If ever there was any doubt in your mind that our so-called “institutes for higher learning” produce nothing of the sort, we give you this article by an Ivy League “genius” with enough credentials behind his name that you have to hit PageDown to get to his actual writing.
Before we start, though, let us reiterate what we’ve said before, lest we get dismissed as a “Putin Shill”, which seems to be the favorite way of making an excuse for actually listening to a different viewpoint: This war is an unmitigated disaster, it’s a tragedy of horrible proportions and, what makes it even WORSE is that it could have easily been avoided. Our heart bleeds for the utterly innocent civilians caught in the hell of this who never had a real voice, no matter WHICH side they’re on. Nobody deserves what Ukraine, Europe and Russia are going through right now, and what’s INFURIATING is that it could all have been easily avoided, with no cost to anybody (except the warmongers and the military industrial complex, but they can all die in a WP fire, as far as we’re concerned. It would not be a loss at all. It would, in fact, be entertaining).
But back to the “let’s fight to the last Ukrainian infant” moron:
He starts off displaying his utter ignorance of basic strategy as it’s been taught for centuries thusly:
Ukraine has notched another big victory in its war against Russian aggression: the liberation of the Kherson without a grueling urban battle.
Mainly because the Russians had evacuated the city when the Ukrainians finally arrived after having failed, time and time again, to even get closer to it. Thousands of losses with gains that would have made even Douglas Haig of WWI fame embarrassed. It’s not all that hard to liberate something when the enemy is no longer there.
Yet that triumph was met with mixed messages from US President Joe Biden’s administration on a very sensitive subject: whether the Ukrainians should begin peace negotiations with Russia.
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, argued that the Kyiv government should seek a settlement before the conflict becomes a stalemate like World War I.
Indicating that the poodle Milley Vanilley finally remembered something from his lectures that prompted him to go off-script.
Other US officials pushed back, saying that Washington would never force Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to negotiate or make concessions. “Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine,” Biden pledged.
And, having been whacked over the snout with a rolled-up newspaper, the poodle has been on script ever since. Good doggie!
It was a rare display of rhetorical messiness by a relatively disciplined administration,
We’ll pause to allow you to clean your screens and keyboards off. Relatively? To whom?
which reflects real uncertainty about four critical questions — not least of which is whether a long war strengthens or weakens the US.
For months, Russian forces had been exposed in Kherson, with 20,000 troops holding a vulnerable beachhead on the right bank of the Dnipro River, near where it flows into the Black Sea. The Ukrainians pounced, using US-supplied High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems and other weapons to isolate those forces, and then grinding them down with a methodical offensive.
“Methodical” in the same way that Verdun was. Or Ypres, or the Somme, except the Ukrainians never actually captured anything. Not even enough ground to bury their dead in.
It is absolutely true that the Ukrainian bombardments of the Dnepr river crossings presented the Russian Army with a very real problem, logistically speaking, not only did they have to cross a river to bring supplies to the military AND the civilians of Kherson, they also had to rebuild the crossings on an almost daily basis. However, the real turning point was when the Ukrainians started shelling the shit out of the Kakhovka dam upstream of Kherson that it became more than a “problem.” Because should the Ukrainians succeed in their concerted efforts, with our help, to blast that dam to Hades, not only would it have caused a humanitarian disaster for the civilians downriver who would suddenly find themselves wishing that they had gills, it would have changed the “challenge” of keeping the right bank supplies, it would have made it impossible.
So the Russians decided, according to their ancient military doctrine, that dirt can be recaptured, lives cannot be brought back.
To put it into perspective: If Adolf Hitler had rejected this Yale alum’s sage advice and pulled out of Stalingrad, WWII would have lasted quite a bit longer.
It was just one in a series of Ukrainian victories since early September, including the liberation of large swaths of territory around Kharkiv in the northeast and the severing of the Karch Bridge from Russia to Crimea.
