How could this be? Russia MoD was flat out unemotional when stated yesterday (in Russian): because they do not match declared capabilities. And in English, here.  Attack on Saudi oil facilities became a dramatic confirmation of this fact. I can wax technical whatever I want here, including discussing dead (blind) zones on elevation for Patriots with 7 degrees on elevation above horizon, or about the fact that sector aiming is still needed to be performed, as opposed to Russian S-series AD systems where missiles are launched vertically and then take "a ride on the beam" towards target.  

Is this whole affair an embarrassment? Of course it is, especially when such people like Mike Pompeo begin to come up with technically illiterate lame excuses thus rubbing salt into already badly wounded ego. Can he at least shut up for a minute? Now, we are all not kiddies here, we all understand that ramifications are much greater that even rising risks of war in the Gulf Region, albeit give DJT a credit where the credit is due--he at least holds his ground, for now, in terms of attacking Iran. No, I am talking about the mid to long term ramifications for American military technology and, as an inevitable result, further acceleration of a departure form already lost to a large degree position of only superpower. So it is not surprising at all that Saudi Prince called Moscow immediately after the attack. Evidently General Jeffry Harrigian could not control his frustration and spilled the beans in a sense of classic Sun Tzu: paraded his weakness. Recall this great quote from Senator Fulbright: 

“It is simply not necessary for us to go around forever proclaiming: ‘I am the greatest!’ The more one does this sort of thing, in fact, the more people doubt it….”   

The doubt has turned into a strong conviction globally now and this has all signs of an impending and recognizable complete collapse of the remnants of Pax Americana.

Sic Transit Gloria Mundi. Some News.

I mean this, current, mundi, whatever comes after it is another matter. But here are some news of import.

Russia and Iran will transfer payments using an alternative system to the internationally recognized SWIFT money transfer network, the governor of the Iranian central bank, Abdolnaser Hemmati, announced. Instead of SWIFT, a system that facilitates cross-border payments between 11,000 financial institutions in more than 200 countries worldwide, the two countries will use their own domestically developed financial messaging systems – Iran’s SEPAM and Russia’s SPFS.“Using this system for trade and business exchanges between EAEU [Eurasian Economic Union] member states can help develop and expand trade exchanges between the member states as well,” Abdolnaser Hemmati said, as cited by Mehr News Agency on Tuesday. Tehran is set to officially join the Russia-led free-trade zone, the EAEU, next month. The document on Iran’s participation was ratified in June by the nation’s parliament (Majlis) and President Hassan Rouhani has already ordered that the free trade zone agreement be implemented.

And this development was unexpected exactly to who? Of course this is just another step in actualization of Eurasian economic space. And then, of course, this:

Russian President Vladimir Putin said that his government would work to strengthen military cooperation with Turkey and that talks to develop new weapons with Ankara were already underway.    

Go figure what that means--possibly SU-35 components among many other things. Samuel Huntington is spinning in his grave now. Especially when one gets such news as this:

Taliban representatives have held discussions with Russian officials in Moscow, just days after US President Donald Trump declared months-long peace talks between Washington and the group "dead". Taliban's Qatar-based spokesman Suhail Shaheen confirmed the meeting in the Russian capital on Friday, saying the group's delegation held consultations with Zamir Kabulov, Russia's special envoy for Afghanistan. At the meeting, Russia stressed the necessity of the resumption of talks between the US and the Taliban, while the group's delegation reiterated their readiness to renewing dialogue with Washington, an unidentified Russian foreign ministry spokesman was quoted as saying by the TASS news agency.

Mind you, Russia DIDN'T want to be an arbiter in this whole mess stretching from Afghanistan to ME. Not at all. Recall this, read attentively:

A “successful end” to the operation in Afghanistan will not come simply with the death of Osama bin Laden. The minimum that we require from NATO is consolidating a stable political regime in the country and preventing Talibanization of the entire region. That is the Russian position. We are ready to help NATO implement its U.N. Security Council mandate in Afghanistan. We are utterly dissatisfied with the mood of capitulation at NATO headquarters, be it under the cover of “humanistic pacifism” or pragmatism.

This was 9 years ago. What did Obama Administration do? They unleashed Cold War 2.0 with Russia, who did all she could, short of direct massive military intervention, to help the United States to settle Afghanistan. All in vain. And here we are in 2019 with the whole Eurasian subcontinent aflame and with the US losing its actual and perceived control over the situation with mind-boggling acceleration. Right now, this very minute, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Kazakhstan and others hold massive maneuvers Center-2019. The legend of this exercises is clearly influenced by the situation in Afghanistan and by the possibility of Russia and her allies doing what she, then as USSR, was prevented from doing.

