On February 24, President Vladimir Putin of Russia ordered an invasion of Ukraine. Russian forces attacked on multiple fronts, only to meet fierce resistance. In response, the Russian Army has shifted gears. It is now advancing slowly and methodically, executing a war of attrition against the Ukrainian Army. The outlook for Ukraine is grim. Russia seems certain to achieve victory, albeit with heavy losses and with massive damage to Ukraine’s infrastructure and population.
Meanwhile, the West has not been idle. Russia is now the most sanctioned country on earth. Ukrainian troops are training in NATO facilities in Germany. America regularly passes on intelligence to the Ukrainian military. There are persistent rumors of NATO advisers operating with Ukrainian troops in combat. The Biden administration has also provided billions of dollars in military assistance, culminating in a $40-billion aid package.
Even so, NATO support is unlikely to prevent a Russian victory. As a result, there is mounting pressure for an American-led intervention. Numerous elected officials, academics, and former military officers across the Western world have called for the imposition of a no-fly zone or for the deployment of troops to Ukraine. The initiation of hostilities between Russia and NATO is now a real possibility.
There is just one problem with this proposal. A successful NATO intervention in Ukraine is a military impossibility. War would result in catastrophic damage to NATO infrastructure across Europe and the deaths of thousands of allied soldiers. Washington would quickly be faced with the temptation to use nuclear weapons to restore the situation in its favor.
Although this reading of the military situation may seem apocalyptic, it is supported by the facts on the ground. The balance of forces in Eastern Europe overwhelmingly favors the Kremlin, despite months of fighting in Ukraine. NATO ground troops are not postured to intervene. While in theory there are around 100,000 American soldiers in Europe, they are scattered across 19 countries from Portugal to Lithuania. A large fraction are lightly armed paratroopers, support personnel, or motorized infantry who could do little in the face of Russia’s huge army. In any case, it would take months to reposition them for war. On paper, our NATO allies possess thousands of troops, tanks, and artillery, but their professionalism in many cases is questionable. Moreover, the necessary large-scale joint training has not occurred in decades. NATO officers commanding huge formations of allied troops would be forced to improvise their operational procedures — a recipe for disaster under any circumstances, let alone in a great power conflict.
It would take years to build up NATO’s arsenal to the point at which it could successfully challenge Russia on its own terrain. Even then, victory would not be assured. It is doubtful that NATO could achieve air superiority over Eastern Europe. The combat record of older Soviet-era air defenses against Western cruise missiles in Syria has been impressive. More recently, the S400 air defense system has been successfully employed in Ukraine to destroy aircraft at ranges in excess of 100 miles. Russia’s top-line S550 has successfully destroyed targets at ranges up to 300 miles in testing and is allegedly capable of intercepting intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Russia therefore possesses the capacity to interdict the air space over a vast swath of Eastern Europe. Any aerial campaign over Ukraine would turn into a bloodbath for allied pilots. Lacking air superiority, NATO would be forced to achieve victory against the Russian Army in ground combat. That would involve sending tens of thousands of soldiers into a meat grinder in which the odds favor the Kremlin. It is uncertain how allied troops would perform in an environment without air superiority, a situation that the United States has not faced since the early days of the Korean War. In any case, at each echelon from the battalion upwards, the Russian Army possesses complete tactical superiority over its allied equivalents in military assets, from electronic warfare to signals to mechanization to fires, especially howitzers and rocket artillery.
Russia’s superiority over NATO in fires is worth remarking on. Artillery plays the defining role in Russian military doctrine. Each Battalion Tactical Group (BTG) — the Russian Army’s basic maneuver unit, roughly equivalent to a reduced-size mechanized infantry brigade in the U.S. Army — possesses a battery of howitzers. (Around 80 BTGs are currently fighting in Ukraine, compared to just three American brigades permanently stationed across the entire European continent.) The Russian Army maintains entire divisions of rocket artillery along its frontier, dwarfing the assets available to any combination of NATO forces in Europe. At every echelon, the sheer quantity of artillery available to Russian commanders greatly exceeds that available to their NATO counterparts.
