They are incapable of putting themselves into their adversary’s shoes, because what their enemy thinks is to them a crime thought. This incapacity to model their adversaries is a huge weakness and huge vulnerability. We can operate outside their ability to see. It is also a massive information leak, because what they say the enemy intends or is trying to do reveals what they intend or are trying to do.
This post was triggered by a recent bread tube comment.
“Russia believes that if they can bring the West to understand that Russia will always fight in Ukraine for longer, Russia will not give in, that the West will then give up on its support for Ukraine.”
This, of course, is obviously absurd, but its ludicrous and obvious absurdity reveals that the current Globohomo strategy is to persuade Russia that the West will not give in.
Therefore all the depressing news we are hearing about forever war is intended for Russian consumption.
Therefore, the Globohomo is about to give in.
This blog is not about the news of the day, but the news of the deep past, and the future.
The left cannot perceive facts that cast doubt on the their self image as good benevolent people, and cannot comprehend beliefs and actions of people based on those facts — cannot conceive of a world view that might imply that their adversaries see themselves as adversaries of evil people motivated by malice, hatred, envy, and spite. The Russians must see globohomo as doing good for good reasons, and understand themselves as motivated by lust for power and/or pointless destructiveness. The left is perfectly sure of that.
John Stewart Leibowitz has been making a visible effort over the last months to introduce to his audience homeopathic doses of wrongthink sandwiched between disparaging jokes.
To a lesser extent his colleague Bill Maher.
So these two at least represent indecisive attempts to take miniscule steps back to some hint of reality. But they’re both 60+ old school moderate jews so who knows. Does it have an impact? Or are they simply proving to their audience that they were secretly nazi boomers all along?
Thank you for stating this so clearly. Thoughtcrime Theory really is the key to The Matrix, isn’t it?
(And why in the hell doesn’t someone present Thoughtcrime Theory at CPAC or Turning Point USA or the RNC or wherever? It’s a question that answers itself, I suppose, but dangit man if only if only.)
I can’t draw the through-line as well as you and P-C can (and would love it if you would, guys), but I’ve always sensed that comedy was once the “portal” through which a civilization inoculated its people with crimethoughts and crimefacts in a manner that was “safe” for both the speaker and the listener. Comedians always had this special (unprincipled?) exception license that must go all the way back to the court jesters.
Black comedians in particular because they had this higher-but-separate caste status (which perhaps might even have something to do with blackface performers, because what the hell was THAT anyway?).
The sticking point, of course, is that the likes of Nuland and others in the war faction do not see the most expensive costs as costs at all; they want people in the ukraine dead just as much as people in muscovy – and also dead balts, dead poles, dead germans, dead english, and dead american.[1]
As long as the people bearing the majority of the costs are people they hate anyways, they feel no compunctions about neverending blind idiot provocation; and indeed, is usually the point itself to being with.
([1]France is semi-autonomous, but this is in the sense of competition for the vanguard of the eternal revolution; they are perfectly capable of handling their own genocide of the natives, they just would like the plum job of being in charge of killing everyone else too.)
(meant for 2979760)
Not content with the recent achievements in fake and gay democracy, the UK today lowered the voting age from 18 to 16.
As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.
-Isaiah 3:12
[*deleted because you are unfamiliar with mainstream conservatives*]
The Brits have no children. That voting age gives the Muslims even more power. The oppressors are not children, they are old folk still trying to fight the Nazis/ patriarchy/ daddy dearest/ God himself.
A tad hyperbolic, but true nonetheless that the Muslim invaders’ “voting” power will increase by this and thus give Labor plausible coverage to rig future elections. In ’20, most criticism of the vote fraud in the US presidential election was dismissed out of hand as racism, given how much more love negroes gave Biden than Obama.
There is little left of Western Europe. Much of it has already turned into an extension of Northern Africa. It probably cannot be saved at this point — the civilized world should have resumed the Crusades twenty years ago if they wanted to do that. At this point Europe can only be used as a cautionary tale.
The globo left likes to falsely paint President Trump as a dictator, because as this blog points out, the left likes to project. The left wants to have a dictator, as long as the dictator is one of theirs (as the famous leftist George W Bush once pointed out).
Ironically, the most expedient way to save everything would be for President Trump to actually become a dictator and implement MAGA by diktat.
Right now across the Syrian border, there is ethno-religious war (more like ethnic cleansing) between Sunni Islamists and the Druze. Once Europe is chock-full of infinity Global Southerners, many from MENA countries, what you saw on October 7 in Israel, and what you are seeing right now in Syria happening to Druze, Christians, and Alawites, will be happening all over Western Europe to native Europeans. You invite the Middle-East and Africa, you become the Middle-East and Africa.
The focus right now should not, however, be war against Islam, but replacing the wicked elites of the West and establishing a functional state religion which will allow Europeans both to breed and to effectively engage in organized violence. If no European King achieves that, maybe American and/or Russian Kings will achieve that. Likely no one will achieve that and what’s happening right now in Syria to the Druze will be happening all over Western Europe to Europeans.
Their streets will look like this:
https://x.com/Saher_News_24_7/status/1945945260195971282
Our streets already look like that. Not every day, and not everywhere, but it’s not everywhere all the time in the Mideast, either.
Looks like the Druze are about to get holocausted, unless Israel intervenes to protect them. Trump apparently doesn’t want Israel to bomb Syria (he seeks to legitimize and strike a deal with Ahmed al-Sharaa), so I guess the Druze in Syria are getting slaughtered tonight. If Israel were not Washington’s little bitch / vassal, this could have been prevented. Since the Druze are not clients of either the Consulate Empire or the Bases Empire, nobody outside the Middle-East will care. But they are broadly allied with Israel, so Israel does care, and might even defy/circumvent (or, ideally, persuade) Trump and bomb the Islamists in Syria anyway.
The Druze have some genetic ties to Europeans, often having blue/green eyes and ginger hair.
Turkey is allied with the majority in Syria (regular Sunnis basically), while Israel is, to varying degrees, allied with the minorities. Trump rather likes Erdogan, so would prefer to stabilize al-Sharaa’s regime. The non-Sunni minorities are not exactly enthused about that, to say the least.
You know that Israel has a lot of Druze within its borders; they even serve in the IDF. Given the reality of tribal family networks and Israel’s coalition politics, coordination across the border and accompanying protection should be the default assumption. The Druze should be OK. For now.
In the medium term, drones are an industrial ratio and Turkey > Israel. The Druze will need a plan.
Always thought that Druzes are mostly descendants of non-Canaanite & non-Aramean peoples. That is, mostly descendants of mostly European settlers form Hellenistic (Macedonian) and Roman times.
Nuts or correct?
Never actually looked more closely at their history.
Anyway, didn’t Golan Druzes retain their Syrian citizenship?
To paraphrase Ephraim Kishon (he was really great Jew, BTW): “After toppling Assad’s bloody regime, hundred to hundred and fifty heads are rolling in Damascus – daily.” So, either Syria will be partitioned, or all minorities will be killed, that’s clear. And partition will be only de facto implemented, never de iure, at least not until Globohomo is no more. Because for Globohomo to live, Forever War must go on.
The Druze keep their religion mostly secret, but it seems that one of its tenets is loyalty to the ruling power – so Israeli Druze are loyal to Israel, Lebanese Druze are loyal to Lebanon, and Syrian Druze were loyal to Assad. Those on the Golan were naturally ambivalent, since their situation was ambivalent. The fall of Assad put the Syrian Druze between a rock and a hard place: they are not ruled by Israel, but also, al-Sharaa is a headchopper. Initially they sought to make peace with Jolani, and it worked for a while, but now that they’re being butchered by Islamists under his watch (and, let’s be fair, do some butchering of their own; they are something of a warrior tribe), they appeal to Israel, and of course to their co-ethnics in Israel, for protection. And wave Israeli flags in their villages.
Racially, they appear to not be fully Semitic, they might even have some European admixture — their origins aren’t exactly clear — and unlike regular Muslim Arabs (and similarly to Christian Arabs and Alawites), they did not interbreed with Sub-Saharan Africans.
okay. but you’re pretending that Israel cares about Christians? as if it wasn’t Israel who wanted Assad ( and Qaddafi, and Saddam, and etc ) taken out?
.
sounds an awful lot like “Create the problem, Offer the ( only available ) solution”.
This genocide should be laid on the deep state’s doorstep. A bit of house cleaning before Trump took over and like who could have known this would follow?
[*deleted*] no one is permitted to talk about Islam, anywhere. [*deleted*]
There is no censorship on this blog. You can talk about Islam all you want provided you pass the shill test required by the moderation policy.
Cynical grifters: “As Middle-Eastern Christians, you must be REALLY MAD at what the Zionists are doing…”
M-E Christians: “We are extremely alarmed by Jolani’s gangs slaughtering the Druze. Next they will be slaughtering us.”
Cynical grifters: “Yes yes, very concerning, now back to Israel – tell us how badly evil Israel is treating you…”
M-E Christians: “If the Islamists in Syria genocide the Druze, they will next genocide the Alawites, the Shiites, the Kurds, and us Christians. Please do something to help our Druze brethren.”
Cynical grifters: “Yeah, blah blah blah muh Druze, now let’s get back to the topic of Israel oppressing the Christians,”
M-E Christians: “WE ARE GOING TO BE SLAUGHTERED IN SYRIA BY ISLAMISTS, WAKE THE FUCK UP YOU DIPSHITS!”
