Some Visuals ...

 ... of "trophies" from VSU in Kursk.  

Combined West IS what is shown here. Some more, some less. That's Europe. And here is an observation from Patrick Armstrong where he arrives to the conclusion that visceral hatred of Russia is organic to Anglos. He bases his conclusion on the historic evidence from the Crimean War. 

Take Britain for example. At the moment London is the principal actor in the anti-Russia/pro-Ukraine camp; before that Cold War opponent; then ally against Hitler; then variable; then ally against Germany; then opponent in the Great Game; then enemy in the Crimean War; then ally against Napoleon and back and forth we go until the first and reasonably amicable trade contacts in Elizabeth’s time. From one to the other as interests dictated. But a month ago I read something that made me wonder if maybe the Russians had a point. It was Orlando Figes’ book on the Crimean War and I was astounded to see the same anti-Russia tropes that we see today. 

Remarkably, it was Crimean War where the United States stood firmly behind Russia. 

... with scarcely a dissenting voice, the American press and public appeared to conclude that the world was picking on its overseas friend, Russia. President Franklin Pierce… all but went to war with Britain and France on Russia’s behalf. U.S. Navy crews rescued the crew of the Russian ship Diana in the Far East. The U.S. Government furnished Russian forces with arms and sent a whole shipload of gunpowder to the defenders of the Siberian coast. Three hundred Kentucky riflemen offered to go to the Crimea, where volunteer American surgeons were already serving with Russian forces. The Russian Embassy in Washington D.C. was flooded with requests for letters of marque from American citizens who wanted to enter the service of the tsar as privateers against Britain. Frank Golder, no Russophile, would later write of the Crimean War, ‘By the time it was over the United States was the only nation in the world that was neither ashamed nor afraid to acknowledge boldly her friendship for Russia.’ The behavior of the United States during this war unquestionably impressed the Russians and strengthened the goodwill between two nations.”

But I also stress in my Disintegration book:

The Crystal Palace was a cast iron and glass structure which was erected in Hyde Park in London to house the 1851 Great Exhibition, a forerunner of international Expo events, which would serve as a place to showcase the achievements of participant nations. The Queen opened this 1851 exhibition, emphasizing that it was above all a “peace festival” intended to promote friendly competition between nations. But as Alan Palmer noted:

But Victoria and (prince) Albert were out of touch with the public mood, for the thousands who flocked to Crystal palace delighted in specifically British achievements and were content to cast curious glances of patronizing approval on what had come from overseas…

The exhibition was also marked with growing Russophobia, which was spurred by Tories and Whig businessmen who deplored the incursion of Russian traders into the areas which Britain considered her traditional markets, specifically in the Far East and Eastern Mediterranean, among others. In the end, British suspicions and displeasures with Russia, sublimations of their imperial policies, resulted in the Crimean War, which initiated a sequence of events which inextricably contributed to the Russian revolution and influenced the outcome of World War II—a defining event of both the 20th and to a large degree the early 21st centuries.

It was always there. It merely went to Eleven after WW II with USSR emerging as the superpower while Britain losing her empire and finding herself reduced to the America's vassal state. Today, UK is fast becoming a third world country and is confined to a small island off the western shore of Europe. With the exception of Rolls Royce and English Premier League, it is the nation which is simply insignificant in military and economic terms. They support 404 Nazis and this is only natural for the UK. Some exceptions merely confirm the rule. Per Canada--you saw everything you needed in Canada's Parliament--this is who they are as a country.  

Ah, Yes! Good Ol' And Tried...

 ... self-medication from the times of victorious Wehrmacht and SS which many is US military still hold in high regard. Maybe because they don't know what winning wars is? Just a wild guess but...

Russia Sends Waves of Troops to the Front in a Brutal Style of Fighting. More than 1,000 Russian soldiers in Ukraine were killed or wounded on average each day in May, according to NATO and Western military officials.

That's how coping looks like. I want to stress again, that Pentagon in general is a sour grapes territory of losers who sense that this is above their professional competencies. So, what's left? Yes, waves of those Red Army peasants prodded from the behind by NKVD troops who overwhelmed artsy Germans in waves--a favorite shtick of Colonel Macgregor who learned all those fairy tales from... yes, Germans. Obviously, math is not a strong forte of "NATO and Western military officials" because the whole system of officer training in the West is a joke. It does not allow for a development of the main capability of the officer which is having a developed mental instrumentation for space-time awareness of the battle space. This comes from not only massive curriculum in STEM but in appropriate study of tactics, operations and military history. They don't teach real military history in NATO military academies--they teach propaganda based on strategic fairy tales. 

Patrick Armstrong gives a good review of the newest book on REAL history:

The central theme and, no doubt, a complete surprise to most of its readers, will be that the the conventional story has got it exactly backwards: Stalin was not Hitler’s co-conspirator. He understood four things: 1) the previous good Moscow-Berlin relations were gone forever, 2) Hitler was a threat to all around him, 3) Hitler would break any agreement as soon as he could, 4) the only response was an agreement of Germany’s neighbours to block him. “Collective security” they called it: only together could Hitler be stopped; individual agreements just encouraged him to push somewhere else. This volume retails, meeting by meeting, the efforts of Soviet diplomats to get their interlocutors to grasp this and to construct an anti-Hitler resistance arrangement. They were not unsuccessful: important people in France, Britain (even the anti-Bolshevik Winston Churchill who met the Soviet Ambassador often), Romania and Czechoslovakia agreed with Stalin’s appreciation of the situation but they could never quite push their governments over the finish line.   

So, consider ramifications. They are severe for the West.

Patrick Armstrong...

 ... reminds us all. 

On this day, 18 June, in 1935, the Anglo-German Naval Agreement was signed. The two sides agreed that the German Navy’s total tonnage would be fixed at 35% of the Royal Navy’s tonnage. Not, when you think about it, a very intelligent agreement from London’s perspective. One of the causes of the First World War had been British concerns about the size of the German Navy and yet where did they think this one-third-as-big navy would be based? Obviously in the North Sea; the British, with their world-wide empire, would have most of their ships elsewhere, In short, London was agreeing that the Germans could have near-parity in the waters closest to it. But worse. The agreement was the first violation by a great power of the Versailles conditions and had been done without consultation with any of Britain’s allies. It was the first, and therefore legitimating, agreement made by a great power with Hitler’s Germany.