This troubles Russia far less than the consequences for the region itself. The Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989 was not a shameful escape accompanied by the hooting of the mujahadeen. The Soviet Army entered the country, accomplished its tasks — unlike the Americans in Vietnam — and returned to its motherland. In fact, we were the first to defend Western civilization against the attacks of Muslim fanatics. No one thanked us. On the contrary, everyone was impeding our actions: The United States, NATO, Iran, Pakistan, even China. After the withdrawal of the Soviet Army, the Najibullah government that we left behind in Kabul remained in power for another three years.

What a historic irony in Russia being thrust back into this position and not by own volition--it is the region itself which called on Russia to interfere. Even Saudi Prince called Kremlin today to discuss this whole "attack" business (in Russian). Russia is not going to invade Afghanistan, but the big game of containing jihad threat is on. I guess this explains why Russia simply cannot exist as a neutral, self-absorbed, power (that would be so great)--she will always be forced to be in the shape of military-economic superpower precisely for the reasons of others not doing their due diligence when unleashing forces they can not tame or control. No matter what she does, she will end up being asked to do one thing or another. That's destiny and nothing could be done about it. And thus passes the glory of the world we live (or, rather lived) in. Pax Americana is over.

Something About "Combat Use".

Leonid Bershidsky is (butt) hurt, badly. So, after Vladimir Putin's air and anti missile defense trolling yesterday--you can see (in Russian) Rouhani's and Erdogan's priceless reactions here:

So, Bershidsky, whose biography you can read here, for some reason (wink, wink) takes it too personally and lets it rip in his piece at Bloomberg (another "fine" specimen of US "fair and balanced" propaganda outlet). Here is what bothers Mr. Bershidsky: 

President Vladimir Putin’s offer to sell Russian air defense systems to Saudi Arabia is about more than mere trolling, even though it caused laughter from Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani.  Putin was trying to persuade the entire Middle East that working with him is more effective than cooperating with the U.S.  One could regard it as a kind of mafia-style protection offer: The new, more aggressive gangster on the block is making a bid because the current king of the streets has grown lazy and risk-averse.

One can almost feel Bershidsky's pain but the problem with this statement is not the fact that there is only one gangster in this story, and that is not Russia, but in the fact that Bershidsky, who hails from an army of brilliant (ahem) "influencers" with degrees in anything but applicable serious professional skills crucial for military and geopolitical analysis, has, as expected, misrepresented risk-aversion for the exercise of sound operational judgement. The United States hasn't "grown lazy and risk-averse"--and Breshidsky wouldn't know it even if explained--it was made such by Real Revolution in Military Affairs whose arrival through new technological means, operational concepts and new force structure, simply removed most (not all) "advantages", often grossly exaggerated, the United States thought it enjoyed for the last 30 years or so. Actually, one of the major reasons this had happened was the category of public with MBAs, stock trading, marketing, finances, banking and journalism backgrounds who could understand some financial bottom lines, for which they tirelessly worked, but had and continue (as Bershidsky so vividly demonstrates) to have huge difficulties with grasping technological, tactical, operational and strategic realities of our modern world.  

Then, Bershidsky makes this bizarre assertion (one would expect it from an amateur):

In reality, it’s the S-400 that Russia has been trying hard to sell to Saudi Arabia, so far without success. It has also offered the missiles to Qatar. Neither the S-300 nor the S-400 has seen any real combat use. Theoretically, and as seen in exercises, these are powerful weapons. But not even Syria’s Bashar Al-Assad, who has had a few opportunities to use the S-300s he received from Russia last year, has done so.

First, Bashar Assad doesn't have full control of S-300 in Syria, at least not yet and it is Russia which defines S-300s use within her military and diplomatic agenda in Syria, not Syrians. It is an obvious fact, which was confirmed couple of days ago:

According to the report, Moscow has prevented three Israeli air strikes on three Syrian outposts recently, and even threatened that any jets attempting such a thing would be shot down, either by Russian jets or by the S-400 anti-aircraft missiles. The source cited in the report claims a similar situation has happened twice – and that during August, Moscow stopped an air strike on a Syrian outpost in Qasioun, where a S-300 missile battery is placed.   

