Leaning On London...

 ... new details begin to emerge from this FUBAR by NATO in Kursk. But before we go there--here is the phenomenon of being grossly overrated. Mind you, this is not me writing this, these are American historians. 

Most overrated person in WW2

LAURENCE REES: And who’s the most overrated person?

GEOFFREY WAWRO: From World War Two? I could add someone who really made their name in World War Two, obviously Charles De Gaulle. ....

LAURENCE REES: Someone who actually did well out of it, but actually there’s a PR spin to it, so didn't entirely deserve their reputation.

GEOFFREY WAWRO: Well, an obvious example would be someone like General George Patton on the American side because there’s been so many books about him and the movie starring George C. Scott about Patton. So he’s become an iconic figure and very much attached to everything Americans think about the Second World War. But there’s a very dark side to Patton, the casualties that he was willing to take. He is pitiless about American casualties. After the liberation of Paris when they’re moving on to attack Germany, and he attacked Metz, he took part in a frontal attack against entrenched German troops and tanks behind a river barrier and took awful casualties, and this was something that Patton was willing to do in order to keep the momentum moving forward but also to assure his own fame. So I think there’s work that needs to be done on Patton. He was energetic, aggressive, a great American hero, he didn’t lack bravery and I don’t think he was doing this to sort of pass the burden onto his troops, he would welcome the burden himself. But there was something about his Generalship that was a little bit crude for the 20th Century.

LAURENCE REES: Yes, and that’s something that people aren’t aware of, necessarily.

GEOFFREY WAWRO: Right. 

Well, Patton wasn't called a "master of chickenshit" by GIs for nothing. But if you want to see true masters of chicken shit, go no further than London and British military's "General Staff" aka officially the org headed by the Chief of Defense Staff (Radakin guy). These guys still venerate their Waterloo, which in the end didn't change much, but they continue to reside in their bubble thinking that they have a great military record in combined arms operations. They don't, not even close. In the end, it was US Army, namely Hodges' 1st Army and especially its heroic 2nd and 99th divisions which took the brunt of Wehrmacht's last gamble in Ardennes in 1944. They are, in other words, overrated beyond belief, in fact--utterly grotesquely. But why, you may ask, I concentrate on them? Very simple--the hint which flashed briefly through London Times and few other UK tabloids via piece with a symptomatic title Britain’s Kursk Invasion Backfires?

... commenting on Starmer’s wideranging efforts to compel overt Western action against Russia, a “defence expert” told The Times: “if it looks as if the Brits [are] too far ahead of their NATO allies, it might be counterproductive.” This analysis is prescient, for there are ample indications London’s latest attempt to ratchet tensions and drag the US and Europe ever-deeper into the proxy war quagmire has already been highly “counterproductive”, and boomeranged quite spectacularly. Indeed, it appears Washington has finally had enough of London’s escalatory connivances. In repeated press conferences and media briefings since August 6th, US officials have firmly distanced themselves from the Kursk incursion, denying any involvement in its planning or execution, or even being forewarned by Kiev. Empire house journal Foreign Policy has reported that Ukraine’s swoop caught the Pentagon, State Department, and White House off-guard.

And you know what? This time Washington may be telling the truth, at least partially. This debacle in Kursk had London written all over it, as also was confirmed by Colonel Maduro, I mean Alexey Leonkov (in Russian). 

So, IT IS, or rather, WAS London's "operation" and it bore all hallmarks of British military "thought"--amateurism, ignorance, delusions of grandeur and lack of any experience in modern warfare. They also do not study military history and warfare in Sandhurst, Joint Services Command and Staff College or in RUSI and Chatham House. The idea that the staff of the army with zero serious military record, pathetic armor and air force, and having the actual combat ready force the size of the Northern Stand of the Elland Road Stadium (FC Leeds) is beyond preposterous. It is pathetic. 

 

I am a consistent critic of Washington for both foreign and domestic issues, seeing as once beautiful country (the US) is being run into the ground, but the US is a superpower still, however declining! UK is not even in the same universe, especially fighting Russia whose military record dwarfs that of the US. If not for the Falklands and Reagan's warning to Argentinians that the US will remove barriers to the use of nukes, UK literally has no record whatsoever other than doing false flags, killing civilians, kidnapping them and other shit for which UK military brass sticks more funny letters to their already bloated prefixes for their titles. The only title they don't have is a force capable of serious operational planning especially against the guys who demolished time after time the best forces combined West could muster. And so, as more information becomes available, they thought they could achieve their insane "objectives" using the best cannon fodder 404 could field. This, plus their SAS and other "advisers" running the show. Boys, go back to school... It was primarily Russia's Border Guards and some hodge-podge units which met them on the 6th and whole "plan" went bye-bye. After that the whole Russian routine unfolded:

Here is one of the flags of this vaunted and trained by British 82nd Brigade of VSU. Now Russians are mopping up this creme de la creme from Kursk area. How many Anglo DRGs are now rotting in Kursk forests will know in due time. But here is the deal--they better wake up in London to a reality of being amateurs compared to the Army which shifted the paradigm in warfare and has capabilities which do not even come in the wet dreams to KCB, ADC, WTF, CNN Sir Tony Radakin nor to anyone in RUSI, because they never heard of those things. As to fighting Russians in Kursk--they better ask spirits of Erich Von Manstein, Walter Model or Hermann Hoth--they'll tell.  

 

For those listening to Leonkov with translation--pay attention to how many times he calls out those pseudo-patriotic media in Russia most of which are "manned" by open and shadow VSU/GUR assets such as Podolyaka, Rybar, Military Informant, Colonel Cassad and others, including in Anglo-sphere many of who you know, and keep in mind that out of all physical advantages listed in the Field Manual 3-0 the US has none left. The only nominal advantage is in "information" but even this doesn't work on the land which saw the death of Nazi panzers. Thinking that some amateurs who are headed by a lawyer (yes, Radakin is a lawyer) can stand on this ground is laughable. Why don't London take MacArthur's advice and just fucking fade away from the arena of big boys.