Nor does Russia possess the advantage in quantity alone. The quality of Russian artillery in training, integration with ground forces, and weapons performance also vastly exceeds that of NATO, according to a 2017 RAND report. Russian artillery in every class far outranges its American equivalents, across all classes of howitzers and rocket artillery. Meanwhile, the United States Army has never conducted the kind of integrated campaign with rocket artillery that the Russian Army is successfully executing in Ukraine. American rocket artillery assets in Europe consist of a few batteries falling under a division that exists purely on paper. The U.S. Army in Europe possesses a few dozen MLRS systems compared to several thousand in the Russian Army. Nor is there any indication that the Pentagon has conducted any kind of preparation to counter Russian tactical superiority in fires. The assets to do so simply do not exist, placing allied troops at a serious disadvantage if war breaks out.
NATO is courting disaster by considering a military intervention under these conditions, let alone escalating tensions by pouring weapons and money into a doomed cause. This is not to say that NATO’s arsenal is worthless. The Ukrainians alone have inflicted thousands of casualties. Yet Western officials must recognize that the enemy has a vote. The Russian response to hostilities will be devastating. We can expect them to target NATO infrastructure across the world — almost certainly including the American homeland — with their arsenal of hypersonic missiles. The loss of life will be immense. The damage to allied military assets and decision-making centers would take years to repair.
Meanwhile, even if NATO brigades and divisions managed to reach the front lines, they would face the real prospect of annihilation at the hands of the Russian Army. We simply do not know how Western governments will react to the loss of thousands of soldiers. Political instability in the United States, Germany, Great Britain, and Italy, among many other places, does not bode well for the outbreak of war. Under these circumstances, the possibility that the White House would choose to reverse any initial setbacks by using nuclear weapons cannot be ruled out.
Russia and NATO stand at the precipice of an existential trap. A NATO victory in any kind of war with Russia in Europe is unlikely without recourse to nuclear weapons. Total defeat for the alliance at the hands of the Russians is highly probable. The United States must do everything it can to avoid this possibility by disavowing any intention of engaging in hostilities, desisting from arming Ukraine, and encouraging both sides to negotiate a peace deal.
Jesus said, “Agree with thine adversary quickly.” We are running out of time to forestall the worst crisis in human history since the Second World War.
Reader: Why delete Felix’s Grandfather’s words. It is the first sign of Felix’s humanity/
@Ted Belman
Could you please delete those sentences where FelixQuigley’s grandfather is mentioned on this thread?
Thanks.
Reader
So ask the editor to remove the worst especially sentence beginning BTW
Adam too
This stuff will be picked up by political enemies and used for sure
If Telegraph is difficult see video of Armenian woman on my twitter maybe 15 down..
Just my full name is handle @FelixQuigley
She is a truly wonderful person
So ask the editor to remove the worst especially sentence beginning BTW
Adam too
This stuff will be picked up by political enemies and used for sure
If Telegraph is difficult see on my twitter maybe 15 down..
Just my full name is handle @FelixQuigley
@FelixQuigley
I wasn’t really interested in what the woman had to say, I saw your original comment, and I am not good at noticing small things.
I just thought you got emotional again for some reason and called us Nazis which I chose to ignore.
When I decided to open the video after all this confusion, I couldn’t get to it because I don’t use the social media where it was posted.
Neither Adam nor I meant to insult your grandfather, it was sort of a domino effect of ambiguous statements.
The words are the words of an Armenian woman. Not my words.
She is talking about her grandfather. It’s clear he fought against the Nazis
Go to my original comment. For whatever reason Adam distorted it.
She speaks on video.
The words are an English translation
A link is given to the video
Below then to make even clearer I explain the above
Something like …this is an Armenian woman speaking
Where’s the problem. Nothing could be clearer.
But do as you like. I’m finished.
Adam would you also please arrange to have removed that very offensive to me comment. If it was just me I might not care so much but it involves somebody whose memory is precious to me.