Unlike Israelis or US Military-Industrial-Media Complex Russians, when the deal is a very serious real kinetic military affair between Russia and nations which matter globally (US), or regionally (Israel), seldom runs around praising oneself and own capabilities, since this may adversely affect, usually behind the scene, diplomatic effort. It is one thing to show off salvos of 3M14 burning jihadists in their compounds in Syria, or reveal weapons, such as in Putin's speech on March 1, 2018, to cool the heads of some homicidal lunatics in D.C., totally another--describing everyday contingencies between all players in the region. In fact, Russia officially was very low key on that and that is understandable. 

There is, however, a risible line in Bershidsky's "assertion" about S-300 and S-400 not seeing "any combat use". I would love to use Sergei Lavrov's meme here but I have to restrain myself, because at this stage it wouldn't help the situation. Evidently, Leonid Bershidsky who never spent a day in any serious military position, thinks that "combat use" is when things only "shoot". Well, there is one problem, well, actually two, with this assertion because from the get go he misses:

1. Both S-300 and S-400 systems were delivered to Syria with one thought in mind--to precisely prevent this "combat use" by means of deploying capability which drastically reduces tactical and operational options for all bogeys (Israel, ahem) to make them much more cooperative in a political, as opposed to combat, field. It worked, brilliantly in a strategic sense--with IAF being effectively pushed out of Syria's airspace, while reducing the number of its sorties drastically still. This is not to mention the fact that other systems, such as S1 and Tor M2s, not to mention a very well organized work of Battle Management Centers and Early Warning and Electronic Warfare systems, performing admirably by shooting down all, but one, jihadists' drones and missiles. That is real combat performance and a very impressive one. I will abstain from describing Trump's "very smart missiles" 70% of which (including, rumor has it, JASSM) had been taken down by Syrian Air Defense.

2. Now, most important--COMBAT record of the Soviet/Russian Air Defense systems. Discarding a fear of being called a Russian chauvinist, nationalist or accused of gloating (been there, done that), specifically for Bershidsky--combat record of Soviet/Russian AD systems is without equals in history. No one comes even close to a number of combat episodes Soviet/Russian systems took part in and came out victorious against bogeys. Not least among them is Israeli Air Force. I will quote from my latest:

While estimates vary wildly, approximately 1,737 U.S. aircraft (not counting helicopters) have been lost to hostile actions between 1961 and 1973 in South East Asia, largely over Vietnam.1 The majority of these losses were due to AAA (Anti-Air Artillery) and SAMs (Surface to Air Missiles). During almost 24 months of the Rolling Thunder operation the U.S. lost 881 aircraft; in 1967 alone, the United States lost 62 aircraft to SAMs while losing 205 to AAA. In 1973, during the 19-days long Yom Kippur War, the Israeli Air Force lost over 100 aircraft, most of them to SAMs. This is just a highly abbreviated list of Surface-to-Air missiles engaging all kinds of aerial threats from high value attack and fighter jet aircraft, to bombers, to cruise missiles since the early 1960s. The feature which unifies all entries in this list is the fact that all these surface-to-air missiles and the targeting and launch systems for them were and are Soviet/Russian made. Putting it in simpler, more straightforward language—Soviet/Russian Air Defense systems, when used by skilled operators, have an unrivaled combat history. No other nation has a comparable record of the use of such systems in combat and thus of gaining such a combat experience.    

For Bershidsky--all data was taken specifically from Western sources to avoid being accused of pro-Russian bias. Numbers do not lie, when confirmed. Those have been confirmed (unlike modern-day economic fuzzy data) and even at the lower end of estimates (not to mention a factor of often NON-Soviet/Russian manning of systems--in stochastic combat models multipliers less than 1 are introduced for degraded capability) make a dramatic impression. 

So, in this case, one has to start thinking what this record means for new systems? It means an enormous array of data which is behind honing, design concepts, algorithms, sensors, targeting systems that is, which allow for steady improvements in capability. In the end, this was a major reason Turks "exchanged" F-35 for S-400. I am sure they were made privy to mathematical expectations and probabilities of success for various air attack scenarios against Turkey. They, obviously, loved what they heard and saw and now Turkish officers (the second team) are in Russia training for S-400. So, unless the whole Saudi (ARAMCO) oil facility attack is a false flag by Saudis themselves or by a triumvirate of purveyors of liberty and democracy in the Middle East, aka KSA, Israel and USA, there is pretty much only one thing Saudis can do about defending oil facilities against drone and missile attacks--get systems which work. I know, that makes Leonid Bershidsky's life miserable--after all, he dedicated his journo carrier to writing on things most of which he cannot grasp or doing a hack job for someone else's interests. But in general, I am getting really tired when majors in marketing or broadcasting pretend to be "experts" in fields which are beyond their grasp. No wonder the West is in steep decline.  