Read the whole thing--you will understand why they cry so loud about Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. You will also be "surprised" that the SS ass-hole who was met with standing ovation in Canadian Parliament--you know, Hunka guy--is accused of killing 500 people among them Russians, Poles and Jews (in Russian). I think the guy should get tenure in either West Point or Sandhurst, before he dies. He surely has skills in "war".

Patrick Armstrong Wrote A Must Read.

I cannot emphasize enough the importance of this piece. 

If you were Stalin, what would you do when your Plan A is dead? You know war is coming, you believe Hitler when he says his aim is to seize lebensraum to the east. Your potential allies don’t get it. What would you do? While London and Paris dither and Warsaw dreams dreams (what dreams? Hitler just tore up the non-aggression pact you were counting on: you’re next) Hitler strikes. How about a non-aggression pact? Stalin seizes the chance, the agreement is immediately signed. Stalin knows perfectly well that Hitler is going to attack the USSR and so he starts to grab as much territory to the west as he can and put off the day as long as possible.

One cannot understand the modern world without learning the REAL history of WW II and the sabotage by the West of the Soviet Collective Security efforts of which people such as Correlli Barnett and Alexander Werth also wrote extensively. A must read from Mr. Armstrong.

Larry Thinks About Hunger, Patrick--About Mistakes.

Larry Johnson asks a question--are we in for a famine? This is not a vain question, it is a very important one and Larry gives some numbers:

Let me help you with the math–Russia and the Ukraine combined accounted for 33% of all wheat exports among the top ten exporters. Russia exports more than the United States. Let that sink in for a moment.  Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is highly likely to disrupt Ukraine’s ability to fully plant and harvest wheat in 2022. And Russia will be blocked, in theory at least, from being able to accept U.S. dollars for its wheat export. On March 9 President Putin signed an order banning the exports of some goods and raw materials.

Larry presents some figures which should (we can only hope) give some pause to insanity which passes in the US for "foreign policy" and economics. Read the whole thing at Larry's blog--the link is in my blog-roll. 

Patrick Armstrong meanwhile writes about what he got wrong. I disagree, he got things right based on available information of that time. Nobody knew, albeit many did suspect, that new facts will change the thought process by many analysts, me included, about the objectives of Russia's campaign in 404. As Patrick writes:

So why was I wrong? What did I miss? I believe I missed three things – two I didn’t know about and one that I did but did not properly weigh. These are: the nuclear weapons issue, the planned strike on LDNR and the biolabs.

Biolabs is a huge issue with the US de facto admitting through Nuland's response at the hearings in Congress about them that the US was involved in developing bio-weapons program in Ukraine and was also working on a genetic weapons. This issue is not going anywhere, it will stay top and center in Russia's foreign policy agenda and it will feature prominently at the War Crimes Tribunal. By now Russian MoD and FSB have more than enough documents and witnesses to make a case, a very strong one.  

Lara Logan, however, makes one mistake, albeit it is not her mistake--it is an inevitable confusion by those in the US military who grasp at the last straw of US military credibility trying to confuse people who are removed from operational matters:

RuAF is a completely different animal than the USAF. Moreover, the flying hours of RuAF are probably in the top 5 in the world and RuAF performed extremely well, supporting a very high operational tempo in Syria, and now did an admirable job in 404. But that brings us to a larger issue which I stress all the time--Russia and the US fight very differently, but the US military is extremely sensitive when it comes to its combat "record" which, frankly, is underwhelming in the last 70+ years and the US fighting doctrine is distilled into a very simple principle--get overwhelming air dominance (against third rate opponents) and then blow shit indiscriminately. 

Moreover, the USAF doesn't know what it means to fight in the modern EW and AD environment. The last time it faced more or less adequate AD was in Vietnam and it lost 10,000 aircraft, 2,500 of them combat fixed wing ranging from B-52 strategic bombers to F-4s and even UAVs. Russian VKS of 2022 are a completely different game. And any USAF operations against Russia's VKS in a real conventional war will result in the most dramatic losses. Again, this only applies if US (NATO) air forces survive the meeting with Russia's high precision stand-off weapons at air bases. If to believe this video, it is Kinzhal flying to target--underground bunkers with ammo and weapons in Western Ukraine. Those were build to withstand indirect nuclear explosion impact. Kinzhal, reportedly, had no problems destroying them. I doubt this video shows Kinzhal, but still, military porn.

In related news, all Bastion launchers are capable to launch 3M22 Zircon. Evidently, per Russia's MoD, P-800 Onyx from Bastions are actively used in 404. I will expand on this military porn issue later. That's the primer for the weekend.

British Begin To Suspect Something.

Or, we all told you so. Thanks to Larch who posted this link at the Saker's blog. The reality begins to creep in. Get this headline from today. 

Putin is NOT crazy and the Russian invasion is NOT failing. The West's delusions about this war - and its failure to understand the enemy - will prevent it from saving Ukraine, writes military analyst BILL ROGGIO. 

Well, Roggio even complains that:

The world has underestimated Putin before and those mistakes have led, in part, to this tragedy in Ukraine. We must be clear-eyed now that the war is underway. Yet even the professionals at the Pentagon are letting sympathy cloud their judgement. Just two days into Russia's invasion of Ukraine, U.S. Department of Defense briefers were quick to claim that failing to take Kyiv in the opening days of the war amounted to a serious setback. DoD briefers implied that Russia's offensive was well behind schedule or had even failed because the capital had not fallen. But U.S. leaders should have learned to restrain their hopes after their catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Roggio should learn that US leaders do not learn and if military professionals have "sympathy cloud their judgment"--they are not professionals. For Roggio I can state straight--Pentagon and US Intel orgs have a vague understanding of Russia and Russian military and how it is incorporated into the Russian society. The United States simply lacks such historic, cultural, doctrinal and strategic experiences. Read my lips (again): NO US servicemen, from general to grunt, ever fought in modern history in defense of his motherland. Period. American combat experiences are very niche and the military record is rather underwhelming. Speaking in tactics and operational lingo does not address the issue of continental warfare. Not surprising for a country where Patton is considered a "genius for war" and Earl Ziemke's book which makes the case of Western Allies winning the World War Two primarily on the secondary theaters is still available for download from the US Army War College. It is only natural to have own judgement clouded. In fact, it is not a bug, but a feature. 