@FelixQuigley
Adam responded:
You answered:
This seemed to imply that since your grandfather wouldn’t fight for Britain in WWII (and Britain ostensibly fought against the Germans), then he fought for the opposite side, i.e., Germany.
I am sorry for my wrong conclusion but your responses kind of led to it.
They weren’t clear enough, unfortunately.
I finally read your post about the typo, it did cause a lot of confusion, sorry.
Reader can you arrange with Ted to have that very offensive to me sentence removed starting BTW
See how rattled I am. It should read “fighting in the Russian Army”.
Peloni
It is years since I read it but I was very influenced by a very learned article written by Daniel Pipes on the Assad family and the position of his Alawites in relation to the Jihad.
There is ALSO a longer version in PDF with many references included. I think it is central but you may not think so.
https://www.danielpipes.org/191/the-alawi-capture-of-power-in-syria
Thank you Peloni.
A typo picked up by two people and I cannot believe what they did.
I missed the first quotation mark which often happens when I highlight text with my finger on smartphone.
But then below that I could not have been clearer.
It was from a Twitter video of a wonderful Armenian woman in argument with pro Azov people in Armenia.
It is very obvious she was referring to her grandfather fighting in the Nazi army before conquering Berlin.
Let me get what I wrote
How can that be confusing?
Iran yes I agree and I have always opposed Iran from the overthrow of the Shah by Khomeini.
Francisco Gil White has written how America was involved.
But Assad? Surely he helped keep the peace on Israeli northern border for many years.
So what state terror from Assad?
Is that not the reality that Assad formed alliance with Iran and Russia because he FEARED America
@Adam
@Reader
I am quite amused by this confusion. Felix will have to confirm this, but I believe he was quoting the conversation between the Armenian and Ukrainian in the video linked. He seems to have missed the first quotation mark which caused the confusion.
@Felix
You expect Trump to carry out a policy because the Yazedi judge it straitforward? This seems a silly point, so perhaps you were not seriously intending this as I read it.
It is fair that Assad was fighting an existential threat against Isis, but that is no reason for Trump to have formed an alliance with him. I really am puzzled by your insistence on this issue of forming an alliance with Syria, of all nations. Trump would never have done so, not in a million years.
Syria was in an alliance with Iran. The two of them were State Sponsors of Terrorism. These nations were the very antithesis of the entities whose position in the the Middle East Trump desired to elevate with a close US association.
Trump sought out moderate Arab states willing to abandon their associations with terrorism. He did make overtures to the PA, but only so he could pursue a peace between them and Israel. Luckily enough, after some dialogue, it became clear to Trump that the PA was ever attached to their terrorist ways and refused to be waned from their addiction to Jewish blood. The consequence was the Taylor Force Act, the defunding of UNWRA and the tabling of a peace plan which made it impossible for the terror-addicted PA from entertaining, while also including a sunset clause to finally end this false state of endless cycles of pretend negotiations, advantaging the Arabs to simply agree to not agree, and thereby gain from their position of intransigence.
In any event, Syria was never a serious consideration for Trump as an ally, based solidly upon the policy he established in his Riyadh speech and used in his endeavors to end State Sponsored Terrorism.
A VERY interesting presentation from May, 2016 but still relevant (some about Ukraine):
Amazing details, especially about the start of the Cold War and Truman (no transcript, so don’t bother with the text):
https://www.registremblay.com/peter-kusnick-three-false-myths-americans-believe/
@FelixQuigley
This is not the ideology of neocons, this is the ideology of the US practically since its founding.
The so called “neocons” simply make no secret of it.
BTW, how come your grandfather was fighting for the Germans in WWII?
Peloni you lose me here meaning I don’t understand.
To a Yazedi it is straightforward
Assad was fighting existentialist fight against Islam ISIS.
ISIS WAS CREATION OF NEOCONS
Black and White decision
That decision was not taken by Trump. He had great power. He could also have insisted to Assad I join you to smash ISIS and a condition is that you exclude Iran…..