Cynical grifters: “Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel Israel…”
“M-E Christians: “We are extremely alarmed by Jolani’s gangs slaughtering the Druze. Next they will be slaughtering us.””
.
*snort* as if M-E Christians haven’t been getting slaughtered for well over a decade now. it’s been obvious since at least Obama that the destruction of the Christian Churches *which are older than the Church in Rome* has been a major point of international policy for some time.
.
Of course.
The point is that the grifters bring up Middle-Eastern Christians if — and only if — they can be used as a rhetorical tool against muh Zionist Regime.
No a single one of those grifters actually gives a damn about Middle-Eastern Christians. They are nothing but a “talking point” for them. Always have been.
They love speaking for them; they don’t bother speaking with them.
>Therefore all the depressing news we are hearing about forever war is intended for Russian consumption.
That is what you want to believe, not reality..
>Therefore, the Globohomo is about to give in
when
I don’t believe that the European proposal to continue full scale war in Eastern Europe forever is a lie intended to pressure Russia because I want to believe it. I believe European proposal to continue full scale war in Eastern Europe forever is a lie intended to pressure Russia because the left always projects.
Almost everyone in Russia at every level of society from the top to the bottom believes that they have to go on killing Western troops and destroying Western equipment as long as the West keeps using them to harm Russia and Russians. The West refusal to hear what everyone in Russia says they are thinking reveals what the West is really thinking.
That the voice of authority keeps telling us that Russia really wants to give up, and that the vast majority of ordinary Russians really want to give up reveals that the West really wants to give up. They keep keep denying the Russians are saying what they are saying, and the voice of authority assumes that the Russians are lying when confronted with what the vast majority of Russians have been saying for many years, therefore the voice of authority wants to give up, and are lying about it. What they say ordinary Russians really feel, is what they really feel.
“depressing news we are hearing about forever war”
Maybe I misunderstood because you said “depressing news” instead of “blatant propaganda”. Plus I of course think the west intends to keep attacking Russia forever. And, the evidence so far proves it.
But let’s assume for argument’s sake that they are saying “black” when they actually mean “white”, and so you deduce they are about to give up. How many months before trump surrenders then.
The west wants Russia to de-escalate the forever war to a level where the west can continue it forever, as a mixture of a bit of moderate low level shelling of Russian civilians, pressure against Russians outside Russian borders to derussify them, economic and political pressure on Russia to allow ngos to operate inside Russia, a partial siege of Kaliningrad Oblast, and arming and funding separatists among Russian ethnic minorities. That they want such a deal reveals inability to sustain the current level of war forever. That deal is not on the table, and that they are shouting so intensely that it is on the table, that ordinary Russians are crying out for such a deal, that the vast majority of Russians want such a deal, and Putin is going to fall because he obstinately refuses to give Russians this wonderfully generous deal, reveals that the reality that it is not on the table is slowly sinking in.
That “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” has been cancelled for when his contract expires in 2026 May tells me that the decision has been made that if the Russians do not capitulate sometime before then, the forever war will also be cancelled. How long the West is prepared to stick to it I do not know, but reality is penetrating, and that cancellation is people in power already starting to adjust course for that reality. So, the timer expires sometime before 2026 May. Probably the west is going to throw in the towel sometime 2025 September October.
It has been suggested that Stephen Colbert was cancelled because he was not funny and no one was watching him, but I find this unlikely, because the legacy media has no interest in such matters.
It’s good in principle that unfunny hack was canceled the last time he was funny was on Strangers With Candy 25 years ago.
https://latenighter.com/news/cbs-reportedly-lost-40-million-on-colberts-late-show-this-year/
Colbert’s show employs about 200 people and costs 100m a year to produce for some reason. And for some strange reason, it’s still not even funny.
You would think humor would be prized most of all because AI is going to kill everything else. So to see terrible humor is a particularly cursed bad omen.
Here, yet another move of the neocons / “trump administration” to trigger nuclear war.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/us-nukes-deployed-to-england-for-first-time-in-over-a-decade/
America stationing nukes in Britain is like Russia extending security guarantees to Serbia, which resulted in World War I. Your barking chihuahuas are apt to drag you into a fight.
Britain’s nukes don’t work, and it is becoming known that they don’t work. Britain wants someone else to fight a war with Russia, just as Serbia wanted someone else to fight a war with Austria.
I know too many child-free* liberal Russians who see no need to fight the West and don’t care if Russia still exists in 2100 because they’ll be long dead by then.
There’s no arguing them out of this position. “When you’re old and feeble, no one will care if you live or die.” “Nor will I care; I’ll just be glad that I had a lot of fun when I was young and free.”
But the majority are tradcons who celebrate International Women’s Day, send their smart beautiful strong independent daughters to college, and wonder why they have no grandchildren.
* “child-free” is always said in English; it sounds utterly perverse to say such words in Russian.
As the Japs used to say, “If the sun is not rising, it is setting.”
And what do tradcons think their nation should do when it is the target of low level war intended by a variety of means to restore the 1990s status quo ante, and this “low level” warfare extends all the way to shelling Russians?
“Russians never surrender!” To which I once added, makes them easy marks at the poker table. Fortunately for them, we weren’t playing with real money.
They’re very proud of Russia’s hard-won victories against “fascism”, past and present. They boast that Russia conquered Berlin, and I reply that America conquered the Moon.
But they, like Putin, are baffled by the “demographic catastrophe” and think more money for families will help.
Former Singapore foreign minister is somewhat Jimian in his analysis of Ukraine. He mentions he expected Russia to invade based on his reading of Putin’s analysis. And he mentioned some of his American friends “ridiculed” him for reading Putin because “Putin is evil”. Which supports Jim’s analysis that Globohomo refuses to know its enemy.
https://x.com/ricwe123/status/1945757212019740717
BTW, the preface by the American in the video just sounds retarded by the standards of the readers of this blog. It’s somewhat scary that normies believe this stuff.
Watched the entire interview. So, this discussion took place almost 2 and half years ago. “Multipolar world,” “the dollar is going away” etc etc was the rage and still is, to some extent. The problem is that Russia’s advance, over the last almost 3.5 years of war, has slowed down. As has been noted, it is no war of maneuver but a positional war of attrition, fought with modern tools. No “big arrow offensives.” Partition of the Ukraine might well take place, but it no longer seems like it will be on exactly the terms that Russia was seeking at the start of the campaign. No “rump Ukraine.” Annexing most of the Ukraine does not seem to be possible within the next 3-4 years either. Forget about Odessa, even Kharkov’s capture is questionable. Sure, the Ukraine is losing, but it can be losing this way for a very long time. Short of using nukes, of course.
At this stage, the best strategy for both sides — imo — is to accept a detente. Another 3 years of this will lead to even more ruin, economically and demographically. Not sustainable for long; particularly, for gain of unclear magnitude. Destroying human capital (not to mention other capital) — be it through its death or out-migration — is not smart in the realities of post-industrial world, where knowledge-based economies rule. And there’s already plenty of smart people, on both sides, that have fled (or died). It is especially nonsensical, since there’s huge territory possessed by both sides regardless, and Russia’s main objective — a sizable and defensible land bridge to Crimea — has been achieved. War has been tried and it’s proven costly and not particularly gainful, after the first two years. The whole “fast advance through steppes” has proven to be no longer true, in modern realities of warfare. Hence, given already huge strategic depths of both Russia and the Ukraine, the war is increasingly nonsensical.
“Denazification” and “demilitarization” do not seem to be attainable in the next 3-4 years of this ruinous war. The number of dead and wounded is already orders of magnitude larger than whatever was perpetrated by anti-Russian, neo-Nazi/xenophobic Ukrainian gangs over the previous decade, be it real or not. As to Ukraine, they also have little to no hope of returning the land they have lost, though they seem quite capable of resisting and able to preserve their sovereignty.
I think, after this is over, will be able to impose and enforce their separate language and culture doctrinally, however inferior/provincial or anti-Russian these may be, on their entire remaining territory. Apropos, the patriarchy of Russia started out by declaring itself independent from Byzantine’s. The patriarchy of the Ukraine is starting out similarly. (Not that I care much personally, as they’re both Jew-haters.) More saliently, the only truly big issue remaining is what the Ukraine will get or not get in terms of “security guarantees” that it has been demanding. So far, Russia isn’t budging. But I don’t see how Ukraine can give up such a basic demand and accept a sustainable peace treaty merely based on Russian signature alone.
So, it’s time for realpolitik and diplomacy, with external pressure. Trump has been trying to do this for the last 6 months, applying both carrot and — now — moving toward stick, but it looks like the populaces of both countries do not wish to give up on their respective objectives. For a “single, one people” they seem awfully bent on each other’s de facto destruction. So, it’s still going on and no one knows if it will stop in the next year or two. Meanwhile, for all the talk of “tradition” or patriotic bravado, emulation of Western ideas is ongoing regardless, female emancipation is high, and fertility — particularly, among most talented — is in the dumps. Notably, for Russia — being that it’s considered by nutjobs as a “conservative” country (it’s not). (There is even a metoo movement and “pedophile” labeling that’s been gaining momentum in Russian mass media against some Russian celebrities formerly dating minor aged chicks or not condemning it.)
