About This Grayzone Article ...

 ... on Krynky catastrophe, naturally planned by British. We saw British operational "genius" in Kursk Oblast where those credentialed cretins from London killed more than 76,000 NATO (VSU and their "advisers" ARE a NATO army) personnel. Against this background or famed "counteroffensive", which exposed Pentagon's military incompetence and killed already more than 160,000 personnel, Krynky "operation" seems almost an insignificant detail in otherwise a war crime Washington and London committed by killing most likely more than 1.5 million VSU-NATO and roughly 100,000 of Russian Army servicemen. I omit here atrocities against civilian population and POWs. As GZ's opening salvo describes:

On the morning of October 30 2023, dozens of Ukrainian commandos on small boats glided across the Dnieper River to control of Krynky, a village in Russian-occupied Kherson. They had spent the prior two months in remote areas of the British isles with similar terrain, running drills under the watchful gaze of UK generals. Now, they believed their hard work was about to pay off. Both British and Ukrainian officials were convinced the operation would turn the tide of the war, creating a beachhead allowing Kiev’s forces to march on Crimea and all-out victory.

Instead, the British-trained Ukrainian marines were led like lambs to the slaughter. The catastrophically planned effort saw a seemingly endless stream of heavily overloaded Ukrainian boats attempt to reach Krynky without air cover, under relentless fire by Russian artillery, drones, flamethrowers and mortars. Marines that made the journey were ill-equipped, resupplying those troops proved virtually impossible, and evacuating them was out of the question.

As the promised missile cover failed to materialize in the ensuing weeks, it became clear the effort had amounted to a disaster. Yet for the next nine months, wave after wave of British-trained Ukrainian marines were dispatched to almost certain death to Krynky. The decision to let the costly quagmire drag on, at a human and material cost no NATO military would ever allow, has come to be seen as one of the worst tactical mistakes of the war — and it appears top British generals are to blame.

Leaked documents reviewed by The Grayzone expose how the British not only presided over the training of the Marines involved, but built from scratch the “Maritime Raiding Force” which would ultimately be sacrificed over the course of the Krynky suicide mission.

Let's review these statements. 

1. All of NATO, let alone British military have zero tactical and operational experience and knowledge applicable to the warfare of the 21st century:

a) British military education and thought are completely detached from the realities of modern war and fire impact and operational tempo which Russian Armed Forces can enforce across a very large line of combat contact. The system is simply broken and obsolete. 

b) Academic level of British officer corps is extremely low and does not provide proper insights into even lower tactical level, which completely reduces any combat training to nothing more than mechanical repetition of prescriptions from NATO's obsolete Tactical and Operational Field manuals. 

2. The fact that British military believed already during and after catastrophe of "counteroffensive" that a tactical action can have serious operational, let alone strategic effect on one of several (today it is 11 of them) operational axes of Russian Army exposes a shocking lack of awareness about:

a) The weight of Russian salvo across all means of delivery of long-range fires within RUK/ROK. 

Evidently, British General Staff has difficulty grasping the issue of scales and the role in much more advanced military such as Russian its ISR assets play.

b) British military and its general staff structures do not understand the issue of COFM (Correlation Of Forces and Means) because the only explanation for the consistent failures of NATO in 404 is that either they cannot calculate properly, or their models are bunk or likely, both.  

3. NATO doesn't have real strategic intelligence as such. 

4. Promised "missile cover" could have been conceived by British military based on a complete lack of understanding of the role of AD in modern conflict and how REAL SEAD is conducted. E.g. NATO's AD is not survivable in modern conflict against highly developed Air Force, ISR and fires such as Iskander, Kinzhal, Oniks or 3M22 Zircon. NATO militaries simply have no reference point. 