A great decision with huge implications
But not a forever marriage either
I look at things, it seems, more flexible than you.
It is a good article. Robert Hunter writes
I defend Putin and Russia unconditionally.
We have to ask additional questions. How to overcome the ideology of NEOCONS and their deadly program.
The ideology of NEOCONS is America Rules and always
Quality is extreme callous violent
Is not complex and is real
I’m getting swamped by all the labels here, so I looked up “neoconservative”:
No mention of the Nazis, who were not a political power after 1945. The comparisons I’m reading here, therefore, make no sense.
@Felix
I agree, of course, that the virus/vaccine is a separate issue, but it does suffer from the same corruption in shaped communications where wrong think is the established order in which people are permitted express their views, just as is the case in the Ukraine matter, but more so in regards to the virus/vaccine.
I fail to see this as accurately stated. Why do you believe Trump required Assad as an ally for anything? Sure enough it would have set him at odds with the NeoCons, but as Syria is a recognized State Sponsor of Terrorism, allying the US with Assad would have set Trump at odds with the Trump Doctrine and policy of reciprocity that he established in Riyadh. There is no way would Trump have allied himself with Assad, and rightfully so.
Regarding Russia, the NeoCons had Trump setup and compromised from enacting his own judgement and policy from Day One, actually several months sooner than even that.
@Felix
We all study history but we don’t all empathize with it.
Leftists of all stripes today concentrate on who they hate, Israel and America. And their numbers are so small, they can’t afford to be choosy about their allies. At least you don’t hate Israel. If the rest of the left were like you and Reader, in that respect, I’d still be a leftist.
There, I paid you a compliment.
Look we all study history.
Please every time you address me you insult me.
I feel most uncomfortable discussing anything with you and understand this is not personal as we know nothing about each other.
Nothing good or productive FOR ME an association with a person who with no knowledge of events and context of revolution calls Trotsky what you did.
With a transcript
This is in addition to it seems to my information the Trump base or following is split on the war and Trump is thereby taking different positions too. Or so it seems to me. America may be uniting around world nuclear war. What worries is the speed. The Nazis now bombing civilians in Donbass since they lose. And Russia in response bombs Kiev yesterday. Johnson just escaped the vote so he pushes for war all the more. Same with Biden. Only Hungary says no. This can be a world nuclear war. Sebastien Zorn assured us DO NOT WORRY. But that is proving to me more and more an absurdity.
@Adam
Good to hear from you, Adam, I noted a bit of a pause in your posts.
I don’t think it is fair to assert that since Russia had nothing to fear from NATO/US, it undermines her right to respond to international threats, which is essentially what you are stating, correct me if I am taking your comment out of context. Russia had many reasons drawing it to war, and the threat of NATO encirclement was just one of these. Given the fact, if it indeed proves accurate, that Russia had the ability to defeat her enemies handily, it would not negate her right to react in self defense from a perceived threat on her borders which Russia vociferously made known to all concerned parties. Furthermore, these warnings were based upon Red Lines established by Russia in 2008. and were only answered with further actions by the Ukrainian to exacerbate the already overly tense situation, while ignoring all attempts to pursue a diplomatic solution.
@Felix It’s a Marxist myth that only capitalists go to war with one another. The tendencies I named are 3rd international, Trotskyist, Maoist, Stalinist. In my lifetime they all work together and take similar positions except when they have a falling out.
Your head is stuck in an era before either of us were born. I know a number of leftists like that. Most people would find that comical.
Leftists who seem all warm and cuddly out of power become monsters in power. Absolute power corrupts. one party?
Peloni the virus is a separate issue and I will not discuss it here.
As soon as Trump did not alliance with Assad and Putin in Syria the NEOCONS had him.
In all of these things there’s a critical moment that was it
Adam my dear grandad was an Irish small farmer did not fight for Britain nor would I
Look, this is simple as pie – this is a replay/continuation of WWII.
WWII is described in history books as a fight of the “civilized world” against German Nazism/Italian Fascism, etc.
