Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't give a sh*t about Ukraine's territory. I don't support American money and weaponry in Ukraine. Negotiate now. No more proxy war.

Why? Proxy war so far is net-positive for the us

Beyond the toll of human misery and death? Because the average regular joe in any country prefers and needs peace and stability.

Because war expands and increases the risk my son or my neighbors sons will be drafted. Because the US is dragging out what could have been negotiated and de-escalated. Because we are playing with the possibility of nuclear war and the annihilation of humanity. Because countries rise and fall but we only have 1 earth.

You don't view Russia as a threat. But for those that agree Russia is a threat, they are diminished and degraded at a low cost to the US vs other options. And keeps those defense contractors busy and rich and happy to donate to any republican, democratic or independent that will help keep them on busy.

That's true as long as the dead are worth nothing.

That is a scolding for Russia. Putin clearly just sees a piece of meat ready for grinding when he views his young conscripts.

Prigozhin got 50,000 prison inmates and sent them to fight at Bakhmut. A month later, it's believed that 40,000 of the 50,000 are either dead, captured or otherwise MIA. In the west that whole thing would be shocking. But in fact there is discussion about how maybe this is a good thing for Russia, criminals liquidated and no more cost to Russian taxpayers. They are truly sick and deranged.

Concur. Now you see the true former Soviet mentality. Remember that Putin is a true originally trained KGB agent, with all that means. If he cannot win, he will do as much harm as possible. Failure is not an option. As he ages, I believe he may succumb and cling to his programming. I believe he is becoming completely irrational, which is why some of his public appearances have been curtailed.

I think Simonyan hit the nail on the head when she sang the Charge of the Red Cavalry. She knows how the inner circle thinks.

I think this is why 300,000 to 500,000 troops are massing in the East for an invasion.
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/3841230-ukraine-warns-russia-massing-500000-troops-on-border-for-offensive/

Even though all reports indicate they are poorly equipped and probably don't have much in the way of resupplies, I don't believe that's the intent.

Imagine that all 500,000 die. Or alternatively, launch a nuke in Ukraine with 500,000 prepared to invade Poland or Wester Europe?

What is the shock value to the Russian Government if, all of a sudden, they released the actual figure of Russian casualties in Ukraine? I think Putin is seeking a complete transition of his country from Mass Formation Psychosis into Mass Psychosis.

Again, I'm not a "Russia Expert", so I hope I'm wrong?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In other news, Sy Hersh says the CIA blew up the North Stream. The fine art of stating the obvious..

https://scheerpost.com/2023/02/08/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream-pipeline/

I remember when the folks here accused anyone suggesting that a non Russian actor could be responsible was a Russian agent.

Hersh doesn't have any smoking gun. He's just laying out a few selective dots and is leading the reader to connect them. But he leaves out that many other state actors also had the capabilities, the motives, the access, and the opportunity to pull this off.

Was there another state actor who said "believe me, we will take it out"?

Yes, several in fact.

Link.

In the spot it happened, the UK is the only other country that could conceivably have done it without US help/permission. If it were more easterly, perhaps Russia could have done it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In other news, Sy Hersh says the CIA blew up the North Stream. The fine art of stating the obvious..

https://scheerpost.com/2023/02/08/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream-pipeline/

I remember when the folks here accused anyone suggesting that a non Russian actor could be responsible was a Russian agent.

Hersh doesn't have any smoking gun. He's just laying out a few selective dots and is leading the reader to connect them. But he leaves out that many other state actors also had the capabilities, the motives, the access, and the opportunity to pull this off.

Was there another state actor who said "believe me, we will take it out"?

Yes, several in fact.

Link.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In other news, Sy Hersh says the CIA blew up the North Stream. The fine art of stating the obvious..

https://scheerpost.com/2023/02/08/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream-pipeline/

I remember when the folks here accused anyone suggesting that a non Russian actor could be responsible was a Russian agent.

Right now these same folks are saying so what if we blew it, serves them right. Shouldn't there be some kind of accountability for destroying what the other guy owns?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In other news, Sy Hersh says the CIA blew up the North Stream. The fine art of stating the obvious..

https://scheerpost.com/2023/02/08/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream-pipeline/

I remember when the folks here accused anyone suggesting that a non Russian actor could be responsible was a Russian agent.

Hersh doesn't have any smoking gun. He's just laying out a few selective dots and is leading the reader to connect them. But he leaves out that many other state actors also had the capabilities, the motives, the access, and the opportunity to pull this off.

Was there another state actor who said "believe me, we will take it out"?

Yes, several in fact.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In other news, Sy Hersh says the CIA blew up the North Stream. The fine art of stating the obvious..

https://scheerpost.com/2023/02/08/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream-pipeline/

I remember when the folks here accused anyone suggesting that a non Russian actor could be responsible was a Russian agent.

Hersh doesn't have any smoking gun. He's just laying out a few selective dots and is leading the reader to connect them. But he leaves out that many other state actors also had the capabilities, the motives, the access, and the opportunity to pull this off.