And economically, common people on both sides struggle — which is partly by design (to fuel military recruitment) and partly unintended consequence. The government has decided to give special perks to veterans’ children by reserving spots in prestigious academic programs (including even MIPT, apparently) and reducing, if not altogether waiving entrance requirements. That is an example of desperation. Only a small, and not particularly bright segment of population winning, as things stand. Ukraine is ruined economically, clearly. In Russia, inflation is very high. At this point, it is looking more like stagflation. The economy is in war mode and the war is not bringing much in, economically. If one is afraid of the 90s returning, well, if this continues for another 3-4 years — particularly if Trump comes through on his threats of additional measures — the return of conditions reminiscent of the 90s is not out of the question.
If you think that Russia is winning, if this bloodbath, destruction, censure, and stagflation continue for another few years — you’re a nutjob.
Someone with more patience than me is going to take the time to fisk your post, but let me point out where you are in a leftist frame and unable to see the world as it is
>The problem is that Russia’s advance, over the last almost 3.5 years of war, has slowed down.
This war is not over territory, but sovereignty and being free from the constant low level war being put forth from the GAE. Your framing is as if this war is being fought over lines on a map and possibly control over what you see as Ukrainian tax cattle.
>post-industrial world, where knowledge-based economies rule
lol lmao. Yes yes, that icky manufacturing thing is over, its all now jews favorite playthings of abstract organizational priesting and paper finance economies. Tell me how the post‐industrial policy of your home country would have helped in a real war with Iran.
>This war is not over territory, but sovereignty and being free from the constant low level war being put forth from the GAE.
This war is *also* very much about territory; it is quite obvious to anyone who is not an idiot and actually reads and understands Russian. Now, true, there’s been quite a lot of statements regarding low-level warfare but, since you’re not a particularly bright goy and did not understand what I wrote, I will chew it up for you:
1) Russia has already taken most vital “Russian world” areas. (There are more, but they cost a lot more due to reality of modern warfare).
2) The hot war has already killed orders of magnitude more than whatever “low level war” has killed and will kill over next decades.
>Yes yes, that icky manufacturing thing is over,
No one said that it’s over. It’s just that you need smart people to organize, automate it, and make it competitive on the internal and world market, as well as invent and build next level of products based on that. This is especially true for relatively low-volume highly capable machinery. Even high-volume Apple is mostly a knowledge-based company, and less of a manufacturing one. ‘Tis should be simple enough for even a simpleton like yourself to understand.
If this war was over territory, Russia would not have done its retreat to the Dneiper, and would have treated the Ukrainian Kursk advance as much more significant and important than they did treat it. Obviously territory is an insignificant issue.
Russia wants Russian majority Russian areas abroad to be safe and free. Which can be done by making them Russian, or by killing everyone between them and Russia and then making them Russian, or can be done politically. They would rather do it politically, but politically is not yet on the table. More importantly, much more importantly, they want to stop the low level war against Russia by making the threats of making it high level credible. They have been uttering these threats for a very long time, and they had lost credibility. Now, they are credible.
So right now, today, on the battle front, their strategy is not aimed at gaining territory, but at killing Western troops and destroying western equipment. Which tends to have the almost accidental side effect of gaining some trivial and insignificant amounts of territory.
They yielded vast amounts of territory without a fight, and have been gaining tiny amounts of territory at great cost, but the point was always to inflict a far greater cost upon the West. So territory does not matter. What matters is making it credible that when the west crosses a red line, the west is likely to incur enormous costs, and if a nation submits to color revolution, it is likely to incur enormous costs. What matters is inflicting enormous costs, and if that fails, inflicting costs so enormous as to incapacitate the enemy, and if that fails, eliminating incorrigibly hostile populations, so as to geographically unit Russians, and deter other populations from getting trapped in incorrigible hostility.
The sticking point, of course, is that the likes of Nuland and others in the war faction do not see the most expensive costs as costs at all; they want people in the ukraine dead just as much as people in muscovy – and also dead balts, dead poles, dead germans, dead english, and dead american.[1]
As long as the people bearing the majority of the costs are people they hate anyways, they feel no compunctions about neverending blind idiot provocation; and indeed, is usually the point itself to being with.
([1]France is semi-autonomous, but this is in the sense of competition for the vanguard of the eternal revolution; they are perfectly capable of handling their own genocide of the natives, they just would like the plum job of being in charge of killing everyone else too.)
War is a test of will and capability. Before the war, both side’s offers reflect the potential cost of war, and their uncertainty about the other’s will and capability. And, perhaps self delusion about their own capability, as for example Nato self delusion about the superiority of Nato weapons and tactics.
If both sides knew their own and the other’s will and capability, there would be no war, they would cut a deal.
The war ensues, and will and capability is revealed. Now that one side knows its will and capability is stronger, it will insist upon a deal vastly better for it and worse for the party whose weakness has been revealed. Thus, will insist on a deal enormously better than the initial offer that was refused.
All uncertainty about capability has been resolved. But both sides remain uncertain about will. The West believes Putin is falling, falling, his people reject the war, his troops are kidnapped off the streets at gunpoint, dragged to the battlefield, and forced into massed charges armed with shovels.
Obviously if one side has to drag men off the streets and stuff them into vans, we know whose will is weaker.
The deal that settles the war will reflect what has been revealed, not the initial offers. Nato was confident in the superiority of its weapons, and thought it had far more of them than it in fact had. (Some of them existed only paper, many of those that physically existed were non functional) Nato was confident that Putin was falling, falling, falling, he had fallen, that the Russians were crying out for return to the 1990s.
As the war drags on, the losing side still maintains considerable ability to do harm. Which capability rapidly diminishes. So the longer it waits to cut a deal reflecting the realities that have been revealed, the worse that deal will be.
The deal that will settle the war must necessarily be vastly worse for West and for the Ukraine, and vastly better for Russia, than the deal that Russia offered in 2022. And as time goes by the deal that Russia offers the Ukraine and the West is going to rapidly get worse still.
This is how wars always end. The initial offers of both sides are based on uncertainty about will and capability. The uncertainty being resolved, the side with superior will and capability will now insist on terms dramatically more severe than their initial offer.
War is a test of will and capability. Before the war, both side’s offers are reflect the potential cost of war, and their uncertainty about the other’s will and capability. And, perhaps self delusion about their own capability, as for example Nato self delusion about the superiority of Nato weapons and tactics.
If both sides knew the their own and the other’s will and capability, there would be no war, they would cut a deal.
The war ensues, and will and capability is revealed. Now that one side knows its will and capability is stronger, it will insist upon a deal vastly better for it and worse for the party whose weakness has been revealed. Thus, will insist on a deal enormously better than the initial offer that was refused.
All uncertainty about capability has been resolved. But both sides remain uncertain about will. The West believes Putin is falling, falling, his people reject the war, his troops are kidnapped off the streets at gunpoint, dragged to the battlefield, and forced into human wave charges armed with shovels.
Obviously if one side has to drag men off the streets and stuff them into vans, we know whose will is weaker.
The deal that settles the war will reflect what has been revealed, not the initial offers. Nato was confident in the superiority of its weapons, and thought it had far more of them than it in fact had. (Some of them existed only paper, many of those that physically existed were non functional) Nato was confident that Putin was falling, falling, falling, he had fallen, that the Russians were crying out for return to the 1990s.
As the war drags on, the losing side still maintains considerable ability to do harm. Which capability rapidly diminishes. So the longer it waits to cut a deal reflecting the realities that have been revealed, the worse that deal will be.
The deal that will settle the war must necessarily be vastly worse for West and for the Ukraine, and vastly better for Russia, than the deal that Russia offered in 2022. And as time goes by the deal that Russia offers the Ukraine and the West is going to rapidly get worse still.
This is how wars always end. The initial offers of both sides are based on uncertainty about will and capability. The uncertainty being resolved, the side with superior will and capability will now insist on terms dramatically more severe than their initial offer. And if those terms are not conceded, will accomplish them by fire and steel.
Russia went to war incorrectly thinking it could impose its desired outcome quickly and at low cost by war of maneuver. It found it could not. At that point the west could have cut a deal vastly more favourable than Russia’s 2022 offer, but it was eyeing the possibility of turning the Black Sea and the Caspian sea into Nato lakes. The west figured it could accomplish its desired outcome quickly and at low cost by war of maneuver — this was the plan of The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive, to capture Crimea for Nato. Russia, having found its attempt at war of maneuver had failed, figured they could prevent Nato war of maneuver. This proved correct. Also Nato weapons proved at best equal to Russian weapons and often inferior.
At this point, three or four days into The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive, capability was revealed. Now both sides knew the other side’s capability. Will had already been revealed in the Bakhmut offensive.
Continuing the war past four days into The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive is just going to result in the war finally being settled with terms that will get worse for the West and for the Ukraine every day.
And any peace settlement that Russia would have accepted after the fourth day of the Greatest Ukrainian counter offensive would have been vastly worse of the West, and vastly better for Russia, than the 2022 offer. It is pointless to try to bargain the Russians down from an offer that they already made. They expect western offers to improve, and as the Ukrainian army diminishes, their offers will worsen.
Initial offers always reflect uncertainty. The uncertainty being resolved, the deal that ends the war must necessarily be very different.