In reality, it was ultimately a war against the USSR/Russia which didn’t stop in May of 1945 and has continued ever since.
The West (led by the US and Great Britain) wants to take “Eurasia”, and once they take that, the idea is that they will control the whole world forever.
They want to accomplish this with the hands of the “Untermenschen” whose lives are expendable, unfortunately, the “Untermenschen” don’t understand that they are being used for cannon fodder and worse.
They will also finish “taking care of the Jews” at the same time.
The rest is just minor details and variations on the theme, and speculation.
@Felix
Good of you to make this point, as I was just now writing on this very topic. Without the media, the NeoCon messaging, just as the Covid messaging, would never be so successful as it has been. The censorship and coordinated messaging has wrapped the public conversation into a funnel directed towards a single outcome, a govt approved narrative shaped by the culling of dissenting voices.
Regarding the issue of allying with Assad, I really do not believe there was any need for it.
This is quite accurately stated. They have sold out the working class again and again. I do believe that the workers have been a great source of support for Trump, even as the labor union leaders have opposed him, for instance.
@Felix. Your post on your granfather’s WW2 experience seems to apply that he was fighting on the German side of the war. One is “betrayed” by someone who had been your comrade in arms, not by an open enemy.
You need to explain your grandfather’s role in WW2. THat could explain many of your opinions.
By describing Russia’s overwhelming military superiority over Nato in a land war between the two blocs in Europe, the author has inadvertently let the cat out of the bag– Russia never had anything to fear from NATO or the United States. Putin’s cassus belli for the Ukraine invasion–that NATO was planning to station troops in the Ukraine and use them to invade and or “encircle” Russia- was a lie from start to finish.
You are Nazis. My grandfather fought before Berlin. He was betrayed by the Nazis, crests. You spat on Russia, Ukraine spat on Russia. The West wants to destroy Russia. It won’t work. Putin is a great man.” https://t.co/GQUSZMiy9A
The video shows an Armenian woman arguing in Armenia with Ukrainians
Peloni
When I referred above to the NEOCONS pulling it off I should have went into detail how they do all of this with the aid of a Media – a very extensive Media Machine.
Sebastien you refer to the CPUSA
They were highly involved in the assassination of Leon Trotsky in August 1940 in Mexico.
You called Trotsky a “murdering bastard”.
How are they socialist?
The problem the world faces is NEOCON thinking. The personnel have changed since Iraq but the ideology remains. Trump was not capable of dealing with the main problem. How that rabid NEOCON Fiona Hill got in for I think two years in his White House is a lesson or a clue. For example Assad. There needed to be an open Unity with Assad to destroy ISIS. It seems to me Trump drifted more and more to NEOCON positions. And this is now very prevalent even today.
The article by Mr Hunter shows great military knowledge which I have not got. But while I understand that Russia had to defend itself war in our time cannot win because mad people.like the NEOCONS will push to the brink and Mr Hunter spells it out. Really well and with truth.
You are intelligent people but you don’t take into account or cannot my points on how the labour and trade union leaders hold the.working class, the poor,down. I understand this phenomenon in Europe better but I see it in America too. For example AOC being for the war.
I’m trying to explain too much. I should have just said the NEOCONS are pulling it off over a wide area of our earth. Yet they are uncultured and are shallow but like in Maidan they plan and act. And their target is China after Russia. Very extensive planning. Of course very worrying.
correction @Michael not Peloni
@Felix @ Peloni The far left condemns Biden’s war.
I checked out the websites of Workers World. CPUSA, RCP, SWP, Northstar Compass, International Communist League
Politics make strange bedfellows. Many of the comments by anti-Communist posters on Israpundit could have been pulled from any of these sites.
@Felix
The greens/liberals are embracing the war because they are looking to use it to mask their New Green Deal agenda. Restated, they will use the war to make energy costs so appreciably unaffordable that their green agenda will actually look competitive, and all the damage associated with setting aside the fossil fuel industries will be placed at the feet of Russia. The associated damage to industry, economy and society will not easily be reversed, but these are not their concern, and they will never have the opportunity to leverage a false narrative as successfully as the “Rape of Ukraine” while achieving their ends.
