With "Professors" in "Military History" Like...

... Frederick Kagan, another offspring of the politically fecund Kagan clan, which is a major contributor to the American neocon ideology, which is a euphemism for academic fraud and ignorance, penned a piece in Time magazine, which is an Exhibit A of the Kagans uncontrollable urges to spew BS any time they speak about Russia. Naturally, they know very little about Russia and American necocons are simply not good at warfare. In fact, they suck so badly that putting a lipstick on the pig of the American wars in Iraq and Afghanistan--brain children of the Robert Kagan and his neocon ilk from PNAC--cannot hide anymore an ugly record of strategic failure, lack of vision and, as a result, humiliating military and political defeats which culminated in the "escape from Afghanistan". Well, Frederick Kagan managed to teach military history in the USMA at West-Point. Boy, I wonder what this military "thinker" taught there. So, he concludes:

The fight for Severodonetsk is a Russian information operation in the form of a battle. One of its main purposes for Moscow is to create the impression that Russia has regained its strength and will now overwhelm Ukraine. That impression is false. The Russian military in Ukraine is increasingly a spent force that cannot achieve a decisive victory if Ukrainians hold on. Russian President Vladimir Putin is therefore trying to turn his invasion of Ukraine into a brutal contest of wills. He’s betting his army on breaking Ukrainians’ collective will to fight on in their country. His own won’t likely break. Fortunately, Ukraine doesn’t need it to. If Ukrainians can weather the current Russian storm and then counterattack the exhausted Russian forces they still have every chance to free their people and all their land.

I know, Kagans hate Russian guts, it is natural for their extensive family which straddles a variety of corridors of power, academy and what passes in the US for diplomacy, having a lot of influence in D.C. But diplomats (like Vicky) or geopolitical thinkers (like Robert), or warfare professionals (like Kimberly), or military historians (like Frederick) they are not. Not even close. 

The fact that Frederick is a fraud as "military historian" is this his risible conclusion:

The Russians have adapted to this grim reality by changing their tactics to something reminiscent of the First World War or the “Methodical Battle” doctrine of the French Army in 1940—artillery barrages destroy everything in a given sector of the battlefield and then Russian troops crawl forward through the ruins. But even this approach has its limits. Russia’s supply of artillery pieces is not infinite. They have had to concentrate artillery densely in the prioritized sectors, pulling it away from other areas. They have drawn artillery (and tanks and other equipment) out of ancient Soviet-era stores. And they’ve begun taking equipment out of Belarusian stocks as well—likely the last stockpiles of gear Putin can reliably get his hands on.

So, no wonder the US Army cannot win shit in the last 30 years. When you have such "professors" like Frederick, who, obviously doesn't know the subject--that is Russia's approach to modern war (and he doesn't, none of the Kagans does, including Kimberly who runs this sinecure for the retired US Army "Napoleons"--ISW), does the US really need enemies? Explaining to Frederick what modern combined arms warfare is, is an exercise in futility because he will not understand it because the person who writes such a hysterical drivel really needs to undergo his professional evaluation, because, obviously the only thing he is good at, same as most US neocons, including those from the US military, is lying and fantastical thinking. But applying "Methodical Battle" doctrine of the French Army which in 1940 successfully collapsed in 6 weeks and France was humiliated by Hitler in Compiegne, to modern Russian operation in 404. Somebody explain to this "military" historian what are modern stand-off precision weapons are and how operations are planned.

If Frederick, who is allegedly a "military historian" wants to find better examples in trying to portray Russia's war effort in 404 in the light which allows his fanatically Russophobic relatives not to have an aneurysm outright, he should have come up with better BS, or, maybe, just maybe, tried to study actual Russian military history and see for himself how Russian military thought developed from the times of Peter the Great to Brusilov (yes, yes--rolling artillery wall, his invention) in 1916, to Triandafilov, Svechin, in the end--to military leaders of the Great Patriotic War. That will spare him a lot of butt-hurt and emotional stress. Or will it? In the end, you may recall (both in my videos and here in blog) that I state constantly--if you decided to lie on matters of warfare, at least learn to lie professionally and that implies serious military knowledge, which none of the Kagans has.

In somewhat sad news, especially knowing that US Ambassador to Russia John J. Sullivan is an old school American diplomat and a reasonable man, he pleaded with Russia:

In a clear attempt to send a message to the Kremlin, John J. Sullivan, the U.S. ambassador appointed by President Donald Trump, told Russia's state TASS news agency that Washington and Moscow should not simply break off diplomatic relations. "We must preserve the ability to speak to each other," Sullivan told TASS in an interview. He cautioned against the removal of the works of Leo Tolstoy from Western bookshelves or refusing to play the music of Pyotr Tchaikovsky.

Sadly, Esteemed Ambassador Sullivan has to face the reality--Russian culture and history will be removed from the combined West and it is not Russia who will be doing it. Considering the fact, as described above, that such frauds and war criminals like Kagans and people like them--Blinken, NSA Sullivan et al--still play an important role in shaping what passes in the US for foreign policy, and understanding an existential character of the clash between Russia and the combined West which it is losing, we must recall Sergei Lavrov's characterization of modern Western elites--you cannot trust them.Difficult to disagree--there is nobody in the US to talk to.