About Talked About Article.

I want to start with solemn "thank you" to our very own Johnny Rotten who two days ago pointed out to me some thoughts by President of Russia on political "science". And, of course, I am profoundly thankful to Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin for his proper and long awaited statement on the issue of a fraudulent pseudo-academic field known as political "science".  I am talking about this:

МОСКВА, 7 июля. /ТАСС/. Президент РФ Владимир Путин усомнился в том, что политологию можно классифицировать как науку, потому что сложно найти метод исследования, присущий только этой области знаний. Такой оценкой он поделился в четверг на встрече с победителями четвертого сезона конкурса "Лидеры России". Услышав о том, что одна из конкурсанток собирается защищать кандидатскую диссертацию в области политических наук, глава государства удивился: "В области политологии?" Есть такая наука - политология?" Услышав утвердительный ответ, он со смехом добавил: "Спорный вопрос". "Я так понимаю, всегда так считалось, что чтобы какая-то сфера знаний претендовала на то, чтобы называться наукой, у нее должен быть собственный предмет исследования и собственный метод исследования. В политологии как-то трудно найти присущий только ей метод исследования", - поделился Путин своим видением ситуации.

Translation: MOSCOW, 7 July. /TASS/. Russian President Vladimir Putin doubted that political science can be classified as a science, because it is difficult to find a research method that is unique to this field of knowledge. He shared this assessment on Thursday at a meeting with the winners of the fourth season of the Leaders of Russia contest. Hearing that one of the contestants was going to defend her Ph.D. thesis in the field of political science, the head of state was surprised: "In the field of political science?" Is there such a science - political science?" Hearing an affirmative answer, he added with a laugh: "A moot point." "As I understand it, it has always been believed that in order for a certain field of knowledge to claim to be called a science, it must have its own subject of study and its own research method. In political science, it is somehow difficult to find a research method inherent only to it," - Putin shared his vision of the situation.

It is one thing when some insignificant washout like me tries to get across the point that political "science" is a fraud, totally another when arguably the most important statesman, highly educated and cultured at that, of the 21st century finally speaks his mind on a fraudulent field "of study" which, to a very large extent, is a reason why the modern West continues with its both homicidal and suicidal policies and arrived at the precipice of the historic, tectonic, defeat. It is becoming exceedingly obvious that 99% of Western political "scientists" are people who shouldn't be allowed to express their opinions (I underscore: opinions) on any subject dealing with modern civilization in so far as its complex machinery, both directly and figuratively speaking, least of all in the field of warfare. 

The record of utter, grotesque failure of political "science" is easily traceable through the even brief review of the Western geopolitical "thought" which provided us with copious amount of geopolitical speculations practically all of which are nothing more than pseudo-academic trash ranging from risible sophomoric Fukuyama's demagoguery to Huntington's "Clash", and I don't mean the band, to 2018 Mearsheimer's meandering and ignorant speculation on the fate of liberalism. We all can go further and recall writings of late Zbig, or the fate of Russian Studies field in the West stuffed with this kind of pseudo-academic parasites, or we can all laugh at pretentious BS produced by CFR which is saturated with political "scientists", including its big honcho Richard Haas, who cannot find their own asses with their both hands in a brightly lit room. In the end, look at the US Congress. 

Speaking of the Council on Foreign Relations and its main publication Foreign Affairs. Here is the guy who penned a few days ago yet another "gem" of the Western political "science" thinking, or, rather lack thereof, and his name is Barry R. Posen who is Ford International Professor of Political Science at MIT. If a well documented inability of the political "science" to predict own next bowel movement wasn't enough--purely on statistical merit they should have predicted by now something right, you know broken clock being correct twice a day thing--Posen decided to buttress Vladimir Putin's (and mine, for a very long time, mind you) thesis about this academic fraud filed, which exists only for generating credentialism for people who, otherwise, have issues with serious fields of study, to which political "science" does not belong and is characterized by Pushkin's immortal words from Evgenii Onegin. 

We all meandered through our schooling 

haphazard; so, to God be thanks,

 it's easy, without too much fooling, 

to pass for cultured in our ranks. 

Well, Mr. Posen penned this talked about (in some circles) article in Foreign Affairs. The title of article is a classic pretentious BS one would expect from the American political "science" so called "experts" in matters of war and Russia: Ukraine’s Implausible Theories of Victory.The Fantasy of Russian Defeat and the Case for Diplomacy. As I already stated (and wrote three books on that) American political class and the "expert" community, a euphemism for a cabal of primarily political scientists, which shapes its views on the outside world are utterly ignorant in two fundamental things:

1. Warfare, which requires a range of expertise which is not even in the same vicinity of the political "science", because you have to have a rock solid graduate level STEM and tactical-operational background and that means actual service in military and intel environment at the officer level. 

2. Russia. West, it can be stated clearly and decisively now, has no clue what it is dealing with in Russia and Russian people. American political "science" field contributed mightily to a complete delusion of the West about Russia and that brought about this current situation of the combined West committing suicide by Russia. 

Obviously, Posen's article title immediately exhibits a fantastical thinking because the "case for diplomacy" has long expired and it has everything to do with:

1. Actual state of the SMO in Ukraine and the dynamics of operations in Ukraine in terms of obvious changing correlation of forces engaged and that is pointing towards utter destruction of VSU. 

2. Inability to see (or admit) the fact that Ukraine is but one of many theaters of a global warm war between Russia and combined West and that war has been started by the West. So, when Lavrov says openly that there is nothing to talk about with combined West that means NO "diplomacy" the way ignorant and incompetent US "diplomats" understand it. 