This is a question that has pretty much been answered. Trump initially supported the “let’s threaten Russia” bandwagon, but given some time to contemplate the situation, he aptly called for peace negotiations. This doesn’t mean that he is supporting a “pull out of war” as you put it, but I do believe that Putin would be reasonable, and that Trump can assess the damage that the war has done and will continue to do to everyone, and act accordingly to what is in the interest of the US, ie pursue a reasonable peace settlement. Unfortunately, Trump is not controlling things, more is the pity, and unless he makes a return in the coming months, he is not likely to have a say in this war drama. So we will have to see how things go.
Honestly, the Ukrainians are not succeeding in much beyond their propaganda campaign, but in this they have been more successful than actually suits their objectives. Their imagined successes have left them with questions unasked, the answers to which provide the greatest chance of Ukraine not becoming a pizza pie where all the nearby nations take a slice. Consequently, the masses, including the working class, are quite high on the Ukraine koolaid, and are presently quite misled in the potentials of Ukraine’s ultimate success. I do believe that many are waking from their delusional stupors as the truth has been revealed of several tall-tales told by Ukraine, such as the Ghost of Kiev, Snake Island massacre, the invisibility of Azov, or the coordinated savage ‘Russian rapists’, but the number of those who have become wise to the effects of Ukrainian propaganda are not so many as to successfully stand against the current wave of support of Ukraine. As the economic hardships become more biting to the general public, this will likely change. Still for this to have the desired effect, in Europe at least, it will require the elected classes to move towards new elections, rather than a simple reshaping of the govt without requesting public review of all the damage that has been done. Hence, the problem lies in the simple fact that they will seek a new leadership without acknowledging the fact that the problem lies not with the leaders, but with their policies, which will simply be continued under new management, should new elections not be pursued.
HI, Felix
You’re right, about the Left having become solidly NeoCon. That even includes PR China — NATO is forming up the “Blue” team and Xi is forming the “Red” team. What side one is on doesn’t matter here, because the whole point of the exercise is war, chaos and destruction. China is HOT on this:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-01/china-taiwan-military-drills-us-policy/101117322
https://rumble.com/v17j0dx-frank-gaffney-what-we-are-doingwhat-we-should-be-doing.html
Even my nine-year-old, youngest grandson has been playing guns with his friends, shouting Communist party slogans.
You’re hoping for “mass opposition from the working class”? Dream on, brother; and I wish pleasant dreams to you. In the US, “mass opposition” means MAGA, and we are being systematically ferreted out and persecuted by the CIA and FBI. In China, the “working class” is the Lao Bai Xing, who will do whatever Xi tells them to. In Europe, there IS no “opposition” to anything, as far as I can see: It is a continent of deer in the headlights, completely clueless.
I know Britain best but I’m pretty sure all of Europe is the same. The Conservatives are madly for the war against Russia. But just as much and even surpassing are social democrats and Greens. In the Iraq and Libya war the left opposed with really big marches. Now it is very different and they are all NeoCons.
For reasons hard to pin down all of Europe has become NeoCon
Even as the War and NeoCons destroy Europe.
I don’t think even Farage now speaks on this. Perhaps Marine le Pen but I know of no other. And how can Russia retreat?
I do not think the NEOCONS will pull back. They are giving signs they’re thinking of China and total worldwide. NEOCON rules.
Will Trump and his Republican party pull out of war or become NEOCON also?
