This is a hallmark of the US military "intel" which is built around US military psyche like trying to tie some operations by Russian military to some "significant" date--a post traumatic addiction to Soviet dissidents' BS about Red Army doing things (like liberation of Kiev in 1943). This all is a result of historic and operational-strategic illiteracy, like applying fairy tales from WW II to modern warfare.
Secondly, most of them will not understand a) what strategic reserves are, b) that Russia produces the number of long-range (stand-off) weapons of ALL kinds, INCLUDING quasi-ballistic Iskanders, in volumes which are order (now orders) of magnitude larger than what the US can produce, c) that in terms of latest iterations of UAVs of a long-range class such as Geraniums and Banderols (this is in effect a light cruise missile) reaching one thousand daily (like in 24 hours)--these numbers are beyond their grasp. I mean it literally--no US military and intel professional ever dealt with such production and casualties numbers ever, insofar as the last half-a-century goes.
In fact, Russia's real military and intel professionals when making operational and strategic level assessments of the US war-making and war-fighting capability smile ironically.
In the end, it was Pentagon and collection of its chihuahuas from UK, Germany, France et al who managed to kill almost 3 million of 404 males and resorted, naturally, to terrorism and war crimes. We are observing a train wreck in progress.
Meanwhile, Russian Army liberated Western part of Malaya Tockmachka.
The storm of Orekhov has commenced.
You can see yourself where it is all going.
In related news, they are correct ...
Nobody will be able to do anything about it. Nobody will even try.
While doing my morning news due diligence, I stumbled upon The Duran's discussion on dismantling of Yugoslavia and the role the Bidens, the Clintons, Amanpour, CNN, Blair and the rest of this cabal played in shaping the world we exist in today. Actually, both Alex Cristoforou and Alexander Mercouris do a very good job conveying in simple words the essence of the conflict around Yugoslavia and that it was about globalization and about demolition of Russia. Just watch it, it is 16 minutes of your time well spent.
We all know today that appearance of Vladimir Putin as, first, Russia's Prime Minister and then him becoming Russia's President with degenerate Yeltsin "abdicating" (or, rather, being forced out) is directly related to the gang rape of Yugoslavia by NATO and to one of the most shameful pages in Russia's history--betrayal of Serbs for a IMF (in essence, American) loans.
What both Alex and Alexander, while speaking about a deadly role this cabal of neo-liberals and crooks played in developing their globalization "strategies", forgot to mention was the fact that as any products of the American "governing" class, without exception, those people have a minuscule, if any, grasp of the power component of any strategy, be that on the level of a city, a country or globally. No power component, no strategy, period. Guys at The Duran used the term "neo-liberal war machine" and this is exactly what captured my attention because this "neo-liberal war machine", once looked at a closer range, even in 1990s, was not looking that great and was good primarily at avoiding near-peer, let alone peer direct conflict and "won" its most victories through blackmail, "financialization" of its "partners" and in media. In fact, if not for betrayal by Russia, who, through her crooked PM Chernomyrdin, played an active role in convincing Serbia to surrender, the United States and its NATO vassals were at breaking point after 78 days of incessant bombing of Serbia. Not only they were running out of stand-off munitions, they were facing the worst US (and NATO) nightmare--a fight in mountainous and forest rich terrain against the Army of the nation with a magnificent history of organized massive guerilla warfare against, forget US Army, Nazis.