But Patrick Armstrong goes further and gives it a broader perspective (not forgetting to touch upon operational and strategic matters) and I quote:

We are seeing the collapse of post Cold War triumphalism, “end of history”, “unilateralism” and all the rest of it. Reality is biting, and biting hard. All you have to do is watch CNN’s parade of talking heads and “experts” speculating about how crazy Putin is: they don’t understand, therefore he must be nuts. For the West, as it has been, it’s over. The confusion, the bullshit, the boasting, the hysteria, the bans: the West has nothing left in the locker. Pour Russian vodka down the toilet, fire a singer and director, change the name of a drink or a salad, ban cats or trees, sanction a Russian plutocrat and steal his yacht, wear a blue and yellow t-shirt. Pathetic. And don’t, under any circumstances, allow a Russian outlet to tempt the sheeple with “disinformation”. Just like the USSR but stupider. And who thought stupider was even possible?

And if Roggio sympathizes with present Ukraine, he better learn Russia's history, not that he will be able to grasp it--people with much greater credentials than his failed to do so. But at least he begins to feel where the winds are blowing. And yes, what is missing from Roggio's piece--the comparisons between Russian and American wars will be made again and we all know how they will be judged.

Patrick Armstrong Speaking To "Belarus" Radio.

Patrick talks to international radio station Belarus. About 404, LDNR and Europe. 

NS2 is also discussed together with Russia-China "axis". Excellent delivery. 

 

Question to Patrick. How do you "smother" the background in your video? I love it and would love to do so myself. 

Patrick Armstrong Went All In.

Most of what he wrote about "or else" is valid and I agree with it. 

Why now? Two possible answers, each of which may be true. US/NATO have been using “salami tactics” against Russia for years; Moscow has decided that a second Ukraine crisis in one year is one thin slice too many. Second: Moscow may judge that, in the USA’s precipitous decline, this will be the last chance that there will be sufficient central authority to form a genuine agreement; an agreement that will avoid a catastrophic war. (The so-called Thucydides Trap). Of course I don’t know what Putin & Co will do and we do have to factor in the existence of a new international player: Putin, Xi and Partners. Xi has just made it clear that Beijing supports Moscow’s “core interests”. It is likely that any “counter-threats” will be coordinated. The Tabaquis have responded as expected but maybe (let’s hope so) Washington is taking it more seriously.

Read the whole thing, it is worth it. I think even omitting "or else" clause is a factor in itself.  

Russia will never forget Belgrade. 

Rumor has it that some "forces" (wink, wink) are readying chemical weapons provocation in Donbas. Of course, Russia, who can wipe the US off the map (forget about Europe) is into "chemical weapons" so much that she is going to use them when she can wipe out VSU in few salvos of stand-off weapons. The lack of imagination in UK and US is stunning. How about gay bomb, oh..wait...

Patrick Armstrong On Governance. And Other News.

I am on record for years that the United States is an ungovernable entity which tries desperately to maintain a decorum of  a functional state. Functional, let alone claiming to be "democratic", states do not have Russiagates being a dominant political factor for years and having an effect of a a cancerous metastasis on the political system as a whole. The United States is not governable in any sense and that is why upcoming virtual meeting between Putin and Biden will have the same agenda which existed since who knows when: NATO, 404 etc (in Russian). You also know that I am on record since the inception of this blog that any treaty or deal agreed upon with the US is not worth the paper it is written on. I am not the only one who thinks like that or in this direction.

Patrick Armstrong left an acerbic comment on his web-site today commenting to Sputnik on Patrushev-Sullivan phone call:  

Answer to question from Sputnik on significance of Sullivan-Patrushev phonecall

None of these questions can be answered until we have an idea who’s in charge in Washington. For example: are Russian troops massing at the Ukraine border — the State Dept says they are, the Pentagon says they aren’t. Is Taiwan part of China or isn’t it? Are they trying to have predictable and stable relations with Russia or are they provoking Russia by arming Ukraine and sending ships and aircraft near Russia? Are they trying to return to the JCPOA, or destroy it for all time? 

The US behaves itself today completely like a schizophrenic (that is, by medical definition) and that is the problem. It is one thing when some EU pipsqueak gets the folie de grandeur bout, totally another when a nuclear superpower begins to behave erratically. So, it doesn't matter what Putin and Biden will decide, on the American side any positive development will be sabotaged and we all know by who. Well, that's Putin's cross to bear to communicate with American POTUSes who since the Clinton tenure in 1990s parade a variety of moral and social anomalies to the world and are incapable to form anything even remotely reminiscent of a common sense policy. 

In related news today, Admiral Gorshkov frigate launched today yet another 3M22 Zircon, it did what it is supposed to do and struck surface target in the White Sea scoring a direct hit (in Russian). The missile will start to arrive to a surface fleet early 2022 and will be deployed on the ships with 3C14 VLS which can accommodate 3M22. For submarines, they will receive already modernized 3M22M, which, most likely, will have longer range and higher speed. 

Sadly, but understandably, Russian MOD cuts off the sound part after (you can clearly hear it) the end of work by booster motor and you can hear only for a second or two a start of the march engine and fading sound of missile itself. It fades ridiculously fast, which means it is already hyper-sonic by the time the sound cuts off. 

Also, Paul Robinson asks the question if: Can a space war be stopped? He laments: 

Most notably, Russia's deployment of hypersonic glide missiles has made the tens of billions of dollars invested by Washington in ballistic missile defence worthless. Even if the Americans could develop some space-based defence system against these missiles, the cost would be gargantuan, and by the time the system could be deployed, new technologies would already have produced counter-measures. The idea that America needs to weaponize space in order to defend itself against nuclear attack doesn't stand up to scrutiny. The Russian anti-satellite test may be seen as an effort to try to force the United States to recognize its vulnerability and so bring it to the negotiating table. This may not work. The gargantuan sums of money mentioned above mean that there are powerful institutional interests in the United States who will resist any such effort. This is highly regrettable. Nobody but generals and arms manufacturers will benefit from an arms race in space. The sooner everyone recognizes this the better.