In other words, the only thing which drove British "planning" more than their military amateurism and adventurism, was as GZ notes:

For the technical details, they decided that “academics should also be included, using the latest technology resources to ensure the success of raids conducted especially in terms of the destruction of key infrastructure.” Therefore, “a formal request” to the British Ministry of Defence “on the latest intelligence imagery and plans” regarding Crimea’s heavily-fortified underground complex “will need to be planned in extreme detail. ”Britain’s obsession with wresting Sevastopol from Moscow’s grasp dates back to the Crimean War of 1853-1856, but the leaked documents clearly show the city’s seizure is still considered a vital, and achievable, objective from London’s perspective. Though Project Alchemy described the military port as home to the world’s “largest concentration of anti-ship missiles” and a bunker complex “immune to air or missile strike,” the group’s operatives still believed the area to be “vulnerable to commando forces.” 

It is both cultural and mental for London whose hatred of everything Russian drove already incompetent military into sheer delusion of UK's greatness as military power. But as GZ notes:

As major legacy media outlets now dissect Kiev’s military failures in forensic detail, the reporting consistently underlines the British Ministry of Defense’s pivotal role in planning some of the war’s biggest disasters. Each of these setbacks left many thousands of Ukrainians dead or wounded, yet no one in London appears to have faced any professional consequences. To the foreign officers who sent them into the kill zone, those who lost their lives were nothing more than proxies.

The conclusion is simple--British military is no good for anything other than sabotage and terrorist (and piracy) "operations", not to mention the fact of its low academic, intellectual, moral and morale level, which drives them to committing war crimes and parading oneself as a collection of military misfits. There is no honor or professional integrity which was substituted with fanatical hatred of Russia. As a result--British military deserves neither professional nor human respect.     

They Made a Discovery.

 WOW! 

In accordance with American doctrine, anti-aircraft defense has never been the real strong point of European armies. Indeed, according to NATO, it is the air force that must ensure the control of tactical air threats, thanks to a fighter and support fleet (Awacs, tankers), far superior in number, quality and training to the Russian air forces. However, the war in Ukraine has shown that it is no longer necessary to fly over the enemy's airspace to carry out tactical strikes, but also conventional long-range strategic strikes against the enemy's key forces and infrastructure. Thus, most of the destruction recorded in Ukraine, concerning command infrastructure, ammunition stocks, as well as civil infrastructure and works of art (energy, communication, etc.), was the consequence of strikes by Iskander-M and Kinzhal ballistic missiles, Kh-35, Kh-55, Kh-101 and Kalibr cruise missiles, as well as Geran-2 long-range attack drones, without the carrier vectors ever having to penetrate Ukrainian airspace. In fact, when faced with Russia, Europe is more exposed than ever, facing a threat against which it has not fully prepared itself. Indeed, today, the European armies align, together, less than 50 long-range Patriot, SAMP/T and S-300 anti-aircraft batteries, of which only half have anti-ballistic capabilities against short-range missiles, such as the Iskander-M.

Well, my not so dear European "friends", I have news for you--whole US fighting doctrine is obsolete and is from WW II. US concept of air war is altogether from BEFORE WW II and is nothing but modified pre-WW II (1920s) Duhe's ideas dressed in advanced radar and high precision weapons. NATO air forces are a joke which wouldn't be able to compete with Russian VKS which are networked from ground up and make NATO's, let alone Euro NATO's, air defense look like expensive toys. This is the price NATO pays today by exposing itself as a corpse, which chocked on its own Kool Aid about "finest fighting force in history" and Top Gun: Maverick. 

NATO is a corpse. All that remains is the grotesque performance art of a diplomatic zombie stumbling from summit to summit, mouthing tired clichés about “shared values” and “burden sharing,” even as its core strategic logic lies rotting beneath the surface. The Atlantic Alliance, once the steel scaffolding of Western security, has become a hollow ritual. Its military readiness is an illusion. Its political cohesion is fraying. Its future, if it has one, lies not in revival—but in reinvention or replacement. 

Meanwhile, Witkoff met with Putin. 

He carried the message from Trump. We can only speculate. British military and its highest officer corps are a joke, now we know this because The Times exposed it, while trying to put the lipstick on the pig. I speak about it in my today's video.