Was there another state actor who said "believe me, we will take it out"?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In other news, Sy Hersh says the CIA blew up the North Stream. The fine art of stating the obvious..

https://scheerpost.com/2023/02/08/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream-pipeline/

I remember when the folks here accused anyone suggesting that a non Russian actor could be responsible was a Russian agent.

Hersh doesn't have any smoking gun. He's just laying out a few selective dots and is leading the reader to connect them. But he leaves out that many other state actors also had the capabilities, the motives, the access, and the opportunity to pull this off.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't give a sh*t about Ukraine's territory. I don't support American money and weaponry in Ukraine. Negotiate now. No more proxy war.

Why? Proxy war so far is net-positive for the us

Beyond the toll of human misery and death? Because the average regular joe in any country prefers and needs peace and stability.

Because war expands and increases the risk my son or my neighbors sons will be drafted. Because the US is dragging out what could have been negotiated and de-escalated. Because we are playing with the possibility of nuclear war and the annihilation of humanity. Because countries rise and fall but we only have 1 earth.

You don't view Russia as a threat. But for those that agree Russia is a threat, they are diminished and degraded at a low cost to the US vs other options. And keeps those defense contractors busy and rich and happy to donate to any republican, democratic or independent that will help keep them on busy.

That's true as long as the dead are worth nothing.

That is a scolding for Russia. Putin clearly just sees a piece of meat ready for grinding when he views his young conscripts.

Prigozhin got 50,000 prison inmates and sent them to fight at Bakhmut. A month later, it's believed that 40,000 of the 50,000 are either dead, captured or otherwise MIA. In the west that whole thing would be shocking. But in fact there is discussion about how maybe this is a good thing for Russia, criminals liquidated and no more cost to Russian taxpayers. They are truly sick and deranged.

They could grozny the entire country if they really wanted and no the west will not nuke moscow if moscow decides to nuke Kyiv

Oh, and before I forget.. Grozny was nothing compared to what the Russians are doing in Ukraine right now.

The 1999–2000 battle of Grozny was the siege and assault of the Chechen capital Grozny by Russian forces, lasting from late 1999 to early 2000. The siege and fighting left the capital devastated. In 2003, the United Nations called Grozny the most destroyed city on Earth.
Between 5,000 and 8,000 civilians were killed during the siege, making it the bloodiest episode of the Second Chechen War.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Grozny_(1999–2000)

Do you think anyone in Ukraine will ever just throw open their arms and hug Russian soldiers entering into their cities as "liberators"? Or do you think that even if Ukraine loses the war, Russians will be plagued by sabotage and terrorists for who knows how long? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_metro_bombing

So guess what silly rabbit, the Russians are already so deep into Wonderland, there is no turning back for them..

Anonymous wrote:In other news, Sy Hersh says the CIA blew up the North Stream. The fine art of stating the obvious..

https://scheerpost.com/2023/02/08/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream-pipeline/

I remember when the folks here accused anyone suggesting that a non Russian actor could be responsible was a Russian agent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don’t understand why it would be wrong for Ukraine to bomb Russia. How would that be the fault of Ukraine? Start a war, you might get bombed. Duh.

I don’t think people understand that Russia hasn’t really been trying.

They could grozny the entire country if they really wanted and no the west will not nuke moscow if moscow decides to nuke Kyiv

The Russians are way weaker than the west initially thought but now the opposite has happened

Too many in the west think the Russians weaker than they are.

And no, Russia hasn’t been trying to maximize body count In Ukraine because they haven’t brought out cbrn weapons like they did in Syria

This is true. And I don't believe the Russians are weak at all. But.

The Pandora's box is a very tricky thing to open. There are so many things that can come out.

There are many many U.S. technologies that, for the sake of Humanity, have been tucked away. Hidden.

Be very careful what you wish for, my friend.

Bioweapons are just as likely to affect Russians as anyone else, so it's a poor choice. Chemical weapons are certainly a Russian cup of tea, but they forget that the Ukrainian Army was just as proficient in the Former Soviet Union as the Russians are in that type of warfare. My guess (at least this is what I would do) is the West has most likely given their weaponry and support on the condition the Ukrainian's doesn't attack Moscow to escalate the war any further than it has already. I wonder if that restraint would hold true if Russia escalated and used chemical weapons? As far as radiological weapons go, I think that the Russians are just as vulnerable as the Ukrainians are. More so, since 80 to 90% of the ethnic Russian population are only in two cities, so that's a bad choice.

That leaves only nuclear weapons. But Russia needs to be careful if any of the weapons are salted. As they saw in the Chernobyl accident, there's a bit of nasty fallout and contamination that lingers for years. Russian bomb shelters won't do squat if the food chain is contaminated as it was in Belarus.