My answer to this question is very simple: NO, it cannot be stopped. Especially because of the US facing what already is towering in the background as Zevs, whose first mission is planned for 2030. While it is purely scientific mission, military applications for such a system are clear. The United States will, indeed, either throw gargantuan sums of money for PR or will die trying. So, until either of two events happens we will have a steady militarization of space and Russia shooting down a satellite couple of days ago did send shivers down the spines of many in Pentagon. Recall, hailed by many, American shoot down of defunct satellite in 2008. It was intercepted at 247 kilometers. Russia took down Tselina D (Kosmos 1408) from 645 kilometers. That's the difference, which also demonstrated the capability to shoot higher, much higher--precisely where most US recon networks are. So, for now we have to live with the fact that space will continue to be militarized and space-based weapons are coming. Sad, but it is what it is.

It Is So Good Not To Feel Alone.

 I am not the only one who loses my cool when writing about Western (American especially) Russia "expertdom". This "expertise", or rather inability of those "Russia experts" to find their own ass with both hands in a brightly lit room, evidently got to Patrick Armstrong too and he wrote, traditionally incisive, rebuttal.

One of the favourite delusions of the people Scott Ritter calls the “Putin whisperers” is that Russia or Putin – to them the two are synonymous – are always on the point of collapse and one more push will bring them down. To the sane, observing the development of Russia from 1991 to 2021, this conviction is crazy: Russia has endured and prospered. But, as I have said elsewhere, these people fit Einstein’s definition of insanity and forever repeat their failures: Ritter calls them “intellectually lazy”. They’re not Russia experts, they’re wrongness experts and constant practice has made them quite good at being wrong.

I also do not share Scott Ritter's optimism about "Putin Whisperers" getting ready to leave the stage and I can only support Armstrong's conclusion that:

I hope he’s right but I suspect that there is still more to come: they’ve made an easy living at this grift and they can’t change now. And it’s depressingly unlikely that they will be replaced by people who can see reality.

Couldn't have said better myself. But then again, intellectual corruption is what defines the field of geopolitical expertise in the United States today. The financial one, is not far behind.  Paul Craig Roberts, meanwhile, wrote a superb piece on feminization of the Western man--the problem which now reaches a truly catastrophic scale. PCR writes:

For a number of years I have noticed that unless I am among older men I often only hear males with women’s voices, speaking like girls, the same intonation and the same words, “like,”  “really.”  I hear males who sound like Valley Girls. When you look at them you don’t see male strength, and neither does Camille Paglia who says androgyny is historically a sign of cultural collapse. 

So is an obsession with macho culture and sports, especially in the US where American Football is more than just the sports-event but long ago became a revivalist ritual for a feminized men, who sublimate their lack of real masculinity and tawdry sex-appeal through the images of new age gladiators throwing a ball in the breaks between the commercials. Let me put it this way, this is, certainly, not an ice-hockey where physical loads and fights are very damn real and very manly in a good sense. These are real fights and they are not for wussies. 

But then again, who would want to fight for this: 

But then...again, what do I know.

Patrick Armstrong Explains...

Why they continue to do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result. We know the definition--insanity. 

Einstein is said to have observed that insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, and expecting a different result. What a perfect description for U.S. foreign policy since the end of the Cold War. Two decades in Iraq and Afghanistan is not enough: keep doing it. Sanctions on Russia haven’t made any difference, keep doing them. Beijing is not the least deterred by “freedom of navigation” cruises, keep doing them. Iran won’t bend to Washington’s will, keep doing the same thing.

One trick ponies, arrogant, uncultured, badly educated--we know that. We knew this for a long time now. But here is an excellent example how the words of real professional--and Colonel Douglas MacGregor is a real deal--can shake and leave searching for words even such an indomitable figure as Tucker when the professional insight is presented. Watch to the end. 

What MacGregor says is nothing new. Many people, me included, spoke about this for many years. It is impossible to explain to some think-tankdom sinecure abusing political "scientist" or lawyer who constantly prod incompetent US political elite towards wars of aggression that reality, economic, military, geopolitical, you name it, is such that the main danger for the United States and the world is not in the US' strength but its weakness. It is this weakness, which cannot be cured under present conditions, and delusions of grandeur which carry with them a grave danger when ignorant adventurists at the American political top may decide to "go all in" and be shaken into the realization that the world operates, and always operated, not in accordance to their fantasies but reality. 

As I always say: what is going to happen in case of real war when the United States military loses after the first salvo several thousand people and possibly an aircraft carrier in one day? What will be a decision process after that in Washington D.C.? Will lowlife journos from the New York Times and CNN provide a sound advice? I am sure Don Lemon has a lot to say about combined arms warfare. Or will it be Thomas Friedman? The loss of competence in the United States today is appalling, it comes hand-in-hand with a complete detachment from human reality and the necessity for players like Russia to seek an alternative communications, such as Shoigu stressed a couple days ago, when speaking about the contacts with the US military. It is not just that the United States is non-agreement capable--that is an old story. One literally cannot talk to anyone in D.C. since it is a complete mental ward. To speak to WHO? And I don't mean mentally and physically declining Joe.  

Paul Craig Roberts recently wrote a nostalgic and very relatable piece titled I Have Outlived My Country. He writes:

I grew up in halcyon days. In those days a person did not have to be brilliant or have ruling class connections in order to succeed. This fact separated America from the rest of the world in popular opinion. Americans lived in a land of opportunity. And it was true, not make believe. In Atlanta, Georgia, 5-year olds could walk alone or with neighborhood classmates a mile to school and a mile to home without being molested or kidnapped. Boys could have fights on the playground without being arrested. Parents together with teachers dealt with problems, which were few. Teachers were outstanding. There was no such thing as education degrees. Teachers had degrees in English or other languages, mathematics, chemistry, physics, history. They were people who loved their subjects and conveyed that to students. Misbehavior, which was rare, was dealt with a note home that had to be signed by a parent and returned the next day. The last thing any of us wanted was a note home. There was no CPS we could call to complain of being punished for our misdeeds.