Only if both sides behave rationally and each side thinks that the other side is agreement capable. Russian officials have said that the West in not agreement capable and it doesn’t look like globohomo behaves rationally.
With some people it is impossible to cut a deal. As long as demon worshipers are in power, a deal that settles anything seems unlikely.
>jew cannot grasp what manufacturing is or how physical goods come to be and thinks its “smart people” (jews) priesting and throwing money around
Yes yes. You have figured it all out Eli. It’s all about priesting. You need those oh so clever priests to tell those stupid goy engineers what to actually invent.
Never mind any of those yucky physical machines or tacit knowledge of production. Do not mind those filthy Chinese peasants that absorbed all the knowledge from those clever Apple “knowledge workers”, they wouldn’t know what to do with such information, being derelict peasants and all that. Of course Huawei is failing failing failing, they don’t have nearly enough clevel organization men about.
Israel is clearly very full of clever knowledge workers, is it not? Let me ask again how much that helped in your little tryst with Iran.
While your priest citicosm of us is valid, its also too black and white
Priests serve a legitimate purpose. As long as they stay in the confines of the temple, all good. When they try to take the throne, like the Maccabies did, its a catastrophie.
Information tech works. We are communicating on information tech at this moment. To say we dont need information tech is idolatrous worship of nature spirits.
To say information tech is everything is a priest putting on the crown. Priests are forbidden by God Almighty from putting on the crown.
I have been in Israel the entire time, and the Iranians very clearly did not win on any level. If anything the IRGC came across as bitches
It would be easy for either of us to say the other takes a different position because of bias. Let me offer an alternative view
During the Yom Kippur was, Ariel Sharon had managed to carve out a corridor through the Egyptian forces and had spread out behind them cutting off their supply lines. In effect he had them surrounded.
But the high command didnt see it that way. From their perspective, it was Ariels forces that were surrounded and according to his testimony their were frantic near hysterical calls for him yo retreat.
He said that all he asked for was just one of the high command to take a helicopter to the front and see for themselves what is going on. Their maps simply could not give them the whole picture. And as we know, he was correct.
Take a flight to Israel, spend a week in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. See for yourself.
Fidelis basically agrees with Netanyahu: we had no choice but to significantly degrade Iran’s missile production and launching capabilities to prevent this threat from going strategic. (Same might apply to some other hostile countries, by the way.) What he fails to see is that we have just demonstrated our willingness — and, so it seems, our capability — to do precisely that.
@Fidelis: you really are dumb, aren’t you. I am an engineer myself, and I don’t have the bandwidth for this fundamentalist Moronism.
If it is not obvious to anyone reading this that the American made and very much Israeli modified F-35 Adirs are truly magnificent creations of American and Jewish engineers, then there is no hope for you. And if the fact that Israeli Arrow missiles are being bought by Aryan ex-Nazis in Allemand is just “priesting” to you… Bash your head against the rocks, until something useful, like bird feed, might start coming out.
No one wants the F35 except the US twists their arms. Is the Ukraine crying out for F35s? No, because it actually intends to use its planes.
Eli, all your arguments are the same argument: It is totally inevitable that Russia will be defeated eventually, so they should cut out this silly nonsense right now and immediately accept something similar to the 2014-2022 status quo.
But obviously when they started the special military operation, the Russians figured they might be able to change the status quo, and after the first few days of The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive, it became obvious that indeed they could.
So they will. Regardless of what American and Europe have to say about it. The end.
Well not, quite the end, the question that yet remains to be settled is whether the status quo is going to be changed by America accepting a multi polar world, or by most of the people along the borders of empire dying. But apart from that question, the matter was settled three to five days into The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive, when it became obvious that if both sides stubbornly persist to the end, then at the end Russia is still a great power and there are no more Ukrainians.
You are also arguing that Globohomo is not that bad, and Russia not that good, so they would be better off accepting Globohomo domination rather than paying the huge costs of exterminating the Ukrainians, and probably the Poles and Lithuanians also. How bad is a little itsy bitsy Anal Sex Parade? Well, perhaps the Russians would be better off. But Globohomo will also be better off if people do not come to believe that if you are an ally or proxy of the US, you are expendable and going to be expended. Russia’s power will be diminished by the enormous costs of eradicating the problem peoples along its borders, but America’s power will be diminished by the enormous costs of being an American ally or proxy. When the lips are gone, the teeth will feel cold.
Perhaps that is a good outcome, a world with many great powers in which the greatest powers are considerably less great. A less than satisfactory outcome for Ukrainians though.
>Eli, all your arguments are the same argument: It is totally inevitable that Russia will be defeated eventually, so they should cut out this silly nonsense right now and immediately accept something similar to the 2014-2022 status quo.
Jim, this is reminding me of the famous Cathy Newman vs Jordan Peterson interview. She kept trying to put words into his mouth, “summarizing” his position by “so you’re saying…” and then going on stating utter shite and looneydom.
To summarize: this is not what I said, and I don’t really wish nor have time to repeat myself. I said that Russia can win militarily, but it will take at least another 2-4 years and will be a Pyrrhic victory, economically and vis-a-vis human capital, both in bad shape and hard to restore (particularly, given the low fertility). And, taking this further, there is a high chance of: even if there was never a Ukrainian people before, after this war is over, a Ukrainian people will be born and defined. Which is exactly counter to what Putin wanted at the outset. Fighting gay and Nazi propaganda on your own territory (which has been a done deal for years now) is an orthogonal issue to making a bloody mess with millions of dead and wounded.
I may be wrong, only time will tell. I’m disinterested in reading further nutjobbery.
Russia winning militarily in a war of attrition means that everyone else dies. Everyone in the Ukraine dies, and probably everyone in Poland and Lithuania, and this terrifying outcome destroys Western power and accomplishes the Russian goal of a multipolar world, because no one will ever want to be a Western ally or proxy ever again. It also gives Russia a buffer state, or rather a buffer desolate wilderness, on its border, which should discourage other states on its border from anti Russian activity, and stiffen the spines of people everywhere against color revolution. Filipinos are already complaining that the Philippines is going to fed into the meat grinder against China, as the Ukrainians are being fed into the meat grinder against Russia. That if Ukrainians are expendable, so are they.
If you have muppet states you can expend, that is good. If you actually have to expend them, and then they are gone, that is really bad.
So, at the end of a war of attrition, Russia is diminished, but the West is diminished far more terribly. If the west was rational, rather than run by frothing at the mouth lunatics, it would agree to a peace that reflects the end point of war attrition, only with everyone still alive and stuff not blown up. Which is what Germany did at the end of World War I.
The Russian demand in 2022, like the Austrian demand that started World War I, was for the end of low level war. Low level war leads to high level war. The western demand is for a return to low level war, a (not quite) frozen conflict, which low level war Russia was and is losing. So as long as the west continues low level war that it is winning, Russia will continue the high level war that it is winning. And as the end point of that high level war approaches, the Western bargaining chips are rapidly getting fewer and fewer.
Engineers that abstractly build things in CAD and never test their designs always fail.
Countries that outsource manufacturing find the cycle of design, test, redesign gets longer and longer, and their designs more and more brittle.
Apple is now losing to Huawei in categories it used to be proud of, like thinnest smartphone.
You cannot just live in abstract land and expect the peons to build your widget from blueprint, and have it all work out. This is what I was pointing out, and this is the flaw in your case for
We are not in a post industrial world. We are in a world where the West de-industrialized and East Asia and particularly China handles all the manufacturing. This has led to a breakdown in the ability for western companies to keep their lead.
As Putin pointed out, the entire west has been largely demilitarised. Most of the West’s stuff either wore out or got blown up. And most of the Ukraine Nazis signed up with Ukrainian military expecting an easy life as retreat blockers at considerably higher pay than regular soldiers. And at first they did have an easy life as retreat blockers, but though they were never sent to the front, the front came to them, and now nearly all of them are dead. So the Ukraine has been largely denazified.
Not if they are all dead. The problem is that the artificial identity, religion, and language that they have been manufacturing is inherently incorrigibly anti Russian by design, and Russia cannot afford the existence of this artificial identity on its borders. It is going to go, and if it cannot be removed by agreement, the Russians will remove it in another way.
Modestly more patience then Fidelis.
“Partition of the Ukraine might well take place, but it no longer seems like it will be on exactly the terms that Russia was seeking at the start of the campaign. ”
Russian terms at the start of the campaign was Crimea with some degree of internal autonomy for the separatist regions. Russian demands have increased since.
“Sure, the Ukraine is losing, but it can be losing this way for a very long time.”
Ukraine is losing more men then it recruits each month. It had a large reserve of manpower at the start of the war, now it is running increasingly on fumes. The cannibalization of specialized troops, the reduction of training time and reduction of exemptions all point the same direction.
“At this stage, the best strategy for both sides — imo — is to accept a detente.”
That is a Russian defeat and will not be accepted by the Kremlin or the Russian population- Putin would fall out a window before that happened.
“(Not that I care much personally, as they’re both Jew-haters.)”
They do both consider Judaism a false religion. Of course, the Ukrainian one considers the people who attempted to exterminate the entire Jewish population of Ukraine heroes and the Russian one doesn’t. But genocide is such a minor difference and Jews are such a gentle and forgiving people who have a live and let live policy towards people who rounded up their kin, machine gunned them down and dumped them in mass graves.