The glorious victory of Russia, once again, refusing to sacrifice 2,000 troops to delay the offensive of about 40,000 Ukrainian troops by about 20 minutes in order to hold on to a bunch of abandoned fields and cow pastures with quite literally no good defensive lives. Again: “dirt with absolutely no strategic value can be recaptured, dead soldiers can’t be resurrected.”
But if the Biden administration seems suddenly conflicted about the course of the war, that’s because several key challenges are looming.
First, is Ukraine headed for further gains or a grinding deadlock? On the one hand, the liberation of Kherson has brought Ukrainian forces within HIMARS range of Russia’s remaining supply lines into Crimea, while troops freed up by this victory can prepare for new offensives elsewhere.
Let’s just ignore the fact that troops freed up by not having to defend an exposed position in favor of defending one of the easiest defensive lines known to man, an actual river, can ALSO be redeployed elsewhere. Let’s also ignore that, with the current destruction of the Ukrainian road and rail system, redeploying isn’t quite as easy for one side as it is for the other. Fuck, let’s just ignore EVERYTHING we don’t want to hear because, SCIENCE!
On the other hand, Ukraine’s battle-bruised army may need a rest. It may also face stiffer resistance as Russian forces increase their numbers thanks to an influx of conscripts;
The correct term is “reservists.” There’s a difference there. “Conscripts” are what we in the United States call “draftees.” Individuals with NO prior military experience. “Reservists” are not. You don’t have to spend a whole lot of time to teach an adult to ride a bicycle again. The difference is important. You DO have to train and integrate them but it doesn’t take near as long as it takes to ship 10,000 factory workers to Britain and give them a crash course in basic infantry tactics, for instance. At least not if you want the latter to last much more than an afternoon when they see battle for the first time.
If the Russians ever reach the point where they have to rely on “conscripts”, then they have a problem. But there are about 20,000,000 reservists before they get to that point.
shorten their supply lines; prepare trenches and other layered defenses; and dig in for the cold weather ahead. To be fair, the Ukrainians have surprised skeptics before. But given that they have now squeezed Russia out of its most vulnerable positions, the next steps could be harder.
Second, how likely is escalation? Putin has threatened to use nuclear weapons to hold five regions he has illegally annexed since 2014.
No he hasn’t. He has, repeatedly, but apparently nobody in the west understands English anymore, stated that Russia will only use nuclear weapons in two cases: 1) if they’re attacked with such weapons and 2) if the very existence of Russia is threatened. That’s not a “threat”, that’s, at worst, a “warning” and, at best, a guarantee that Russia will never, ever use nuclear weapons on Ukraine. Why on Earth would Russia, of all nations, want to voluntarily create Chernobyl times 100 on their own borders? Has everybody collectively decided to stop using their own brains?
IF, and that’s a huge if since Russia knows full well that nuclear war will escalate to everybody, including themselves, being dead, they use nukes, and that’s what he actually said, they won’t be launching at Kiev. They’ll be launching at London, Berlin, Paris, Madrid, Warsaw, New York, Washington DC (not a great loss, admittedly) and so on.
Third, will the pro-Ukraine coalition hold together? The European allies have mostly been solid; Ukrainian victories have likely ensured international support through the winter. Candid observers, including Secretary of State Antony Blinken, acknowledge that Putin has shown no interest in compromise.
“Compromise?” What the fuck kind of an idiot is this clown Blinken? Compromise means “both sides getting something.” Western and Ukrainian demands amount to “unconditional surrender, coupled with regime change, acceptance of a permanent NATO presence on Russia’s borders, reparations based on the west’s claims as well as tribunals based on the same.”
What sane nation would call that a “compromise?”
In fact, whether he means it or not, the ONLY leader who has shown any interest in talking about this whole thing and what led up to it was Putin, but every single attempt he made was met with the equivalent of “yeah, that’s cute, now go play with the other kids”, and that’s when he and Russia got any response at ALL.
He could very well be a lying bastard. Unlike most “smart, educated people” in the west WE don’t claim to be mind readers, but would it have hurt THAT much to at least TALK about it before we found ourselves in the shit show that is the current situation?