And The Trolling Starts.

On the other hand--why not? As you may have noticed, I didn't write a thing about attack on Saudi oil facilities by allegedly Houthis' drones (cruise missiles?). First, I have no free time to pour over every single piece of text and visual info to do post battle assessment If one is interested, one can easily download Methodology For Combat Assessment (CJCSI 3162.02) and have a go at it. Secondly, there are people who would do a better job than me anyway, such as Bernhard of Moon of Alabama, or my virtual acquaintances from Colonel Lang's Blog. Plus, I don't think that the stream of info on that matter stopped. We may yet hear some more on this operation by Houthis. And then, of course, my well justified lack of trust in Middle Eastern media sources. 

One thing which is clear here, if to assume Houthis' salvo (who supplied then with what is a separate matter), is the fact of the failure of the Saudi air-defense (US produced Patriot PAC-2 and ancient Hawk complexes) to do much about this attack. Well, guess what, Russia is ready to pick up a slack, especially against the background of impenetrable wall Russian AD systems created around Khmeimim air base in Syria against precisely the types of weapons all kinds of jihadists are trying to use. Vladimir Putin, being Vladimir Putin simply flat out offered Saudis to buy Russian S-300 and S-400 systems (in Russian). He even quoted Quran. Well, there is an English version now available.

(Bloomberg) -- President Vladimir Putin said Russia is willing to help defend Saudi Arabia by selling it the advanced S-400 anti-aircraft system after major oil facilities in the kingdom came under attack at the weekend, halting half of its crude production. “For self-defense, for the defense of one’s country, we are ready to provide help to Saudi Arabia, the political leadership of Saudi Arabia,” Putin told a joint press conference with the leaders of Iran and Turkey on Monday in Ankara. “It is enough to take a wise government decision, as the leaders of Iran did before, buying the S-300, and as President Erdogan did, buying the latest air defense system, S-400 Triumph,” Putin said, referring to the Turkish president. “They will protect any infrastructure objects in Saudi Arabia effectively.”

I can only imagine the face expression of some people in current US government and legislature when they hear (or read) this.

But truth is, we need to be cautious before jumping to the conclusion on who actually executed the attack and if it was, which is possible, a false flag. This thought, of course, doesn't prevent shiny military toys freelance masturbator and self-proclaimed "security expert" Kyle Mizokami already declaring B-2 "Stealth" bomber to be the asset Donald Trump can use to strike Iran. But what if it wasn't Iran behind that? But never mind--there is nothing more nauseating than some dude (or gal) with degree in English Literature, journalism or political "science" waxing "operational" and "tactical". What can possibly go wrong? Ah yes, late Tom Clancy.

As per S-300 and S-400 for Saudis, I don't know--it is, of course, a good business (money-wise) and Russia was in negotiations with Saudis on this matter for some time now. This attack, if it has been done by Houthis, who have all reasons to hate genocidal regime in Riyadh, then Saudis, indeed, may seriously consider switching to Air Defense systems which actually work. This brings us to a second, short point of Bibi visiting his "buddy" Vladimir in Sochi, where, according to many, including Israeli, sources Bibi was warned to stop exercising an illusion that Russia will not shoot down IAF planes if they strike SAA's personnel and facilities.                            

Netanyahu gets little from Putin in Sochi meeting

So, who knows, but rumor has it that Russia's VKS in Syria intercepted IAF's aircraft on three occasions. Is it true? Possible. Russians seldom advertise their power actions when diplomacy may follow after that. But, I guess, we will learn about all that in a due time. Israeli elections are tomorrow.   

SSKs In... US Navy?