“But I don’t see how Ukraine can give up such a basic demand and accept a sustainable peace treaty merely based on Russian signature alone.”
Sometimes people lose wars and take conditions they don’t like.
“So, it’s time for realpolitik and diplomacy, with external pressure. Trump has been trying to do this for the last 6 months, applying both carrot and — now — moving toward stick, but it looks like the populaces of both countries do not wish to give up on their respective objectives. ”
The US is the main backer of Ukraine. There is no external pressure the US can apply to get ‘peace’, because if it had the power, it would have already used it to win. The US already put in place a vast array of sanctions to bring down the Russian government; they failed. They weren’t painless (there are still things Russian can’t replace they will cause problems down the line), but winning is more important.
“The government has decided to give special perks to veterans’ children by reserving spots in prestigious academic programs (including even MIPT, apparently) and reducing, if not altogether waiving entrance requirements. That is an example of desperation. ”
It is an example of Putin attempting to build a new elite of military veterans.
“If one is afraid of the 90s returning, well, if this continues for another 3-4 years — particularly if Trump comes through on his threats of additional measures — the return of conditions reminiscent of the 90s is not out of the question.”
The only threat Trump has left is sanctioning Russia’s trading partners. Trump can’t do that because the important partner is China and
1) Sanctioning China will destroy the American economy
2) China knows they are next after Russia so there is no circumstance where they stab Russia in the back.
>They do both consider Judaism a false religion. Of course, the Ukrainian one considers the people who attempted to exterminate the entire Jewish population of Ukraine heroes and the Russian one doesn’t. But genocide is such a minor difference and Jews are such a gentle and forgiving people who have a live and let live policy towards people who rounded up their kin, machine gunned them down and dumped them in mass graves.
As a default position, I’m against Ukraine. Precisely for this reason.
Having noted that, Russian aristocrats and most czars of Romanov dynasty (particularly, Alexander III and the last feebleminded scumbag, Nikolai II) were directly sponsoring (and even openly supporting, like Nikolaii II) suppressing, intimidating and massacring Jews, via the Black Hundreds. On one side, I’m a direct descendant of a man who, together with another such influential man, sent thousands of rubles to a Saint Petersburg bureaucrat, to call off an upcoming pogrom of Minsk, in the early 20th century. And on another side, I’m a direct descendant of a cantonist. I’ve heard stories of my then almost 99-year-old Jewish grandmother about her aunt losing an eye and being nearly killed by Denikin’s troops, in Ukraine. So, no love for czarist Russia, though I’m part ethnically Russian myself, with deep roots in Yaroslavl region. I’m fairly certain, given their backgrounds, my Russian ancestors had — most likely — fairly pro-royalist outlook, standard for most Russians all the way to earliest 20th century.
The commies were marginally less bad. Particularly, under Stalin. My grandparents barely averted being sent to Birobidzhan, which would’ve surely killed my then-newborn father. After Lenin, the state became anti-Jewish and, shortly after supporting its founding, anti-Israel. Being pro-Arab was their hope of spreading the Revolution further. (The commies hoped to be pro-Iran, too; hence supported the Iranian Revolution, but the ayatollah, shortly after coming to power, killed off all the turban-communists, which gave the Soviet Union the right idea to go pound sand. Communizing Turkey turned out to be a fiasco, too, even though the Soviets tried as late as the 70s, to capitalize on the Cyprus related Turkey-NATO tensions.)
The aged, “modern” apparatchiks in Russia are more or less inheritors of same pro-Arab/anti-Israel worldview. Especially, in the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, including Lavrov himself (who is part Armenian, so it’s only natural for his kind). Majority of contemporary young Russians are ambivalent towards Jews and Israel, which is an expected situation, given that very little Jewry has remained in Russia.
Until October 2023, I thought of Putin, the person, as neutral and even mildly philosemitic. I no longer hold that view, after some of the statements I’ve heard from him. And I’d given him a sizeable chunk of good faith interpretation. I’m just hoping he won’t be inflamed any further. I don’t think it’s in his interest to say or do stupid things, but he’s been acting carelessly lately, including with the Azeris.
Hence, it’s not that I’m rooting for Russia-the-wannabe-Soviet-empire. I just dislike Ukraine, the pro-gay and pro-Nazi propaganda, and have interest in ordinary Russian people not being needlessly killed in ongoing bloodbath. And, yes, I do feel that there are plenty of innocent people on the Ukrainian side, too, who are not descendants of Jew killers and don’t hold pro-Nazi, pro-Khmelnitsky, pro-Bandera, pro-Petliura etc sympathies. So, I’m no fan of stretching the war for longer, and support current Trump’s attempts at ending it.
Back to war’s progress, even assuming future capture of more territory (including Chasov Yar, Konstantinovka, Pokrovsk, and even Slavyansk and Kramatorsk) I doubt that in 3 years Putin will reach the kind of conclusive strategic victory he sought to gain at the outset, in 2022. And in 3 years’ time, Russia’s economy will be in considerably worse shape, given the evident stagflation. Only China’s backstopping is preventing a true crisis.
We’ve seen that even Crimea (i.e. Sevastopol) turned out to be less of an asset militarily than what it was thought of pre-2022. Drones, naval and air, have completely upended the entire calculus and importance of many things. Russian surface naval fleet has been withdrawn as far as possible and is out of action.
And as to exit to the Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic? Given the Montreux Convention, Russia’s exit to the Mediterranean via Black Sea is blocked regardless. Furthermore, Turkey is exacerbating this, by building a new maritime canal, right next to IST airport, which — it insinuates — might be outside of the Convention altogether, a stance which favors NATO and not Russia. And, lest we forget, both Sweden and Finland are now in NATO. So, the only non-blockable sea exit Russia has is via the Arctic.
In my book, unless Russia can quickly force Ukraine’s surrender, Putin largely miscalculated, and the country has lost more than it gained economically and geopolitically, since start of 2022. Putting so much into the hands of China might backfire longer term. But this will be clearer in only a decade or even longer. Trump offered good conditions to Russia; it’s a good idea to accept them.
>It is an example of Putin attempting to build a new elite of military veterans.
BS. No, this is just desperation and PR, clearcut. Putting low-IQ people without exams into actual elite engineering schools (as few of them as Russia has now, excluding whatever PR that’s on books) is… DUMB. And no, Putin does not want an overly strong military elite. His power base are the shadow apparatchiks and experts of FSB, GRU etc and the goons of the MVD (interior ministry), supported regionally or when needed by Kadyrov and his goons.
I fucked an Armenian girl once. Not bad, all things considered.
You seem to dislike them; why so?
Don’t American girls in general have a terrible reputation around the world. American men and with enough time to spare to go abroad tend to prefer foreign women. Even Western euro women are generally considered superior.
Armenian.
Never had an American and I’m perfectly fine with that.
I believe Eli rather dislikes the Armenians, and I’d like to know why.
@Mossadnik In the Middle Ages, the Armenians were referred to as “Amalek” (per Jewish Encyclopedia). This is the only people who have very little trace of Jewish diaspora among them. Contrast this against Azeris, Georgians, Dagestanis, Ossetians, and even, apparently, Chechens. Go ahead, try to find any trace of Jews in Armenian domains dating to after mid-14th century. And even previous to that, there is very scant, puny evidence of Jewish settlement. Also, according to Pew Research poll a decade or so ago, Armenia is the most antisemitic country in Europe.
Also, anecdotally, it’s been noticed by some (and I have some past Armenian acquaintances who jocularly admitted to same) that Armenians often engage in outright fraud. What’s more, they like to hide behind non-Armenian and even Jewish names while doing so. Martirosian becomes “Martiroso.” “Avagyan” becomes “Avagi.” Or they’ll create a business name like “Goldberg Properties” under moniker of which they’ll do all kinds of petty things and squeeze / blackmail their business tenants.
I suspect, Armenians have envied Jewish success but could never achieve it.
Nonetheless, Soviet Union had given them, along with Georgians, preferential treatment. Contrast this with Jews being specifically prevented from advancements, including in academia and top political echelon, starting with Stalin.
That having been said, keep fucking them, if it feels right.
Dagestanis refer to Armenians as “Gypsies of the Caucuses”
Thanks for the answer. Calls to mind this anecdote by George Orwell from “Down and Out in Paris and London”,
Heh.
You are out of touch with reality. Chasov Yar was captured some time ago, not that that matters much. Again, I point out in World War I the Germans surrendered when they were still holding Belgium and a large part of France. The war of attrition was lost in France. Do you think the Allies should have given them terms that reflected what they were holding? No, the terms reflected the state of the German army.
By the time the Russians have captured Pokrovsk, the only terms the Russians are likely to offer are “give up your heavy weapons, dismiss your government and install a government that we might feel like talking to, and then we will tell that government how much territory they can keep.”
Because Russian offers reflect the reality of attrition — the reality that the Ukrainian army is evaporating. By the time Pokrovsk falls, it will likely fall for lack of men to defend it.
By the fifth day of The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive, Putin had won it all, and since then the west has been desperately stalling recognition of the new reality, and the longer it stalls, the higher the price it will pay in the end. Because in the first few days of The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive the West’s theory of victory went up in flames. Since then we have been in the “deny reality until we win” phase.
If the West continues to deny reality, Russia will continue the war till reality knocks on the door.