So, the title alone with its "case for diplomacy" is nothing more than a fantastical thinking by Posen who, naturally, has no clue about Russia and Russian way of war. Posen's tenure in Pentagon and RAND as analyst is of no use, because neither Pentagon nor RAND have a grasp of what the US was getting itself into when organized bloody and criminal coup in 2013-2014 in Ukraine. Plus, pardon my French, one has to have at least some record of successes and accomplishments, which in case of Pentagon is non-existent in the last 20+ years. I doubt the product of organization with a totally confused fighting doctrine and miscalculating every single enemy it ever fought can have anything to add to the issue of outcome in Ukraine.  Yet, he tries, and in doing so betrays the desperation for a face saving exit for the US which now observes its greatest ever proxy SOB being taken apart by Russia. 

A negotiated solution to the war would no doubt be hard to achieve, but the outlines of a settlement are already visible. Each side would have to make painful concessions. Ukraine would have to relinquish considerable territory and do so in writing. Russia would need to relinquish some of its battlefield gains and renounce future territorial claims. To prevent a future Russian attack, Ukraine would surely need strong assurances of U.S. and European military support, as well as continuing military aid (but consisting mainly of defensive, not offensive, weapons). Russia would need to acknowledge the legitimacy of such arrangements. The West would need to agree to relax many of the economic sanctions it has placed on Russia. NATO and Russia would need to launch a new set of negotiations to limit the intensity of military deployments and interactions along their respective frontiers. U.S. leadership would be essential to a diplomatic solution. Because the United States is Ukraine’s principal backer and the organizer of the West’s economic pressure campaign against Russia, it possesses the greatest leverage over the two parties. 

A fantastical, detached from the reality thinking. Each phrase in this segment is an Exhibit A of a delusion of a grandeur, hubris and stupidity. I have news to Posen: for starters, there will be no "concessions". Russia will take what she needs without asking anybody what and how they think about her actions. Moreover, Posen is being totally disingenuous, and I repeat, SMO is but the part, however important, of a larger existential conflict between Russia and combined West. This time it is fully global and to even grasp what is going on here and what mechanism have been engaged on the Russian side, ranging from economic, military, cultural and spiritual, Posen needs to know Russia's real history, culture and, especially so, her military history and the history of WW II. None of these subjects is properly taught in the US. Posen as most US political "scientists" has no clue of the subject. But the quip about "US leadership being essential for diplomatic solution" is altogether risible. 

For Posen and people who took this baloney of his seriously: the US cannot provide any "leadership", because it is not viewed as a serious counterpart by Russia (and many others) because any arrangements with the US are not worth the paper they written on (non-agreement capable). Secondly, the US "diplomacy" is an insult to an honorable profession and looking at the US State Department and its "quality" it is only natural to avoid any contact with those people who have no honor or integrity. Thirdly, the US IS NOT a military factor in Ukraine because, short of all out war, in which the US and NATO will be physically annihilated, nothing the United States can do to influence a military outcome which dictates a political one. I am not sure Posen ever heard of Deng Xiaoping's famous inversion of Clausewitz: "Diplomacy is a continuation of war by other, peaceful, means." Russia has an overwhelming escalation dominance in Ukraine. 

But Posen, who, obviously doesn't understand what escalation dominance is (you need a very serious military professional background to understand that), has to be reminded:

It ended with Peskov "clarifying" that Russia didn't even engage its main forces in Ukarine. They don't understand the correlation of forces and combat effectiveness issues in political "science" community. But Posen continues to have wet dreams:

It is easier to state these principles than it is to hammer them into the implementable provisions of an agreement. But that is precisely why negotiations should start sooner rather than later. The Ukrainian and Western theories of victory have been built on weak reasoning. At best, they are a costly avenue to a painful stalemate that leaves much Ukrainian territory in Russian hands. If this is the best that can be hoped for after additional months or years of fighting, then there is only one responsible thing to do: seek a diplomatic end to the war now.

No, Western "theories of victory" have been built on utter propaganda and completely made up numbers, with propaganda being spread as information influence operation driven, among many others, by losers from US top brass, who apart from parading themselves as amateurs, couldn't hide their utter butt-hurt from seeing how real operations with severe constrains due to civilians being used as human shield (a good old Nazi tactics and Nazis are admired by many in the US) are conducted. And no, Mr. Posen, the only solution will be Russia dictating the conditions of capitulation by Kiev regime and its main puppeteers from Washington D.C. The fear of a much larger and far reaching humiliation than even shameful run from Afghanistan is the main reason for this sophomoric and fantastical thinking article by Posen. This, plus absolute inability to wrap their political "scientists'" brains around a simple fact that none of them understand real war and nothing can help them with this understanding because, as Putin succinctly noted: "As I understand it, it has always been believed that in order for a certain field of knowledge to claim to be called a science, it must have its own subject of study and its own research method. In political science, it is somehow difficult to find a research method inherent only to it." 

There is no research method in it, never existed and the only reason this pseudo-science was created, same as another fake filed of "geoeconomics" or, for that matter, Queer Studies is to bestow some higher education degree on people who never were and are good in anything other than pseudo-academic demagoguery on subjects which are hard to learn. Plus, there are always historians and lawyers, granted they are honest people, who can provide all needed expertise on matters of political "science". The article by Posen proves the failure of political "scientists" perfectly. As Russian military has a saying--учи, блядь, материальную часть (Study the fucking equipment). Applies to Posen and his ilk perfectly.