I stumbled on that through Yahoo News yesterday. As you may know I do not read The National Interest--it is a tabloid dumpster for fanboys and its military sections are 99% a masturbation to shiny military toys by people who have no clue. The OTHER 1%, however, is represented by such people of scale as Colonels Daniel Davies, Douglas Macgregor or Professor James Holmes. So, I saw James Holmes' name at Yahoo and I went for it.  Holmes opened with a broadside:

For the past five years or so these pixels have been arguing—nay, clamoring—for the U.S. Navy to build or buy a contingent of diesel attack submarines (SSKs) to fill out its undersea inventory. If anything the logic for going conventional is more compelling now than ever. It offers a way to add new hulls with dispatch, at manageable cost, and without imposing extra burdens on the few shipbuilders that specialize in naval nuclear propulsion. Best of all, a diesel contingent is an ideal implement for executing U.S. strategy in what the Pentagon terms its “priority theater,” bar none: the Indo-Pacific.

I never, obviously, served in US Navy and I know of its internal kitchen from open sources only, such as memoirs and other texts. But I always remember Elmo Zumwalt quoting Rickover that:"The United States Navy got used to traveling first class."(c) In Rick's words "first class" meant large and very large surface combatants and nuclear propulsion. That's the institutional culture--US Navy likes only nuclear-driven subs. And it kinda makes sense once one considers the fact that the United States is an imperial power and she likes to sail anywhere, everywhere to "project" herself. Nuclear powered subs are perfectly suited for this strategic and operational posture since they provide for long-duration, thus translating into very long distances, clandestine operations against enemies, which all, as we know, dream of denying America her freedoms. Yet, James Holmes calls for SSKs. Hm. Holmes speaks in the broadside yet again and pronounces this "M" word, which many in the US are reluctant to say when speaking about actual war (Holmes wants to fight both China and Russia):

...the nuclear mafia within the silent service—the dominant faction among submariners, it must be said—will produce statistics beyond counting to prove that nuclear-powered craft are superior to their conventional brethren. And they will be right—by every measure except what matters. Namely, winning. The SSK is the right tool for the job provided it’s deployed at the right place on the map in the right manner to achieve maximum effect. 

Ah, that's warmer. And should I have been American exceptionalist, which, of course, I am not, I would have taken this Holmes' argument to heart, especially since Holmes, almost verbatim, repeats Stansfield  Turner's operational truism brilliantly formulated by him in 1976 in his interview to Christian Science Monitor, titled Who has The Best Navy. I will help you to recall that:

Pay attention to Turner's succinct observation about the number of keels. He delivers it in the clearest way possible: It is the capacity to do what might be decisive in some particular situation. And the first issue with that, if to imagine some scenario of the battle, say, for Senkakus in which hypothetical American-built (or bought) SSKs will take part is this: what kind of weapons will they carry? Holmes describes his scenario in next terms:

Combining submarines with marine geography amplifies their efficacy at sea denial. Array diesel boats along, say, Asia’s first island chain in concert with unmanned combat vehicles, sea mines, surface patrol craft, warplanes, and missile-armed ground troops and you’ve erected a formidable barrier to passage between the China seas and Western Pacific. That’s a barrier that Beijing will think twice about flouting. You don’t need an SSN to stand picket duty, and in fact using it thus amounts to overkill. Nuclear attack boats have sea-control missions to perform on the open ocean. Used imaginatively, inexpensive diesel subs can reinforce conventional deterrence and free up precious SSNs for more important things, all without busting the shipbuilding budget. That’s the reciprocal of producing über-pricey SSBNs to reinforce nuclear deterrence. How’s that for cosmic balance? 

Well, it is all fine and dandy (on the paper), but even the brief look at the map (First Island Chain) reveals something significant:

You know what it is? Right--ranges, aka distances. First Island Chain is entirely within the range of a variety of Chinese deadly anti-shipping weapon systems which, in case of real war, God forbids, have a complete capability to shut down approaches to this very Island Chain and deny hypothetical US Navy SSKs what they would need desperately--forces supporting their operations. You may have guessed it already, such forces are US Navy's Carrier Battle Groups and their airwings. No support from them, any SSK operating at those ranges becomes a prey for ASW patrol aviation and surface groups which follow. This is, of course, not to mention the tempo of China buying those pesky S-400s and SU-35s from Russia. 

What are, then, the probabilities of hypothetical salvos of subsonic anti-shipping missiles launched from hypothetical US SSKs against PLAN's surface groups to provide a number of leakers is for a separate discussion but I doubt those to be effective against modern naval AD systems. While I totally understand where James Holmes is coming from and I know his bad feelings towards PLAN and namely Admiral Lou, I, honestly, do not see, from what little I know about US Navy, how the habit of "traveling first class" could be kicked, especially in the times of massive stock buybacks and strict bottom lines for CEOs and shareholders. After all, I think, Congress is also on it. But I repeat myself.       