Repeating. War is a test of will and capability. Will was revealed in Bakhmut, capability in The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive. Continuing the war once the test results are in is insane. The rational decision is to cut a deal reflecting the test results — which deal is always going to be vastly more radical than offer and counter offer that preceded the war, because the the prewar offer and counter offer reflected the uncertainty about will and capability that has now been resolved at enormous cost.
Western theory of victory after the first few days of the Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive: Deny reality until it goes away.
Russian theory of victory since the retreat across the Dneiper: Kill everyone and destroy everything till we get what we want, or until we run out of Ukrainians who are disinclined to identify as Russians, whichever comes first.
Chasov Yar was captured sufficiently to secure Bakhmut’s frontyard. It has not been captured sufficiently to make it a base of operations into Slavyansk and Kramatorsk. The next month or two or three will likely change this reality in favor of the Russian forces.
You got your point across, but I don’t agree that these kinds of sacrifices are worth the Pyrrhic victory. In terms of feminism etc, other than some backwater — mainly Muslim, non-ethnically Russian regions, Russia is just somewhat less socially pozzed than the US. And this war will not resolve that issue. Unless, of course, you’re the kind of accelerationist who believes that a Muslim Russia will be a better Russia (an argument which does have some merit, admittedly).
The only reason this continues is that the current elite believes that it must or else they’ll pay a price of their hold on power. Trump, with all his faults and latest weirdness, is saner, and tries to give them a decent exit out of this bloody horrible mess.
Victory means a multipolar world, and the end of Globohomo’s aspirations to total world empire. That is worth any price. A frozen conflict, which is what Trump is offering, is continuation of Globohomo’s program of World Empire, slow motion reconquest of Russia.
The often stated Globohomo strategy was to bring Russia to heel, so that they could hold the threat over China of cutting off access to resources by both land and sea. Because of high population, China is vitally dependent on external resources. The Ukraine coup was always intended to create a battering ram against Russia, and the Ukrainian coup was an important step in this process.
A frozen conflict is not a decent end. Globohomo loves its frozen conflicts, because it gives them leverage over both parties to the conflict. When Globohomo frowns upon one party or the other, it turns into low level war with sporadic outbreaks of inconclusive higher level war. The whole point of the Special Military Operation was to end a permanent low level war — which had to be ended by capitulation or escalation, because Globohomo was low level shelling civilians, which would have eventually resulted in everyone leaving the disputed areas. So it was escalate, or lose.
A refrozen conflict means Russia gets lands subject to sporadic shelling of civilian targets, which means it does not actually get to keep those lands. Russia has to establish the principle that they will not put up with shelling. A refrozen conflict means that Globohomo gets to continue limited low level shelling with no consequences.
Further, a refrozen conflict is simply a ridiculously bad deal, given what was revealed in the first few days of the of The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive.
Once you know what will happen if both sides are stubborn to the end, which became obvious in the first few days of The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive, you cut a deal that reflects that outcome, only with everyone still alive, and stuff not blown up. Russia’s offer is remarkably generous. Trump’s offer is absurdly unreal, because Trump’s offer fails to reflect what will happen if both parties stick to their guns to the end.
War is a test of will and capability. Once will and capability is revealed, a sane man will settle on the basis of will happen if both sides continue to the end. Will was revealed at Bakhmut. Capability in the first few days of the Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive. Everything after that is just the west acting like a raving lunatic, and there is just no way you can make peace with a raving lunatic, “not agreement capable”, so no alternative for Russia but to continue to the end.
You are arguing that it is irrational to continue to the end, because any peace is cheaper than war. Well, is that not irrational for the west also? It has been disarmed, and Russia has not. And a frozen conflict that you will inevitably lose is enormously more expensive than any war you will inevitably win. You cannot freeze a conflict with a raving lunatic, because his idea of “frozen” is “we will not shell your civilians too hard, just hard enough that you lose slowly, rather than losing fast.”
First, I don’t buy into the premise of Zelensky being a marionette of the West. He’s an independent actor (literally and metaphorically), though he absolutely must rely on the West for support (which, more or less, has been given).
Second, as polling has shown, popular support for sovereignty and defensive war is very high among the Ukrainians (above half, certainly).
Third, the Ukrainians have shown high will and sufficient capability. Within the context of “Russians and Ukrainians are a single people” and “it’s us (Russians) vs the decadent West,” the Ukros have shown that it is very much their war, too, and that they, largely, don’t want to be Russian. And us much as I rooted for Russia’s win at the outset and for the first 3 years, until April-May 2025, I cannot but recognize that the combination of strong opposing will, sacrifice on both sides, and modern realities of drone warfare has upended a lot of the original assumptions and hopes.
If Russians and Ukrainians are indeed a single people, then said “one people” is committing a suicide. And if not, then admitting that the costs are outweighing the gain is the rational thing to do.
No, future low-level warfare is not worth continuing the war effort. Any low-level warfare will have to shift way past the previous borders of pre-2022 — towards west — and it is possible to make sure that buffer zones will exist to protect even the current territorial gains. Donetsk, the city, will be at least as safe as it already is. Water to Crimea and its Russianness can be provided for as well. And, if it needs to come to it, Russia can always put more dent on Ukraine than Ukraine can on Russia, if any of the points are broken or reneged on.
Precedent exists: the two Koreas hate each other’s guts, but it has been more or less calm on the border.
In summary, if they cannot stop the war by the upcoming or, at the very least, next year’s first rasputitsa, then this “raving lunatics” term will be what will define the current Russian elite.
The Ukraine has been a brutal terror state since 2014 — just listen to people’s stories of torture and and disappearance. Thus no poll result is believable.
Someone who can, or represents those who can, torture you or murder you capriciously, has probably tortured, murdered, or disappeared someone you know, or someone that you know knows, asks “Do you support total war till everyone dies?” What are you going to answer?
Nuts. Will was revealed in Bakhmut, capability in first few days of The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive.
Which revealed that if both sides stick it out to the bitter end, Russia remains a great power and everyone in the Ukraine dies.
Should have been settled on day five of The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive with Globohomo capitulating to all important Russian demands. Continuing the war beyond day five was madness, and revealed the Russians were confronting a lunatic. By the fourth or fifth day of The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive, it had become obvious that if the war should continue to the ultimate bitter end, Russia remains a great power and everyone in the Ukraine dies. So the time to most advantageously settle, and for the West to get the least bad terms, was on that day, and every day that passes, the terms on which the West must ultimately settle get worse and worse.
Forever war works by pressing militarily and politically on multiple fronts — the pressure on each front makes advances possible on another. Military pressure enables political pressure, political pressure enables military pressure. Military pressure on one front enables political or military pressure on another. Color Revolution works because if you repress the ngos, the shelling and bombing is likely to ensue. Look at the big picture. And the big picture is that Globohomo created astroturfed organisations of exiles dedicated to dismantling Russia into bite sized pieces. If Globohomo can shell Russian civilians, and Russia cannot shell, or chooses not to shell, Globohomo civilians, that astroturf is going to get places.
Globohomo wants to bring Russia to heel by creeping advances that do quite not risk nuclear war, but edge as close to exploding into nuclear war as they dare. The Ukraine is just one front of this operation. This is existential for Russia. They have to force Globohomo to stop this stuff.
It is not just that they don’t like anal sex parades. It is that anal sex parades are one small part of an operation intended to subjugate and conquer. If you don’t have an anal sex parade, you will get low level shelling of civilians. If you do have an anal sex parade, you will get color revolution. And if you get color revolution, you get what Libya and the Ukraine got, and the Philippines are about to get. If a state on the boundaries of the empire is color revolutioned, it is apt to be transitioned into a battering ram against states Globohomo hopes to subjugate.
Russia has to defeat the Ukraine to bring all this to an end. This is existential for Russia and Russians. If it ends with all Ukrainians dead, and the West still stubbornly persists, it is going to encounter a great deal more resistance to color revolution. Either outcome, the West agrees to stop it with these frozen conflicts, or the outcome of color revolution is revealed as unthinkably costly, is an existential victory for Russia. If the West will not stop, Russia has no alternative but to kill every Ukrainian who is disinclined to identify as Russian, likely followed by every Pole and every Lithuanian. Russia has that capability and simply has no alternative but to either get the West to agree to stop, or destroy the West’s capability to do this stuff.
If the West is too demented to agree to stop, exhausting the West’s military logistics and eradicating the Ukrainians, and possibly the Poles and Lithuanians, will put a big crowbar in the West’s ability to pull it off.
After the first few days of The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive, the West’s theory of victory was that if they stay in denial long enough, the problem will go away by itself. It is not going to go away by itself.
Trumps peace offer is just wishful thinking. “Lets go back to the frozen conflict.” Russia was losing. Now it has already won.
>He’s an independent actor (literally and metaphorically), though he absolutely must rely on the West for support (which, more or less, has been given).
How can you really be independent if someone else got your balls in a vice grip? This is not a convincing way to start your argument, and consequently I have zero interest in the rest of what you have to say on the matter.
Vladimir Zelenski is not his own man, but history is full of examples of the tail wagging the dog.
When you are a puppet in a proxy conflict, the only leverage you have is to escalate the conflict. So of course that is exactly what he is going to do. If peace breaks out his goose is cooked, so of course he is going to do everything in his power to prevent that.