The only solution is mass opposition from the working class
Resident Biden assigns top men to Ukrainian issue:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fdjf4lMmiiI
https://imgs.search.brave.com/GhEwLZzxPPIDDzEqp_lmxfLVhfXF58v_WjA0DHR8SPg/rs:fit:640:360:1/g:ce/aHR0cHM6Ly9zdGF0/aWMtMy5iaXRjaHV0/ZS5jb20vbGl2ZS9j/b3Zlcl9pbWFnZXMv/cWJjQlNZVlpwMExZ/L05PbDRHTzJDaTVo/SF82NDB4MzYwLmpw/Zw
US Industry gears up for wartime production:
https://imgs.search.brave.com/5D4PH39vy77tEVs6zpfDUyJlJVa3NecGqpJBK62u29k/rs:fit:939:642:1/g:ce/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5h/aXJmaWVsZHMtZnJl/ZW1hbi5jb20vVFgv/R2xvYmVGYWN0b3J5/X3dhdGVydG93XzAy/LmpwZw
US Economy gears up for war:
https://endhomelessness.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/homelessness-statistics.jpg
Mobilized US troops on bivouac, ready to indade Russia:
https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-public/styles/inline_image_mobile/public/inline-images/Tentcity1-768×403.jpg?itok=SNLjhie2
The Russian armed forces have not been performing well in Ukraine. While accurate information is hard to come by, what is verifiable is that the Russians have taken large losses and have degraded military capabilities. Their goals have been scaled back considerably and they are still having difficulty securing their land bridge to Crimea.
I can’t comment on the Western capabilities the author describes. I wouldn’t be surprised if many of his comments are accurate. Still, the US has a big advantage over Russia in logistics and mobility, and that would count for a lot in a conflict with them.
War is a ghastly and terrible thing. I hope we can stay out of one and only fight if we know why we are doing so and have a good chance of winning. It isn’t clear to me that the current administration is able to meet either of these two conditions.
The US would not fare well in a nuclear war also. See the video I just posted.
Even should someone with an IQ greater than their shoe size find a way to return to the White House, it would be highly unlikely that any “disavowing any intention of engaging in hostilities” would take place as the author here advises. Of course, peace initiatives should certainly be pursued, though, given the sharp betrayals experienced by the Russians following the Istanbul talks, the still recent memory demonstrating Ukrainian treachery will certainly limit their success. Still, Russia needs an off ramp to end this war, and this is really the highest commodity that Ukraine still holds with which to trade towards the salvation of their rump state. The stubbornness of Ukraine to not settle with the Russians prior to the war, and then their decision to betray the Istanbul talks with the Bucha propaganda campaign, have both served to seriously damaged their ability to be taken seriously, and this is a great disadvantage for all. This will limit Russia’s ability to consider any agreement as viable, and will require the Ukrainians to provide some significant step of faith building to repair the damage already done to begin peace talks. This will, naturally, be unacceptable to the Ukrainian people who have been fed a steady diet of propaganda by their govt claiming victory after victory, even as the lines of battle have moved further and further from the Russian frontier. The apparent betrayal perceived by the Ukrainians will only heighten the atmosphere of instability in Ukraine, a nation whose troubles all began with a coup, not that long ago and has radicals and arms freely moving about the nation.
Of course, these complications are all the makings of the US, who supported Ukraine prior to the outbreak of war, and again in supporting the Bucha narrative without even any form of interest of pursing an investigation, despite their very strong support for the UN condemnation removing Russia from the HRC. The final complication in all of this will be the war spirit in the US, which is less than it was, but I do not believe it has fallen below a majority. Indeed, the words contained in this article are sobering, even as many would like to ignore the reality that in the decade prior to Trump, the military was faced with budget cuts, despite the wars in that time period, “the cupboards were bare” as Trump stated. Though Trump’s words were not entirely accurate, the point is that since 2008, Russia has focused upon building up her military, while the US focused on keeping up with the costs of the ongoing wars, before the Trump era, at least. In the past months, much of the US stockpiles have been affected, as discussed above, and these facts do present a question that we should all hope will not be answered in our lifetime, especially not while defending something so far from an existential threat as the poor decisions by Ukraine to demand their ‘right’ to extend NATO membership to the borders of Russia, despite the knowledge of what such a decision would cause.
This article is SO conspicuously slanted and dissuasive of ANY military recourse, I can’t but conclude that this writer is on the payroll of the Kremlin …or, he should be!
What crap!