Of Course, I Love Blues.

But this is one of the best guitar jams ever. Eric and Joe do their magic and it makes your skin produce many standing hairs on every part of your body. 

It is Friday. 

He Is Going To Be Singing As A Bird.

No comments. This is important:

WASHINGTON – Federal prosecutors recommended seeking criminal charges against Andrew McCabe, the former deputy director of the FBI and a frequent target of criticism by President Donald Trump, according to people familiar with the decision Thursday. McCabe was fired from the FBI just before his retirement in March 2018 after the Justice Department's internal watchdog concluded that he improperly authorized a leak about a federal investigation into the Clinton Foundation in the final weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign. Investigators concluded that he displayed a lack of candor when asked about the leak.

Can we expect DNC (read: Clinton-Obama) mafia to be taken down?

He Was Never Qualified To Start With.

So, it is pleasant but not entirely unexpected. Truth is--he shouldn't have been allowed into the POTUS circle in the first place. So, good riddance. There are many sinecures in D.C. for former incompetent losers, so John Bolton will have subsistence. Plus, I am sure, juicy book contract is coming up. 

President Donald Trump has ousted national security adviser John Bolton, saying in a surprise tweet Tuesday that he and the controversial aide often clashed on foreign policy matters. "I informed John Bolton last night that his services are no longer needed at the White House," Trump wrote."I disagreed strongly with many of his suggestions, as did others in the Administration, and therefore ... I asked John for his resignation, which was given to me this morning. I thank John very much for his service," the president continued, adding that he will name a new national security adviser sometime next week.

I think there are many swamp creatures still to be drained and I am not sure DJT is capable of that feat of swamp draining, but at least one lunatic is gone and, overall, this is good news. 

I Write About This For Years.

Far from idealizing military anywhere, I still insist that Western political and punditry class is utterly incompetent in matters of war, thus making it unqualified for making decisions or promoting aggressive foreign policy. Now American war veterans made their voice heard somewhat. 

An important new consensus is forming against America’s endless wars, shaped by an important constituency: the military veterans who have sacrificed so much to fight them. A Pew Research poll of veterans released contained results that contradict the cherished talking points of the bipartisan Washington foreign policy blob that sees “leadership” and “engagement” as being synonymous with bombing and regime change. Sixty-four percent of veterans said the war in Iraq was not worth fighting when the costs to America are weighed against the ostensible benefits to the region and our national security. Just 33 percent concluded that George W. Bush’s Baghdad democracy adventure was worthwhile in retrospect.

There is, of course, much more to it than mere cost/benefits analysis but I will take here whatever I can. I will just remind you, that in the immediate wake of 9/11 tragedy I was FOR military operations in Afghanistan. But most importantly, The American Conservative's staff which wrote this column concludes it with what I write about for years:

The men and women on the frontline have seen the results of these mishaps firsthand. They know how the realities of these wars have differed from the abstract theories of the neoconservatives and liberal hawks, concocted in think tank conference rooms far removed from the real world. It’s time to heed their counsel more and the Beltway “experts’” less. 

Yes, about that--the United States completely discredited the principle of civilian control over military precisely for the reason that most militantly ignorant, aggressive, war-mongering elements of US government and media, responsible for millions of deaths, refugees, horrors of displacement, in the end, thousands upon thousands US servicemen who lost their lives, health and mental peace, are civilians whose only understanding of military is limited to Hollywood propaganda and most of who didn't serve a day in uniform, let alone have serious military academic background and operational experience. Good that someone other than me points out this damning fact.     

No, Really.

Who needs these meaningless statements on being against everything bad, and for everything good? But this is precisely the feeling one gets when observing France's yet another diplomatic "maneuver" of trying to insert herself (obviously, on Macron's initiative) as intermediary between combined West and Russia. As TASS reports:

MOSCOW, September 9. /TASS/. Russia and France should think about ways to bolster strategic security in the region, French Minister of the Armed Forces Florence Parly said on Monday. "The second aim is to think through how we can make a lasting contribution to improve strategic stability. Discussions on the history of the last 20 years should not be centered around finger-pointing, we need to move forward," she said following a 2+2 meeting between the two countries’ defense and foreign ministers. According to her, dialogue will help to "reconsider the basis" of the relations. The minister is convinced that it will also help to avert incidents and alleviate frictions. Parly is certain that mistrust can be eliminated only through better understanding of each other. This is "not always easy because we often have different visions and methods," she pointed out.