The win condition for the patsy is to make it impossible for the string-puller to cut you loose and walk away, by dragging them in and getting them personally entangled in the business too. In other words, the abiding pole-star for all his actions is causing an open shooting war between Russia and Washington.
A smarter policy would be to let veterans do Boko Haram on the entire university system. Russia needs mothers far more than it needs female college grads.
‘Russian history’
I wasn’t referring to history. The Ukrainian veteran the Canadian parliament applauded was an SS guy. There is continuity between the people who collaborated with the Nazis and the people who are currently fighting Russia. Modern Ukraine is state whose national mythos is anti-Russian and whose most salient exemplars are people who waged a race war against Poles and Jews. Lumping them with the Eastern Orthodox church as ‘Jew Haters’ is weird. There is a difference between ‘these people burnt down Jewish neighborhoods and beat up Jews’ and ‘these people are the reason there are no Jewish neighborhoods’.
“Until October 2023, I thought of Putin, the person, as neutral and even mildly philosemitic. I no longer hold that view, after some of the statements I’ve heard from him. And I’d given him a sizeable chunk of good faith interpretation. I’m just hoping he won’t be inflamed any further. I don’t think it’s in his interest to say or do stupid things, but he’s been acting carelessly lately, including with the Azeris.”
? Putin benefits from Israel getting into conflicts and sucking in American war material that would have been sent to Ukraine. His optimal strategy is plausible deniability towards Israel while egging Iran on.
“So, I’m no fan of stretching the war for longer, and support current Trump’s attempts at ending it.”
…
“In my book, unless Russia can quickly force Ukraine’s surrender, Putin largely miscalculated, and the country has lost more than it gained economically and geopolitically, since start of 2022. Putting so much into the hands of China might backfire longer term. But this will be clearer in only a decade or even longer. Trump offered good conditions to Russia; it’s a good idea to accept them.”
Russia considers NATO in Ukraine existential. Declaring they are actually “Assistance from European military forces as “a robust security guarantee” following a cease-fire.” isn’t going to fool the Kremlin.
“BS. No, this is just desperation and PR, clearcut. Putting low-IQ people without exams into actual elite engineering schools (as few of them as Russia has now, excluding whatever PR that’s on books) is… DUMB. And no, Putin does not want an overly strong military elite. His power base are the shadow apparatchiks and experts of FSB, GRU etc and the goons of the MVD (interior ministry), supported regionally or when needed by Kadyrov and his goons.”
That is bog standard affirmative action. Russia formed additional military districts that aren’t being deployed in Ukraine, presumably for use in the event of open conflict with NATO. Presumably if round 2 doesn’t kick off immediately, Putin doesn’t want to redo the ‘learn by dying’ phase at the start of the war so having veterans in places of power makes that all go down smoother. Or could be a pointless mistake like pre-WW1 panslavism; social engineering has a long history of not working.
>There is a difference between ‘these people burnt down Jewish neighborhoods and beat up Jews’ and ‘these people are the reason there are no Jewish neighborhoods’.
I will put it in stronger, more direct form for you: these people are the reason there are no Jewish neighborhoods and entire towns *altogether.*
By that I mean the actions of both Catholic and Russian Orthodox churches, in various times and places. I won’t argue who was worse, but I’ll address the latter. These “pogroms” were not just about “burning, looting, and beating up.” They were about straight up massacres. Don’t know how explicit I need to get. Do look up “pogroms in Ukraine between 1917 and 1921.” Hundreds of thousands of dead. Look up the Khmelnitskiy Uprising and pogroms of 17th century. Again, hundreds of thousands of dead, often in most gruesome and torturous fashion — October 7th would be just a shadow of that.
I’m giving you a pass because there are so many people who literally don’t know or obsess solely over WW2’s atrocities. The Khmelnitsky pogroms were such a monumental event that despaired and affected even the core of Judaism itself, by giving rise to Hassidism and weird Sufi-like cults and philosophies.
All of the things I described above were supported and, in fact, very much directly driven by the Russian Orthodox Church, particularly with its doctrine of Replacement Theology and accusations of Jews as “murderers of Christ” etc
Replacement theology is plain biblical doctrine clearly stated in the New Testament, and the Jews are under a hereditary curse collectively and individually, which can only remedied by accepting Christ.
Any Church that hides replacement theology in the basement behind the water heater is heretical and postChristian.
Replacement theology is part of the founding event of Christianity, Peter’s interpretation of the significance of the Crucifixion for Jews and Gentiles. You cannot genuinely celebrate Easter without celebrating replacement.
“I’m giving you a pass because there are so many people who literally don’t know or obsess solely over WW2’s atrocities. ”
I’m aware of both of them. The former general reading about the Russian Civil War, the latter from the 1632 series (1990s fiction; nerdbait and not very good). The death toll has been revised downwards as the population numbers in the 17th century aren’t enough to support 6 digit Jewish death tolls.
If you are complaining about the Orthodox Church, including Stalin only makes sense in claiming continuity of the Russian state. However the pogroms of the Russian civil war take place in the absence of state power/an independent Ukraine/White warlords and the Khmelnytsky Uprising occured when Ukraine was part of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth.
The reason I keep hammering on WW2 in Ukraine is because Ukraine keeps putting Nazi symbology on everything, deployed Neo-Nazi paramilitaries for the ATO and venerates World War 2 collaborators. Nazi is overused due to leftists and edgelords, but Ukraine is working very hard to occupy the ‘murdering innocent people in an unwinnable race war’ part of the definition.
“All of the things I described above were supported and, in fact, very much directly driven by the Russian Orthodox Church, particularly with its doctrine of Replacement Theology and accusations of Jews as “murderers of Christ” etc”
You are confusing your pogroms. You are thinking the pogroms during the first Crusade and the Black Plague.
The pogroms you are talking about where a nationalist revolt against the PLC (with Jews identified as with the PLC) and fighting against the Bolsheviks or bourgeoisie (with Jews identified as with the Bolsheviks or bourgeoisie).
If this continues, the Ukrainian army is not going to continue to exist for three or four years.
If Russian objectives are not achievable politically, they appear, the way the wind blows at present, to be achievable by fire and steel. The Ukraine is not losing territory, but is losing its army. Recall that in World War I, the Germans capitulated while still in possession of much of France and Europe. This is, so far, a World War I style war, and if ended politically, as World War I was, must have a World War I style end. Ukraine surrenders its heavy weapons, removes its existing government, installs a government more agreeable to the victors, and awaits the victor’s decisions on the terms to be dictated. It could easily, however, have a vastly worse ending — somewhat worse for Russia, immensely worse for Ukrainians.
Like Ukraine, Germany in World War I was not losing significant territory. Like Ukraine, losing significant blood and treasure. This is likely to lead to a like political outcome.
That is inherent in escalation. Is escalation never necessary or wise? If you allow someone to go on doing bad things, you wind up accepting ever worse deals. If someone is doing something bad, a shoplifter, a trespasser, you have to do something considerably worse. And that can, and likely will, wind up being extremely costly. But consider the alternative of continuing to allow shoplifting or trespass?
Russia has been announcing one redline after another. Remember Kosovo? And the west has been crossing one redline after another. This was just one more redline.
Obviously whichever red line one backs up by terrible violence will always be a lot more costly than allowing that one redline to be crossed. But the crossings are going to keep on happening. In retrospect, this war should have started over Kosovo.
Kosovo. Muslims reading this will be very interested.
Russia is winning by inflicting enormous costs. The greater the costs Russia inflicts, the greater the credibility when they set a red line, and the costs themselves consist of physically destroying threats to Russia, among them Azov Nazis and western weapons. The exact boundaries do not matter. What matters is that when Russia declares red lines in future, the world listens. The world still refuses to listen, so Russia just has to keep piling up the costs until it does listen, or until its capacity to harm Russia and Russians is destroyed.
The complete disappearance of what little is left of the Ukrainian army is in sight. Why stop now? And if Russia cannot obtain a favourable peace by eradicating the Ukrainian army, why stop then? If the west will not agree to a demilitarised buffer zone around Russia, Russia has demonstrated the capability to demilitarise it with fire and steel.
Obviously political solutions are cheaper and less dangerous than fire and steel, but political solutions take two, while fire and steel only takes one.
“How can A possibly accept X” is what people say before a war starts. When it ends, one side accepts the unacceptable. Which is usually vastly less acceptable than what was originally on offer.
Russia has a long, long list, of things it said it could not possibly accept, and then it accepted them. In retrospect, this turns out to have been a really bad idea.
Obviously, if one side keeps crossing the other side’s red lines, there is going to be war. And if the side that has been crossing the red lines wins, it will go far beyond the red line that finally started the war, and if the other side wins, many red lines whose crossing it previously accepted, it will no longer accept.
That is what happens when a war begins, and this is what happens when a war ends.
Ukraine will suffer full amnesia regarding their previous demands and conditions, *if* they have to declare surrender. This is not what is happening.
I’d like to make this discussion about figures. Concrete figures. The problem is that neither I — nor you — have them. The casualty figures are very much under hot debate.
I like how liberally you define denazification and demilitarization. From the point of view of massaging public opinion and peace negotiation, it’s cool to say that those have been achieved. I’d go along with that half-BS, if it helps with peace.