I already mentioned public admissions 5 years ago by General Ivashov and former Deputy Defense Minister Andrei Kokoshin, you can find it at 2 hours 47 minutes, that NATO (and the US) peed its pants at the prospect of facing this kind of the army on the ground:
As 21 years after this criminal aggression proved beyond the shadow of a doubt, ANY "strategy" is worth anything ONLY when it has serious, credible military (I underscore it, military as a first derivative of advanced economy) backing. US couldn't provide it, other than beating the shit out of weak, disorganized, badly trained Arab military. You want to impose your economic (institutionalized robbery that is) "vision" on the world--you better represent itself a shining example of prosperity and liberty and have enough military wherewithal to support it. Through its "globalization" the United States became neither. This could have happened already in Serbia in 1999, albeit the bluff was already partially called there. Yet, as in the months leading to WW II, when Yugoslav resistance delayed Barbarossa, Serb sacrifice in 1999 allowed for Russia to wake up. We all know what happened next: 080808, Crimea, Syria and here we are today--do they have a "strategy", other than their BS and propaganda in lap dog media, to do anything other than impose more and more sanction which, in Russia's case, are a very positive economic factor. American elites do not know how to govern, let alone how to fight a real war with real enemy, and if 21 years ago Yugoslavia's tragedy served as a warning, which was heeded, today the only concern with these same ol' incompetent (other than how to swindle everyone) cretins is similar to a feeling one experiences while looking at a monkey with a grenade. They are NO GOOD in anything, all of them from civilians to military, and it took a little bit of time (20 years in historic time is an instant) to understand that. In fact, global fragmentation happens as I type it and combined West and its globalist "elites" have to be surrounded by the cultural cordon sanitaire, maybe even a physical one, as it is done to burning dumpsters.
In related news, which also explains somewhat why Russia is in no rush to build very large surface combatants. This piece of news:
In the end, it came down to European (Italian) concept (FREMM) of frigates. The main question, however, remains--what will those frigates carry as anti-shipping weapons if they want to really fight. Naval Strike Missile, LRASM? As long as the US Navy's anti-shipping weapons remain subsonic they present very little real threat to modern navies armed with capable AD complexes and long range high supersonic, not to speak of hypersonic, anti-shipping weapons. But yes, all that looks good for "investors".
By now we have to learn one simple fact, which, evidently neither Daniel Larison (for all his valiant effort) nor Andrew Bacevich understand, when they call out warmongers in present American media-political establishment. Most of them are warmongers, including in Congress, and this can not be changed. Sure, I get it and I respect Bacevich, but what is the point when he singles out yet another political "scientist" turned journo calling for war on Iran?
I have news for Bacevich (I am sure he knows it)--there is NO context in US history of 20th and, especially, 21st century. There never was--did Andrew Bacevich look at the American historiography, bar some few superb exceptions of note such as Glantz and House, of World War Two lately? A DEFINING feature of an American political class and punditry, apart from utter lack of professionalism, is an astounding ability to exist in causality-free world. The fact that cause precedes the effect is a concept many American pundits may find intolerable.
Enter this comparative politics educated political philosopher Stephens--what can possibly this neocon boy write about other than some delusional BS on US "foreign policy", which long ago became the foreign policy by and for Israel. Apart from having zero tools required for any competent opinion of foreign policy, the way it is formed and conducted by competent people, including this tricky teeny-weeny military part, what can possibly neocon shill from New York write? I long ago stated, that you cannot argue with these people--they exist in their fake universe and are not configured to argue as in using knowledge and reason--they have neither. Most of them are humanities "educated" journos with zero military-academic and operational experiences who live off NYC media-Parnassus and Israeli interest groups in US. No, arguing, debating them is useless. The only way to deal with them is to do what they only can do, in the breaks between writing their sophomoric crap on US "foreign policy", personal (sophisticated) attacks. Most of them are cowards who wouldn't enlist to fight, nor will their children. None of them have any clue nor credentials (this is important) to competently speak on any tactical, operational or strategic issue. In the end, they have no clue about weapons.
Statecraft, especially military craft today, is the realm for truly gifted and exquisitely educated, cultured and experienced--what could possibly some second-rate journo from totally discredited and corrupt US establishment media offer of value on the issue of war remains a puzzle. Until these warmongers and ignoramuses begin to be called for what they are--people who must have their mouths shut on any American war due to them being utterly unqualified, until all their "educational" credentials be exposed for what they are--useless concoction of a humanities' abstracts and glorified English degrees, until they are called out as Israeli shills and until they are forced into debate, which they will lose, on actual military art--until then these SOBs will continue to act as people whose useless opinions matter. But we also have to understand that this type of arrogance and ignorance is what dominates today corridors of US media-political power because it is a demand by the system. In the end, there is simply nobody else out there who could have seriously challenged this state of the affairs--the experience of the last 27 years provides an overwhelming empirical evidence of that. But that is the whole other story.