Blah blah blah blah, yada yada yada. It is becoming, indeed, nauseating reading about these crude attempts to prevent Russia's Eurasian integration, which is now irreversible, and especially from the nation (France) whose President, Macron that is, still thinks that Russia's GDP size is that of Spain. No, really. It is, of course, understandable that France has her own interests and visions but those are hardly compatible with those of Russia. I can not even conceive what can possibly be substantively discussed between Shoigu and France's Defense Minister--what kind of "cooperation", "cooperation" in exactly what? I understand that some intelligence exchange on terrorist threats is not only possible but highly desirable, but high level military cooperation is simply out of the question and it is not up to France, or Macron, to make such decisions.  

Make no mistake--I am all for talking. It is better to talk than to fight, but this talking, with one side (France) having no sincere desire to do anything in good faith with Russia, changes absolutely nothing in the structure of the Russia-West relations. France will still remain NATO member, she will still be dependent on the United States' will, which, in the end, will get France back to where it belongs as an American lap-dog. Airbus still WILL get competition from Russian aerospace products, coordinates of French military installations will still be in the flight plans of Russia's stand-off weapons, Russia also will never forget France's criminal role in both Libya and Syria. Russian-French trade is minuscule and the times when my and generation of our parents were charmed by French cinematography, music, perfumes and style are long gone. The charm is gone together with, indeed, French cinematography, music, style and France's sovereignty as a nation of French people. Perfumes still remain, but for how long until creeping Sharia will forbid the use of alcohol in them, who knows. So, do not expect anything of substance from these "negotiations". In the end, they are mostly Macron's PR campaign designed for domestic consumption in France and reminding voters that France still matters. Europe has made her choice and Russians, overwhelming majority of them, are keenly aware of it and that is the only thing which matters in this "security" configuration. Those who will need the sanctuary in Russia in the future--they will be welcomed, but as Alexander Blok foresaw it 101 years ago:

But we shall keep aloof from strife,
No longer be your shield from hostile arrow,
We shall just watch the mortal strife
With our slanting eyes so cold and narrow.

Unmoved shall we remain when Hunnish forces
The corpses’ pockets rake for plunder,
Set town afire, to altars tie their horses,
Burn our white brothers’ bodies torn asunder.

I Seldom Use Poetry.

But Alexander Blok's magnificent 1918 The Scythians, being one of the most stunning in its prescience geopolitical poems of all time, I think, should be posted here. For those who want to see how Russian poetry must be recited (in Russian)--one can enjoy the "music", the sound and rhyme of it here, even if you don't know Russian:

But here is the best English version of it. 101 years on--it reads like it was written yesterday. 

Millions are you – and hosts, yea hosts, are we,
And we shall fight if war you want, take heed.
Yes, we are Scythians – leafs of the Asian tree,
Our slanted eyes are bright aglow with greed.

Ages for you, for us the briefest space,
We raised the shield up as your humble lieges
To shelter you, the European race
From the Mongolians’ savage raid and sieges.

Ages, yea ages, did your forges’ thunder
Drown even avalanches’ roar.
Quakes rent Messina and Lisbon asunder –
To you this was a distant tale – no more.

Eastwards you cast your eyes for many hundred years,
Greedy for our precious stones and ore,
And longing for the time when with a leer
You’d yell an order and the guns would roar.

This time is now. Woe beats its wings
And every adds more humiliation
Until the day arrives which brings
An end to placid life in utter spoliation.

You, the old world, now rushing to perdition,
Yet strolling languidly to lethal brinks,
Yours is the ancient Oedipean mission
To seek to solve the riddles of a sphinx.

The sphinx is Russia, sad and yet elated,
Stained with dark blood, with grief prostrate,
For you with longing she has looked and waited,
Replete with ardent love and ardent hate.

Yet how will ever you perceive
That, as we love, as lovingly we yearn,
Our love is neither comfort nor relief
But like a fire will destroy and burn.

We love cold figures’ hot illumination,
The gift of supernatural vision,
We like the Gallic wit’s mordant sensation
And dark Teutonic indecision.