It is highly relatable when speaking about Soviet Union of 1960s and 1970s, funny how things go in parallel more often than we suspect. Sadly, highlighted in yellow is not true anymore in the US and the country is run by a cabal of Ph.Ds in pseudo-"sciences", which completely eradicated any semblance of a critical thinking and ability of dealing with facts in most people. When Joe Biden is removed from the office--no, there is no "if", just when--due to his inability to be POTUS, Kamala Harris, a lawyer by education and a woman who has zero understanding of the world outside, forget about complex issues of foreign policy and military, she will be controlled by a neocon lobby which will sell its ignorance and arrogance as a foreign policy and warfare "expertise", which was never there. Make your bets, ladies and gentlemen, on how the process of implosion will accelerate for the United States once it will get into the conundrum from which there will be no good exit. Not that it exists now. It doesn't. 

They May Try Again.

Everybody writes about it and the signs are there--Ukraine is trying to attack Donbass, again. As Patrick Armstrong notes today:

The team that gave us the Ukraine catastrophe is back in Washington, a US general is in Ukraine and heavy equipment is moving. A resumption of fighting would suit many in Kiev, Washington and NATO. But Moscow is not asleep and the Donbass defenders are prepared. I would expect, along with supplies, Moscow to make discreet but observable preparations. If that doesn’t stop an attack, Moscow has the long-range weapons to interdict assembly areas and routes and pretend deniability. If that doesn’t work, I would expect a reprise of 2008, only faster. What’s the West going to do in the face of a fait accompli? Shout more? Sanctions? A crushing defeat will produce reverberations in Kiev: very few of the Ukrainian forces in Crimea stayed loyal to Kiev and Zelensky was elected on a promise of making things better, not worse. A week should tell us which it is.

It is exactly the same team of one trick ponies in D.C. who assured that in the long run Donbass will join Russia's as her administrative region and that, this time, Russia may appear in person and this will "reverberations" in Kiev which will accelerate already proceeding apace the process of the statehood failure in Ukraine. Three factors define West's actions as of now:

1. Western Europe wants to "unload" this shithole of a country it created on Russia. Russians do not want to pay for this banana locality, so the only way to "coerce" Russians is make sure they defeat Ukraine. OK. Russian Armed Forces can wipe out Ukrainian Army in several days but, as Patrick Armstrong correctly observes, the Georgian scenario could be in store--Russia will demolish Ukraine's military and will bulldoze the remnants of Ukrainian statehood to the West.  

2. For the United States which increasingly reminds of Ukraine, just on a much larger scale, the factor of visceral Russo-phobia and desire to engage Russia's resources in any way in Ukraine--personal military encounter with Russia means many bad things for the United States and its military, hence proxies--should not be discounted. Plus, in a face of an economic catastrophe the Biden Administration needs some distraction--I told you, one trick ponies. 

3. Both the so called President Zelensky, who is a clown (literally) by his background and a bunch of people in his "Administration", controlled from the US Embassy in Kiev, are not people who actually have any grasp of the reality and act on pure neurotic instincts in their constant fight for a position at the ever shrinking trough of a disintegrating Ukrainian economy. So, Zelensky may decide to commit a political (and who knows which one additionaly) suicide and commence operations in Donbass seeing them as the only exit he has from a clusterfuck which Ukraine and its bosses from EU and US created in the midst of Europe. 

Too bad, as they say. This time Kremlin has one major factor playing for it, which was not the case in 2014--by different estimates, majority of Russians had it with Ukrainians. No, not with Ukraine, but namely Ukrainians as people. Ukrainians have got what they wanted when stating for the last seven years to Russian faces "We will never be brothers" (in Russian). Overwhelming majority of Russians today say--OK. In fact, these are the Russians now who do not want to be "brothers" and will have no compunction about demolishing, if it comes to this, Ukrainian Army. In 2014-15, there were still huge reservations on Russia's part in this regard, today--the hell with it. As is the hell with the EU and the United States. But I am sure if it comes to it Russia will start with high profile, but less costly in terms of personnel, strikes on whatever is left of Ukie Air Force and its bases, it will destroy Ukie Air Defence and then will burn all tanks, APCs and artillery at the line of contact. 

So, whatever Russia will do, ranging from behind the scene support for LDNR to the outright annihilation of Kiev regime, she has options and escalation dominance, Kiev does not. If EU stops Nord Stream-2 as a result of the United States pressure and the use of Donbass conflagration as means of coercing Europeans to commit energy suicide, as was stated not for once, for Russia the stoppage of the Nord Stream-2 is merely a bump in the road. As latest events in Russian-Chinese relations indicate, Russia finally reoriented herself economically to the East and it seems actual Russian-Chinese alliance is de facto in existence now.  

Russia and China have signed an agreement to build an international lunar space station that will be “open to all interested countries”, Beijing’s space agency announced on Tuesday.The two countries “will use their accumulated experience in space science, research and development as well as the use of space equipment and space technology to jointly develop a road map for the construction of an international lunar scientific research station (ILRS),” China National Space Administration said in a statement.Though no timeline is accorded to the project, the lunar science station is being envisioned as a “complex of experimental and research facilities created on the surface and/or in orbit of the moon,” Russia’s Roscosmos space agency was quoted as saying by CNN.

Those European nations, who would want to join any major Eurasian economic and science projects--they will be welcomed and the selection process already started. 

An Italian-Swiss pharmaceutical company has agreed to produce Russia's Sputnik V vaccine in Italy, the first such deal in the European Union, a trade body said Tuesday. "The vaccine will be produced from July 2021 in (pharma company) Adienne factories in Lombardy," northern Italy, a spokesman for the Italian-Russian Chamber of Commerce, Stefano Maggi, told AFP. "Ten million doses will be produced between July 1 and January 1, 2022," he added, describing it as the "first agreement on the European level for the production on EU territory of the Sputnik vaccine".

You see how easy it is? No coercion, no imposing oneself, as it was with Russia in 1980s through early 2000s. Nope, just keep the door open wide enough for people to see the opening and if they will step in is entirely up to them. It is so easy to live when you don't owe anything to anyone and you don't need anything from anyone.         