But let's play that game. Let's say Russian deep cover sleeper agents, Unit 29155, sub-launched hypersonic missiles, satellites, etc. are so super duper that they completely neutralize all Western defenses around the world and Russia does a perfect nuclear first strike with 100% success. What then?

With all the Russian propaganda washing out common sense, Russians really don't have a sense of cultural relationships - Russian culture is superior to everyone else's after all. Russians don't understand that if billy-joe's brother is nuked in New York, that billy-joe living in China or India might take offense to that. This is why Simonyan was on TV talking about how you can be a (dark skinned person, but used a bad word for it, completely oblivious she was actually being insulting) and still be a Russian (although the facial expressions on her guests said it all). And since so many immigrants have relatives still living abroad (ironically, a concept that Russians were recently introduced to these past two years after the Ukraine War started..), attacking Europe and the U.S. or even former Soviet satellite countries will create even more internal opposition to the Russian Government the more people are killed.

But lets say the Russian Government is willing to take that risk. They've made their lists of who's naughty and nice and are readying housekeeping to tidy up. Now comes the other Russian blind spot. Russians believe that "borders" are a thing. Russians believe their borders will keep out undesirables; both personnel and radioactive fallout. They also believe that their nukes are so superior, that no one would dare oppose them. But can you use a nuke on a terrorist within their own city? Same goes for supply chain. If there is no semiconductor factory producing chips to steal, how will you maintain global superiority with only 140 million Russian citizens? That's only half of the US population, and a tenth of the Chinese or Indian populations. Russia has three times the population of Ukraine and chewed up it's military dealing just with one country. Does the Russian Government really believe that nuking the U.S. and Europe won't trigger consequences in India and China? News flash, Federal Assembly, a lot of rich relatives are picked as UN ambassadors, or like to shop on Rodeo Drive, or like to hang in Vegas, or maybe get cushy ambassador positions in DC, etc.

But I don't believe the Russians can take out the U.S. and Europe in one fell swoop, and given that 80-90% of ethnic Russians are in two cities; I believe it would be unwise for the Russian Government to believe they could survive a nuclear strike intact and carry on their global domination ambitions.

I hope I never find out if I'm right or not. It's so much fun blogging here, I'd miss it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't give a sh*t about Ukraine's territory. I don't support American money and weaponry in Ukraine. Negotiate now. No more proxy war.

Why? Proxy war so far is net-positive for the us

Beyond the toll of human misery and death? Because the average regular joe in any country prefers and needs peace and stability.

Because war expands and increases the risk my son or my neighbors sons will be drafted. Because the US is dragging out what could have been negotiated and de-escalated. Because we are playing with the possibility of nuclear war and the annihilation of humanity. Because countries rise and fall but we only have 1 earth.

You don't view Russia as a threat. But for those that agree Russia is a threat, they are diminished and degraded at a low cost to the US vs other options. And keeps those defense contractors busy and rich and happy to donate to any republican, democratic or independent that will help keep them on busy.

That's true as long as the dead are worth nothing.

That is a scolding for Russia. Putin clearly just sees a piece of meat ready for grinding when he views his young conscripts.

Putin isn’t in DCUM saying this war is low cost for the US.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't give a sh*t about Ukraine's territory. I don't support American money and weaponry in Ukraine. Negotiate now. No more proxy war.

Why? Proxy war so far is net-positive for the us

Beyond the toll of human misery and death? Because the average regular joe in any country prefers and needs peace and stability.

Because war expands and increases the risk my son or my neighbors sons will be drafted. Because the US is dragging out what could have been negotiated and de-escalated. Because we are playing with the possibility of nuclear war and the annihilation of humanity. Because countries rise and fall but we only have 1 earth.

You don't view Russia as a threat. But for those that agree Russia is a threat, they are diminished and degraded at a low cost to the US vs other options. And keeps those defense contractors busy and rich and happy to donate to any republican, democratic or independent that will help keep them on busy.

That's true as long as the dead are worth nothing.

That is a scolding for Russia. Putin clearly just sees a piece of meat ready for grinding when he views his young conscripts.

In other news, Sy Hersh says the CIA blew up the North Stream. The fine art of stating the obvious..

https://scheerpost.com/2023/02/08/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream-pipeline/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't give a sh*t about Ukraine's territory. I don't support American money and weaponry in Ukraine. Negotiate now. No more proxy war.

Why? Proxy war so far is net-positive for the us

Beyond the toll of human misery and death? Because the average regular joe in any country prefers and needs peace and stability.

Because war expands and increases the risk my son or my neighbors sons will be drafted. Because the US is dragging out what could have been negotiated and de-escalated. Because we are playing with the possibility of nuclear war and the annihilation of humanity. Because countries rise and fall but we only have 1 earth.

You don't view Russia as a threat. But for those that agree Russia is a threat, they are diminished and degraded at a low cost to the US vs other options. And keeps those defense contractors busy and rich and happy to donate to any republican, democratic or independent that will help keep them on busy.

That's true as long as the dead are worth nothing.