We know it all: in Paris hell’s dark street,
In Venice bright and sunlit colonnades,
The lemon blossoms’ scent so heavy, yet so sweet,
And in Cologne a shadowy arcade.

We love the flavour and the smell of meat,
The slaughterhouses’ pungent reek.
Why blame us then if in the heat
Of our embrace your bones begin to creak.

We saddle horses wild and shy,
As in the fields so playfully they swerve.
Though they be stubborn, yet we press their thigh
Until they willingly and meekly serve.

Join us! From horror and from strife
Turn to the peace of our embrace.
There is still time. Keep in its sheath your knife.
Comrades, we will be brothers to your race.

Say no – and we are none the worse.
We, too, can utter pledges that are vain.
But ages, ages will you bear the curse
Of our sons’ distant offspring racked with pain.

Our forests’ dark depths shall we open wide
To you, the men of Europe’s comely race,
And unmoved shall we stand aside,
An ugly grin on our Asian face.

Advance, advance to Ural’s crest,
We offer you a battleground so neat
Where your machines of steel in serried ranks abreast
With the Mongolian savage horde will meet.

But we shall keep aloof from strife,
No longer be your shield from hostile arrow,
We shall just watch the mortal strife
With our slanting eyes so cold and narrow.

Unmoved shall we remain when Hunnish forces
The corpses’ pockets rake for plunder,
Set town afire, to altars tie their horses,
Burn our white brothers’ bodies torn asunder.

To the old world goes out our last appeal:
To work and peace invite our warming fires.
Come to our hearth, join our festive meal.
Called by the strings of our Barbarian lyres.

30 January 1918

Paul Craig Roberts About My New Book.

PCR wrote a review on my latest book and I give here some excerpts from it: 

Martyanov’s book is, in a way, two books.  One is about the revolution in military affairs that has left the United States behind.  The other is about the self-medicating and propagandistic version of reality that Americans mistake for reality.  Martyanov convinced me that the Pentagon’s war planners need to upgrade their understanding of war and how to conduct one, but I found more interesting the fake reality supported by controlled explanations from which Americans seem unable to escape that is described in the other part of his book.  It turns out that it is not only the insouciant general population but also the ruling elites themselves who are locked in The Matrix.

But one phrase which PCR used (I really wish I could have come up with it;)) is really succinct and beautiful:

                     Slogans masquerade as ideas

Damn, this is good. It also captures the essence of the contemporary political discourse in the United States. Indeed, where are the real ideas instead of nauseating in their repeatability talking points delivered often by people who absolutely have no business in what should have been the "marketplace" of the real thoughts? Bar some large scale thinkers, such as PCR himself, who constitute a constantly shrinking field of people with actual expertise crucial for saving the United States, all we have today is infotainment. But then again: what constitutes this "saving". What are its basic parameters and metrics? Economy? Absolutely! You cannot to anything without economy, healthy, working economy that is. Military power? Sure! But what are the extents of this power, what it should be and how should it be used? Crucial issue? Absolutely! But, in the end--it all comes down to people who constitute this entity which should be saved. 

As classic of Marxism, Lenin that is, stated once (correctly) that idea becomes a real force when it take possession of the masses. Today, there are no ideas, only slogans and they cannot substitute ideas which are badly needed. World became too complex and it requires new mechanism, instead of utterly corrupt and often incompetent think tanks, for generating ideas which really matter. In the end, those are not just about the fate of the United States, but about humanity as a whole and it is this humanity, a global community, which increasingly doesn't see the future in what came to be known as liberalism, which increasingly comes across as totalitarianism in foreign and domestic policies. And this mutation is being countered as I type this. I finished one of the chapters in my new book with this:

Soviet poet Alexandr Trvardovsky left a Great Patriotic War literary masterpiece for the Soviet people—the epic Vasily Tyorkin, large and written in many self-contained parts, because many Red Army soldiers could never expect to read the entirety because of the possibility of being killed at the front. It was a poem about life and the combat of a simple Russian soldier, Vasily Tyorkin, which later transcended its literary origin and lived on in Russian folklore and culture. One of the most powerful episodes in Tvardovsky’s master­piece about River-Crossing under enemy’s fire, encapsulates the meaning of the titanic struggle against Nazi evil:

Бой идет святой и правый.

Смертный бой не ради славы,

Ради жизни на земле.

The battle goes on, holy and righteous

A deadly battle not for glory

                       For life on Earth

This is what at the stake for humanity today. No less than that. Maybe, more.