Patrick Armstrong Beat Me To It. (Part I)

And it is all for the better since he made some excellent points in his latest piece on soft power. Those points make my job easier. Such as this: 

Popular culture, competence, justice and values and the dream of betterment may have been the pillars on which the USA’s soft power was based, but the ground upon which those stood was success. Success made the others attractive; success is the most powerful attraction. The West is losing its aura of success – endless wars, divisive politics, COVID failure, financial crises, debt. And ever more desperate attempts to hold power against ever bolder dissent. It’s just beginning. And not just the USA, the West doesn’t present well any more: protests in Amsterdam, London, Berlin; a year of gillets jaunes in France. The world is watching. Not efficient, not attractive, not law-based. Not successful.

My latest book delves into this issue too and I agree with Armstrong that success was a huge, albeit not the only, part of the West in general and American in particular soft power which played a key role in a demise of the Soviet Union and dominant ideology which was a bizarre mix of vulgar Marxism and growing individualism. Despite some of the most stunning achievements in developing a human capital, the Soviet Union of 1970s and early 1980s was an increasingly grey country. Environment matters, from smells, to visuals, to sounds to the emotional background which, together with purely economic tangibles, defines both progress and the coming up of a new generation. It is in human nature and even the diet of grade A New-York steaks will get boring, stale and, eventually, revolting, such as was the case with Pavel Vereschagin, one of the main characters of the immortal Soviet Eastern White Sun of the Desert, who could not eat black caviar of the Caspian sturgeon any more after a steady diet of it, and was dreaming about... bread. Yes, that's us, humans and nothing can change it. If that was the other way around, we would still be driving 1986 Ford Tauruses and wear bell-bottom pants. But we don't. And the combined West was simply better in this respect than Soviet Union by providing both material and cultural stimuli, period. 

Yes, Leningrad was still stunning even in 1950s or in 1980s, but the treasures of Hermitage were good only so far as one could go and find an inexpensive clean and delicious place to eat, while being surrounded by people well-dressed and experiencing a good level of service, from hailing the cab to being able to go to the nearest grocery store and buy what you needed. Or, what was even more important--what one wanted. Soviet Union could defeat NATO, it could launch man into space, it could provide excellent education and... here was a problem, educated people, inevitably, have a higher standard of consumption from material to immaterial things, especially in the age of TV, radio etc. Apart from inherent, fundamental problems of the Soviet Union, which doomed it, from nationalism of fringes to mismanagement of economy, USSR could hardly compete with the West in terms of soft power, which in the age of electronic mass media came with a higher standard of living, and broke into the grey Soviet existence with some of the top notch cinematography and music of Beatles and Deep Purple. Seeing and comparing western made cars with what Soviet auto-industry could provide in 1960s through 1980s was also an experience which made many things in Soviet Union look and feel as failures. Some of them, actually, were. Huge lines in Soviet department stores for Austrian and Italian made shoes, French and German made dresses, jackets and overcoats, and an enormous black market for the US-sown denim, from Wrangler to Levi's are just but a few indicators of Soviet inability to counter Western soft power, which also came with glamour fashion magazines and consumer goods catalogs, which themselves were in demand on the black market.

Khruschev openly lied during his famous Kitchen Debate with Nixon that Soviet housewives too, as did American housewives, had the access to automatic dishwashers. They didn't. In 1959 the country was barely beginning to live relatively well and the scars of the devastating war were still present everywhere. The last thing Soviet housewife was dreaming about was an automatic dishwasher, which USSR didn't produce to start with. Getting two-three room apartment was the limit of the dreams for the average Soviet housewife. I write a lot about this in my latest book. Today things changed, dramatically. In fact in the most astonishing way. 

You go to Russia and you can use Uber, you can order practically any delivery, you are offered an  astonishing array of foods, Russian grocery and department stores look like cathedrals of consumerism and yes, modern Moscow or St. Petersburg make NYC or Paris look like a backwater. In fact, for Western tourist getting today to modern Russia, the sense of astonishment is one of the primary senses he or she experiences, and then, there is a wow-factor of a sense of real freedom in Russia. Russia looks and feels today exactly like Russians perceived West looked and felt in 1970s or 80s, when it was still not completely screwed, as it is today. Rock legends and giants are not anymore queasy or are forbidden to tour Russia--they gather arenas, alright. From such legends as Scorpions or Deep Purple who tour Russia constantly, to Aerosmith or Rammstein, to Iron Maiden, Sir Paul and you name it making sure they play in biggest Russian cities. Suddenly, the factor of inferiority which Soviet people definitely had and were influenced by in post-WW II years is gone. Completely. 

Nobody goes to the "West" for shopping reasons anymore--you can buy all that and more in Russia or on-line, Russia is highly computerized country--people go to Malta, Italy or Spain for culture, warmth and beaches, not to gaze enviously at once desirable windows of Western department stores. You can get into H&M in any Russian city. Truth is, you can dress yourself better and more affordably in Russia than in Macy's. Each-time I fly back home to the US from Russia I carry 3-4 pairs of Russian-made shoes. Who would have thought about this 30 years ago. Most importantly, Russia's has preserved what then, 30-40 years ago, was considered one of the major strengths of the West, one of the foundation of its freedom--proper sensuality and sexuality, as well as feminine beauty and femininity, which is being completely removed from the West in favor of ugly pornography with plain freaks of both genders, or in favor of third wave feminism proclaiming ugliness a norm. Here is a train of thought by wonderfully feminine and smart Brittany Sellner on the war against feminine beauty, and femininity, I may add, and that may explain partially the loss of the West's soft power and the growth of it on Russia's side. 

I know, I know, Brittany being an extremely attractive girl combining a very feminine (which often is more powerful than physical beauty) side of hers with excellent mind may seem as an easy advocate for beauty. But she has a point, a very important one--one of the major factors in Russia's soft power increasingly will be how Russians (majority of them) define feminine beauty, femininity and relations between a man and a woman. West tries to destroy those, Russia preserves them and that already is a major contributing factor to Russia's growing soft power because it is natural. This issue is worth looking deep into, because as I said, physical beauty without femininity is just a facade. Alicia Milano may be objectively "beautiful", as is Sharlize Therone, but neither have this "it" factor, which is real femininity, which makes them desirable for truly intelligent and dedicated men... Because third wave feminism is a movement of losers.

To Be Continued...

Patrick Armstrong Wrote An Excellent Piece.