In that case, it’s even more of an argument in favor of peace. What, then, is the remaining stumbling block(s)? As I see it, the Ukros want “international guarantees.” Russia absolutely does not. Another thing, there’s still talk about returning Crimea, including messing with water supply. Russia wants to put Crimea’s status as Russian as condition of any sustainable peace. And same for the territories it already has captured. Yet, other than Lugansk, the other 3 oblasts have not been fully captured.
With all that, whatever the numbers are, I’m fairly convinced that the Ukros have enough manpower and ongoing materiel supply to keep them operating and retreating for another 3 years, even if the pace accelerates somewhat. I’m convinced that they can throw another half a million men into this. Russia will have to keep up, and I’m sure they will.
Nah, no one, no one, absolutely no one, is debating the casualty figures. It is just shills creating meaningless noise to drown out the reality they do not want.
If you actually want to know the evidence on casualties — and I doubt that you do — read Simplicius.
Obviously the people going to the front know roughly what the casualties are, since their friends are at the front. Absolutely no one is volunteering in the Ukraine, and quite extraordinary coercion is applied to grab men of the streets, force them to the front, and keep them at the front, while the Russian army relies on volunteers. So we can confidently dismiss the war shill stories without bothering to listen to them.
But Simplicius has gone to the trouble of listening to them, and gives us the analysis you are asking for, but will refuse to hear.
Casualties only matter as they reflect will and as they affect will (unless, like the Ukraine, you face the complete extermination of your cannon fodder) And Russian will is obvious in their volunteer recruitment numbers. So I bothered to read Simplicius’s analysis only as a sanity check against self delusion. If you are still talking this nonsense after the fourth day of the Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive, you are not going to dare look at or comprehend anything that might endanger your self delusion. On the dawn of the fifth day of the Greatest Ukrainian counter offensive, it was time to ask the Russians for their offer, and time to accept an offer that would have been far less favourable than the 2022 offer, but far more favourable than the 2025 offer.
You are being silly. That offer reflected the Ukrainian army at the time, and the Russian army at the time. That was then, this is now. The Russian army is now bigger, the Ukrainian army now smaller, therefore that offer is no longer on the table. The number of oblasts the Russians demand does not reflect the amount of territory they control, but how many boots the Ukrainians have left. The next offer the Russians make is going to reflect the reality of the time when they make it, so it is likely to be those four oblasts, plus the Black Sea Coast.
The change in reality is not measured by the very tiny territory taken by attrition, but by the number of Ukrainian troops that used to be in that territory, but are now dead, surrendered, or deserted, by the shrinkage of the Ukrainian army. That is what war of attrition is.
And as Ukrainians continue to die, the Russian offers will become less and less generous to the Ukraine and to the West. The Russian offers reflect the reality reported by Simplicius.
Given that reality, what the West should have done when the Russians made that offer is ceded the provinces in full with full international recognition, the Ukrainian army should have ceded its heavy weapons to the Russians, the Ukrainian government should have resigned and a new denazified government Ukrainian government, acceptable to the Russians, installed.
But that offer is no longer on the table. Next offer, those provinces plus the Black Sea coast. By the time the Russians have captured all four provinces the offer is going to be what the Germans got in World War I: “Lay down your arms, and we will decide how much territory you retain and what constitutes an acceptable government for you.”
russian army is not bigger, its actually smaller… [*deleted*]
I would be happy to debate this with someone who can pass the shill test described in the moderation policy, but no point in wasting time talking with the stubbornly demented.
Take the shill test, get white listed, and then we can discuss it.
Very likely they can. And very likely they will. However, they have already thrown well over a million men into this, and somehow have only about three or four hundred thousand of those they threw in left.
Ukrainian conscription is now running at forty thousand a month and yet their army continues to shrink. They will be through your half a million in one year. If they do not accelerate conscription even further, and if they last another year.
“In that case, it’s even more of an argument in favor of peace. What, then, is the remaining stumbling block(s)? As I see it, the Ukros want “international guarantees.” Russia absolutely does not.”
That means openly placing NATO troops in Ukraine. This is NATO thinking if they just wordcel hard enough they can turn things into a win. Say what you will about belief in high tech firepower to achieve victory that NATO believed at the start of the war, at least it was a theory of victory- now they are in the ‘deny reality until we win’ phase. Meanwhile the Russians just keep punching Ukraine until the ability to resist is broken.
And the Germans in World War I were still fighting in France when they surrendered. You think they should not have surrendered till what few was left of them was fighting in the ruins of Berlin?
Do you think the allies should have made an offer that gave Germany France and Belgium?
The writing is on the wall. By the time the Russians have fully captured those four provinces, their offer is going to be as severe as the armistice that ended World War I. And Trump is going to be blamed for it.
This is how wars of attrition end. The loser gives up vast amounts of territory that he was in possession of when he makes the deal. Or he refuses to make a deal, and winds up like Hitler in his bunker.
Laying out your implication clearly so that no one misses it:
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle
Our enemies do not know themselves, for they do not want to know that they are evil people motivated by envy, spite and malice. (Notice the life advice handed out by childless female leftist influencers to women, intended to make every woman as miserable and dysfunctional as they themselves are) And neither do they know Putin or Russia. So, as predicted, they are losing this war.
And neither do they know us, so they will lose the coming war.
This is the big white pill. That when the stuff gets real, when the conflict comes, we will win.
I have been predicting a truly cataclysmic final reckoning, with absolutely terrible costs. But the way things are shaping up, I may well be wrong. The final battle may well go down smoothly. I also have long predicted the final battle in 2026. As 2026 approaches, I am naturally a little nervous, but escalation is on track. The Democrats are rapidly becoming more radical and more violent. At some point, they are just going to have to be crushed.
Hit 17 pullups at 101 kg.
Used cable and DB single arm pullover to train it.
It’s my favorite movement tbh
Good on you, stay strong
>If the West will not stop, Russia has no alternative but to kill every Ukrainian who is disinclined to identify as Russian, likely followed by every Pole and every Lithuanian. Russia has that capability and simply has no alternative but to either get the West to agree to stop, or destroy the West’s capability to do this stuff.
Sorry, you truly lost me here.
Dauguma lietuvių moka rusų kalbą.
Dauguma čečėnų moka rusų kalbą.
Duqaxbolçu litovxoşna örsiyn mott xäa.
Duqaxbolçu noxçaşna örsiyn mott xäa.
Most people ignore language.
So?
Daar zul je nog wel achter komen.
I speak Russian and, while never denying a Russian connection, including some roots, disincline to identify as a Russian. As do many ex-Soviet and ex-Russian Jews. And we will continue doing so, Haagen Dazs.
If neither side concedes, if both sides are stubborn to the end, What, Eli, is the end point of war of attrition?
It is not a draw. It is death.
The west is trying to destroy Russia in a slow creeping way that will not trigger nuclear war. Russians don’t like that, and intend to stop it. The most offensive creep was the low level shelling of civilians in Donetsk. So they launched high level war on the Ukraine front, while the west continued its slow creep, quite successfully, on other fronts.
In Bakhmut, it became obvious that both sides were stuck in a war of attrition, and the Ukraine was losing the war of attrition rather badly, due to the greater Russian resources, population, and will. Russians are volunteers, who want to fight. Ukrainians are dragged off the streets, don’t want to fight, so they don’t. America had the same problem with conscripts in the Vietnam war. Lack of will was evident in Vietnam, and it was evident in Bakhmut.
The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive was an effort, like the 1918 German Spring offensive, to break out of war of attrition into war of movement, by employing the wonderful superiority of Nato weapons and tactics. By day three or five, it became glaringly obvious that Nato weapons were at best equal and often inferior to Russian weapons, and Nato tactics were worthless, because Nato had not fought a peer war in a very long time. Obvious that the Ukraine was, like the Germans in the spring offensive, still stuck in war of attrition. Also obvious that the Ukraine, the country with a considerably smaller population, was, unsurprisingly, losing men far faster than the country with the larger population.
To win a war of attrition, the West would have to apply Ukrainian style total mass conscription to its core populations, because the Russian will is there, and the Western will is not there, which total mass conscription the West is reluctant to do, hence the jokes about expending cheap soldiers but not expensive soldiers. Not going to win the war of attrition with the limited population of the expendable front line states, reluctant to expend the population of the core states. The end point of losing a war of attrition fought with the limited population of the expendable front line states is that the cities of those states are levelled, most of the population dies and nearly all the adult men die. Which solves Russia’s problem (if Russia cannot have buffer states, it can have a desert wilderness) and leaves the West with a very big problem.
If they succeed in portraying Putin as a Crusader Islamophobe, they COULD mobilize the fighting age men of the West.
Good article about one sector of the total bullshit going on in the UK
https://modernity.news/2025/08/02/uk-govt-disinfo-unit-shifts-from-lockdown-dissenters-to-spying-on-mass-migration-critics
Allowing this through, but you are in violation of the moderation policy.
If you continue to be in violation of the moderation policy, future comments are likely to be silently deleted or unkindly edited.
Here’s another good article outlining the complete shitfuckery the GloboHomo UK Pols are wagering against its White Population
https://modernity.news/2025/08/03/government-censorship-of-the-internet-is-worse-than-ever-in-the-uk
If you, PigStarmer, continue to fail to conform to the moderation policy, you are going onto the blacklist, and I will not see any more of your comments.