What, exactly, is our existential, strategic interest in including Ukraine in NATO? Keep in mind that Russia’s demands, from the very beginning almost two decades ago, was that Ukraine could do what she wanted, except become a forward operating base for NATO, much like we would accept, back in the 60s, that the Soviet Union planted missiles in Cuba. They didn’t want an inch of Ukrainian land, they just wanted Ukraine to remain neutral, like Austria has been with any immediately obvious ill effect on that nation.
If you want specifics, all that Russia demanded was that Ukraine follow the Minsk accords that Ukraine themselves agreed to, pending ratification by their equivalent of the Senate, which consisted of of the loss of not one square inch of Ukrainian territory. All that was in it was a guarantee that Ukraine would remain neutral and that the ethnically Russian minorities in Ukraine would be allowed to use their own language. Not EXCLUSIVELY, mind you, but that their culture would not be outlawed directly. They just demanded that their fellow Russians not be treated like third class citizens.
That was it. And the Ukrainian delegation, with the German and French in attendance, along with Russia as observers, signed it.
And then refused to ratify it while starting an 8 year long war against the Donbass which, to the point where the current war started, had cost 14,000 lives in the Donbass. Not that the western media gave a shit while the Azov nazis committed war crimes en masse. In fact, and you can look this up if you don’t believe it, Poroshenko, Zelensky’s predecessor, officially proclaim that “our children will be going to school, playing in parks, while yours (meaning the children of Donbass) will be cowering in basements.” Another of his famous proclamations, after he was no longer president, was that they never had ANY intention, whatsoever, of ratifying the Minsk Accords. As he himself put it, they “just wanted to buy time to build a powerful army.”
And those swine are the ones we’re funneling billions of dollars to?
Let’s end this madness, let’s DEMAND that it ends, or the world will literally end.
All to save the Biden money laundering machine in Ukraine.
Oh, and the money quote from this “highly educated” ghoul:
Finally, does a protracted conflict help or hurt the US? If this war has imposed terrible costs on Ukraine, it has been a strategic windfall for Washington. Russia’s military is being reduced to rubble. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is expanding and strengthening its defenses. China is facing greater resistance in the Western Pacific, as Japan, Taiwan and Australia hasten their military preparations. European nations that now see the downsides of dependence on one coercive autocracy are reconsidering their ties with another: Beijing. Amid Putin’s serial struggles in Ukraine, assertive authoritarianism no longer looks like the wave of the future.
Apart from the fact that he’s laughably, entirely wrong about the “windfall”, the Russian military is, if anything, stronger than ever and the support of the Russian people for making it stronger is even more prevalent, NATO hasn’t expanded a bit and it right now experiencing increasing amounts of arguing among their ranks because 99% of them are Europeans and don’t want to live in the dark because they can’t afford electricity anymore, the military tension in the Pacific is increasing because China might be seeing that this is “their moment” while the west is distracted elsewhere. Just how, exactly, is that a “windfall” for NATO and the freedom that the alliance claims to support?
Because it “weakens” Russia who have, correct us if we’re wrong, has never done a single thing to threaten us?
Really. For that we’re willing to “fight to the last Ukrainian”, to throw the entire world into an unprecedented economic crisis, a crisis which will hit our European allies worse than anybody, throw a nation like Ukraine, imperfect as it is, 40 MILLION innocent civilians, into a disaster while we soothe our consciences, if we have any, with “it was for FREEDOM!”
Our Imperial heart bleeds for Ukraine, it bleeds for Europe, it bleeds for Russia, it bleeds for every single individual who was killed, maimed and traumatized by this war, because it was all so completely and utterly unnecessary.
But that subhuman graduate of Yale? It’s all about the (largely nonexistent) “strategic windfall.”
Forget about the victims of his “windfall.”
They were just “collateral damage.”
May he and his descendants for at least 7 generations burn in hellfire for all eternity.