About learning proper lessons from war. Patrick refers to my work (that is not the reason I refer to his piece, I quote him periodically) in this superb piece and to Fred Reed's succinct and always sardonic description of US military since Vietnam War. 

The US military has not won a war since 1945, with the exception of the First Gulf War, which the LAPD could have won. It lost decisively in Vietnam. It got run out of Lebanon with 241 dead Marines as its only accomplishment. After seventeen years it shows no signs of defeating barely armed Afghan peasants. Iraq has been a complete botch, achieving none of its goals, control of the oil, permanent bases, and a puppet government. Just now the military is losing in Syria. Nothing short of genius can account for losing so consistently given the enormous resources available to American forces. In light of this very low level of military competence, maybe wars are not our best choice of hobby.

Patrick, however, goes deeper and reiterates the main point shared among military professionals that:

The American way of warfare assumes unchallenged air superiority and reliable communications. What would happen if the complacent US forces meet serious integrated air defence and genuine electronic warfare capabilities? The little they have seen of Russian EW capabilities in Syria and Ukraine has made their “eyes water“; some foresee a “Waterloo” in the South China Sea. Countries on Washington’s target list know its dependence.

The last sentence is the most important one. Now recall my three years old "issue" with operational "planning" by RAND's very own Ochmanek and group of air power experts. That is until he himself admitted, two years later, in 2019 that NATO has its ass handed to it real war against Russia and China. Recall my main question then, in 2017:

                     What kind of war with Russia? 

Russian definition of the best air-defense in the world is very simple: our tanks at enemy's airfields. This obvious truism implies something much bigger than mere air operations, it requires a serious battle-space integration across all domains (damn, do I sound like a Pentagon bureaucrat) and, yes, those proverbial ground forces which, actually, have a very effective troops' (voiskovaya) air defenses which the US armed forces never encountered in their modern era. So, in general, Armstrong's piece is great and gives excellent historic introspective. A must read, as one would say.

Meanwhile, 6th international (32 participants from Russia, Belarus, Israel, Iran, Vietnam, China, you name it) army games Army 2020 opened yesterday in Russia and Russians greeted everybody with a ballet. No, not from Bolshoi or Mariinka, but primarily Western, Southern and Central military districts and ballerinas were charming and elegant. Primarily T-80s and Msta-S self-propelled gun. Just enjoy, nothing better than T-80s dance to Swan Lake and Nut-Cracker.  

 

The full ballet performance you can easily find at the Army 2020 Youtube channel. Meanwhile, the first full day of competitions, tank biathlon, saw Vietnamese kicking ass being clinical on targets on their (only China brought her own tanks) T-72B3s and that means a really hot contest, I am sure Chinese and Israelis will have something to say about it, apart from Russia and Belarus. You see, if the world could only fight in such "wars".   

June 22.

It is the Day of Remembrance and Sorrow in Russia today. It was on that day in 1941 that unified forces of Europe, led by Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union. There is no necessity to remind what price USSR paid for ridding the world off Nazism. The debate still rages on on why Eastern Front became such a military and humanitarian horror in which two sides fought each-other with ferocity never recorded in history and why Nazis and their allies committed atrocities on an industrial scale. Russians and other Slavs were to be largely eliminated and those left alive were to be kept illiterate and serve as slaves to Third Reich. 

Remarkably Patric Armstrong posted today a very interesting piece on Europe and Russia. It is certainly worth reading and contemplating. 

I have been considering writing this essay for some years but have put off doing so because I know that for many readers “Europe” means “best” and to say Russia is not European is to say that it’s not good enough. But at last President Putin has given me the opening: “Россия – это не просто страна, это действительно отдельная цивилизация“. “Russia, it’s not simply a country it is certainly a separate civilisation”. And who would dare disagree with him?

I believe I already mentioned it before that it was EU Commissioner Barroso who coined the phrase (later rephrased by John McCain) that Russia is a civilization masquerading as a nation. Title of Patrick's article is telling--Russia is not European. I agree to a certain extent, but I think that the most important issue today is not that Russia is not European, but the fact that majority of Russians do not WANT to be European. I spoke on numerous occasions about what I never thought I would witness in my life time:

Thus, while sharing some important culturaltraits, including in relation to some critical behavioral matrices—and Russians in outlook are very Western—a fundamental, philosophical difference between Russia and West remains and will remain so, because Western project in general reached its natural limits with liberalism, which is in the foundation of modern West, being absolutely inapplicable to Russian historic, geographic and cultural realities. Russians, certainly, absorbed and adapted from the West what they liked, yes, including modernization which had much in common with the West, not least through Marxism—a strictly Western invention. And it seemed, ata time that historic Russia was simply West’s prodigal son (or daughter)—this was a wrong impression. The wind from the West blows and Russia goes as a separate civilization which increasingly is self-aware of own significance 

Overwhelming majority of Russians' condescending view of the West and now bewilderment with a cultural (and economic) suicide of the United States is a sign of not only West's obvious accelerating decline, if not to say implosion, but of Russians largely arriving to consensus in their self-perception and for Russians it is much superior in its outlook than that of the combined West. As Patrick posits:

Not inferior, not “Asiatic”, not uncivilised, not uncultured; different. A “civilisation state”. As is China.

One, looking today at the American and European cities turning into the Mogadishos can see clearly that modern West, that is to say combined Europe, cannot interest Russia at large other than market. The experiment with liberalism in Russia is over and it is combined West which will need to face and, maybe, I do not hold my breath, exorcise its demons. There are very many of those. 

In related news, my friend sent me this today, as he called it "America's premier university turning into Titanic". Here is new "diversity" officer for Harvard.

In her leadership roles at UW-Madison, Charleston has been responsible for assessing and evaluating progress toward the goals of a campus-wide strategic diversity plan. She also oversaw its Office of Affirmative Action Programming and Planning, Office of Employee Disability Resources, and several undergraduate scholarship programs aimed at recruiting and retaining students who are historically underrepresented there.

I am sure her "degree" in 'history" will help her to finish off Harvard as a reputable school. Read the whole thing--it is surreal and it is... so new normal.  

You see, Russians have had enough with the West and today's date is a good day for recollection of what West's real views on Russia and Russians are. That is why Russians develop state-of-the-art weapons and develop real economy as if there is no tomorrow. Or as they say--better safe than sorry. 

UPDATE: meanwhile in the nation of AmSoc and Air Strip-2 implosion continues:

NEW YORK (AP) — The American Museum of Natural History will remove a prominent statue of Theodore Roosevelt from its entrance after years of objections that it symbolizes colonial expansion and racial discrimination, Mayor Bill de Blasio said Sunday. The bronze statue that has stood at the museum's Central Park West entrance since 1940 depicts Roosevelt on horseback with a Native American man and an African man standing next to the horse. “The American Museum of Natural History has asked to remove the Theodore Roosevelt statue because it explicitly depicts Black and Indigenous people as subjugated and racially inferior," de Blasio said in a written statement. "The City supports the Museum’s request. It is the right decision and the right time to remove this problematic statue.”

I do not particularly care about Teddy Roosevelt, but sure--how about Washington Monument and Statue of Liberty? 

Patrick Armstrong Asks A Question.

Patrick wrote today and important piece. I would say a metaphysical (almost) one.  In it he essentially asks and answers the question of WHY people like him (it relates to me in a sense too) do what they do. The piece is titled: 

WE’RE NOT JUST TALKING TO OURSELVES – OTHERS FIND US

It is one of those must read pieces and here is the answer (crucial part of it) to the question of why do what Patric, Bernhard from MoA, The Saker or I do. 

So what’s the point of writing? I already agree with you, you already agree with me. Our readers are here because they also agree. Writing becomes a mechanical operation, moving along a pre-determined course. No minds are changed, no minds are even engaged. But there is one big and important difference between the two solitudes which leads us out of the my bubble/your bubble stalemate. The well-informed person will be less often surprised than the poorly informed person. There is an objective reality and people who actually do have a pretty good take on things, see that reality more clearly than those who don’t. In short, those who actually are well-informed will be less often surprised than those who aren’t. Surprise is the clue: it is both the consequence and the evidence of ignorance.

It is absolutely crucial point. Consider this blog. OK, you read this blog, so let's consider this one as an example, in the end it is the only one way for me to heap the praise on myself, otherwise, as Russian saying goes--did not praise yourself today, consider the whole day wasted(c). This blog, now in a sixth year of its existence, was and remains relentless from the very inception in its warnings about reality being not what it is being presented by people and institutions which Patrick effectively described as being surprised in a non-stop manner:

But the readers and writers of the WaPo/NYT/Economist/Guardian bloc were surprised. They are certain that Assad gasses his own people when there’s no reason to; they believe that Qaddafi “bombed his own people“; they laughed when Trump said he was taped; they called Milosevic the “butcher of the Balkans“; they expect the Russian economy to collapse; they’re confident that the JIT is an honest investigation; they expect the protests will weaken Putin; they believe the “world community” recognises Guaidó; they are confident the West would be happy if Putin weren’t sowing discord; they expect that the next world problem will be managing China’s decline; they know where to find democracy in Hong Kong. And, especially, they were confident that Mueller will find a bombshell to blow up Trump. They remain believers in Browder’s story. The devotees of the establishment media bloc are almost always surprised by the way things turn out. That, by itself, shows that they are poorly informed about reality. Everybody is surprised some of the time but the poorly informed are surprised all of the time.

Bingo, I write for years now that not only WE (as an alternative media) are better in our OODA due diligence, but that Western establishment is utterly incompetent and that is why it is surprised non-stop. I called it few years ago a permanent Chalabi Moment. Mind you, Patrick Armstrong was an analyst in Canadian Defense Ministry, Larry C Johnson or Philip Giraldi were bona fide CIA officers, Colonel Patrick Lang is a Vietnam War combat veteran who availed his blog as a platform for many people whose military-intelligence backgrounds and experiences are genuine and proved viable throughout the years  by giving in general a top-notch analysis and providing good reliability of their forecasts. And here is the point--for people who involve themselves into such activity as assessing and forecasting anything, the first requirement for them, if to put it in a layman's lingo, is to be right, correct in their "predictions" at least once in a while, forget being consistent. That requires knowledge of the subject. In the end, one has to have his facts straight and this is not easy and requires a lot of professionalism,  labor and honesty--qualities completely lacking in the Establishment media and think-tankdom.

We (I say we because I do not separate myself from what, say, Patrick Armstrong and Strategic Culture Foundation do) simply know better. Let me demonstrate Patrick's point about people seeking out truth on this blog's example--from the inception I literally did not use any technologies other than my posts on a discussion boards to attract attention to my blog. None. I referred to some of my post through links on a discussion boards at Unz Review, plus I posted couple of them at Colonel Lang's blog. My blog became more or less known largely through the "word of mouth". Here is how it went since 2014. 

Blog started at December 2014

In other words, Armstrong is spot on when stating:

But people do change and our audience is growing. How can that be happening if we change no minds? Because the individual makes the first step on his own. So this is the reason why we write and speak and – religious allusion again – testify. People we’ve never heard of, disgusted by the strident one-sided nonsense, surprised by some unexpected reality they bump into, stop passively believing, begin to doubt, search around and find us. Our writings then show them they were right to doubt and lead them to a better appreciation of reality. We don’t persuade them, they persuade themselves; we don’t convert them, they convert themselves. But we reinforce their conversion and show them that there is more reality (less surprise) on our side. Once gained to our side, they won’t leave. It’s conversion.

But in the end, we are simply better, because we know more, much more about things we are talking about. Moreover, most of us know our own limitations but we know where to seek competent opinion on matters we don't know about. BTW, while at it, this blog is well over 2 million original views now and, as I stated before, practically nothing was done to promote it, people simply started seeking it out mostly by the "word of mouth". Of course, publishing books helped too. Recall what I stated almost five years ago:

The realization, that Russia IS already inside the West's (and US in particular) OODA Loop (if it does have any at all--the conclusion to which I begin to lean) should settle in by now. Getting inside one's OODA Loop was a highest priority for Colonel Boyd. It did already happen. It is so simple, if to put in into famous (and correct)  slogan--You Are What You Know. And it goes without saying that combined West knows shit about Russia. It always did.      

My assertion stands and it is now supported by an overwhelming body of empirical evidence.