patrick.net

https://babylonbee.com/news/oscar-for-best-actor-goes-to-volodymyr-zelensky

https://babylonbee.com/news/biden-assures-americans-their-life-savings-is-safe-in-ukraine

https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/a-policy-error-of-historic-proportions

"A Policy Error of Historic Proportions"
1997 letter to President Clinton by US cold warriors who opposed Nato expansion.

By JOHN LEAKE

When Dr. McCullough and I started this Substack, we agreed that he would primarily focus on COVID-19 scientific-medical scholarship, and I would investigate how the COVID-19 pandemic response is related to other major public policy issues. Occasionally, some of our readers have exhorted me to “stay in our lane”—that is, to remain focused on matters pertaining to the COVID-19 fiasco.

Because Substack is a free speech platform, and because we welcome critical opinions, I have never felt compelled to respond to these exhortations to “stay in our lane.” To some degree, I consider my critics to have a valid point. As Fitzgerald elegantly put it in The Great Gatsby, “Life is much more successfully looked at from a single window.”

On the other hand, I believe my critics are overlooking a point so obvious that it might as well strike them in the head with a baseball bat—namely, the same corrupt government nincompoops responsible for the COVID-19 fiasco are also responsible for every other catastrophic policy blunder they are currently afflicting on mankind.

For example, let’s take the U.S. government’s catastrophic mismanagement of its relations with Russia the last thirty years. I have closely observed this disaster in the making since I moved to Vienna, Austria for an academic fellowship in 1996. On the plane to Vienna I read the July 15, 1996 Time Magazine cover story about how secret American advisors helped Boris Yeltsin to win that year’s presidential election.

Even at the time I remember thinking it was a bit presumptuous to think that it was perfectly okay for American agents to meddle in a Russian election, and I wondered how Americans would feel if it were reported that Russian agents had provided clandestine assistance to Bill Clinton in his 1996 presidential campaign against Bob Dole.

I read the Time cover story with keen interest, because for many years I’d been an avid student of 20th century Russian history. Yeltsin’s presidency marked the total triumph of American interests with respect to Russia, which had suffered a decisive loss of the Cold War. As I saw it—living in Austria, whose neutrality the Soviets had recognized and respected since 1955—in 1996 it was up to the Americans to welcome and assist Russia in becoming a partner with the West.

The following year, I read the news of how the Clinton Administration had decided to expand NATO membership to the east, ever closer to Russia’s border, and I wondered about the rationale for doing this. Though I’d never really known what to make of Henry Kissinger, I found his “Balance of Power” thesis compelling.

1866 cartoon by Daumier, L’Equilibre Européen,
We humans are constantly making assurances of our good will and altruism, but it’s a rare man or woman indeed who doesn’t press his or her advantage if a disagreement arises. This is why the the Soviet Premier Khrushchev refused to tolerate U.S. nuclear missiles in Turkey, and why President Kennedy refused to tolerate Soviet missiles in Cuba.

I therefore believed I understood why 50 major U.S. foreign policy experts—including top cold warriors such as Robert McNamara, Paul Nitze, Richard Pipes, and Stansfield Turner—wrote a letter to President Clinton on June 26, 1997, stating the following:

We, the undersigned, believe that the current U.S.led effort to expand NATO, the focus of the recent Helsinki and Paris Summits, is a policy error of historic proportions. We believe that NATO expansion will decrease allied security and unsettle European stability for the following reasons:

In Russia, NATO expansion, which continues to be opposed across the entire political spectrum, will strengthen the nondemocratic opposition, undercut those who favor reform and cooperation with the West, bring the Russians to question the entire post-Cold War settlement, and galvanize resistance in the Duma to the START II and III treaties; In Europe, NATO expansion will draw a new line of division between the "ins" and the "outs," foster instability, and ultimately diminish the sense of security of those countries which are not included;

In NATO, expansion, which the Alliance has indicated is open-ended, will inevitably degrade NATO's ability to carry out its primary mission and will involve U.S. security guarantees to countries with serious border and national minority problems, and unevenly developed systems of democratic government;

In the U.S., NATO expansion will trigger an extended debate over its indeterminate, but certainly high, cost and will call into question the U.S. commitment to the Alliance, traditionally and rightly regarded as a centerpiece of U.S. foreign policy.

Because of these serious objections, and in the absence of any reason for rapid decision, we strongly urge that the NATO expansion process be suspended while alternative actions are pursued. These include:

—opening the economic and political doors of the European Union to Central and Eastern Europe;

—developing an enhanced Partnership for Peace program;

—supporting a cooperative NATO-Russian relationship; and

—continuing the arms reduction and transparency process, particularly with respect to nuclear weapons and materials, the major threat to U.S. security, and with respect to conventional military forces in Europe.

Russia does not now pose a threat to its western neighbors and the nations of Central and Eastern Europe are not in danger. For this reason, and the others cited above, we believe that NATO expansion is neither necessary nor desirable and that this ill-conceived policy can and should be put on hold.

https://notthebee.com/article/us-releases-video-showing-russian-fighter-jet-colliding-with-american-drone

The Pentagon's European Command just released this video showing two Russian Su-27 fighter jets buzzing a U.S. MQ-9 reaper drone and spraying it with fuel – the second one colliding with the drone's propeller and forcing it down into the Black Sea, according to the USAF:



From the US Air Force:

Two Russian Su-27 aircraft conducted an unsafe and unprofessional intercept with a U.S. Air Force intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance unmanned MQ-9 aircraft operating within international airspace over the Black Sea on March 14, 2023. Russian Su-27s dumped fuel upon and struck the propeller of the MQ-9, causing U.S. forces to have to bring the MQ-9 down in international waters.

"Unsafe"? Is the US Air Force concerned about the safety of Russian pilots now?

Kind of creative to dump burning fuel on it, imho. I didn't even know that was a possibility.

Patrick says

Kind of creative to dump burning fuel on it, imho. I didn't even know that was a possibility.

What I've heard is they were dumping fuel on it to disable it in order to recover it. The drone is flying at several 100 miles an hour, and when it runs into a liquid at that speed, the propellers are disabled if not destroyed. The fuel wasn't lit on fire, it's just being used to damage the propulsion system.

I've also heard that it's unlikely the Russians actually hit the drone with their jet and if they did, that would have been a mistake. This was done to capture the drone.

The drone is there because it's part of the Ukrainian war. It was an entirely legitimate target.

Look, a nation that actually prosecutes their own people for war crimes:



Although, he was given a suspended sentence:

https://cultureru.com/russia-sentences-soldier-who-admitted-to-war-crimes-in-ukraine/

So, no real punishment. At least they aren't putting somebody like Julian Assange in prison to experience a slow death. It's not a large step up, but it's a step up, a minuscule one.

The US once set the standard for the world, and I think still does, but we've allowed that standard to be drastically lowered.

If we improve our nation's morality, we'll improve the world's morality - dragging them up kicking and screaming - let them kick and scream, but we need to bring up our own nation's morality. We can be the greatest nation in the world, but we need to deal with those that actively prevent it first. We do seriously have domestic enemies, we just need to expose them to be rid of them and stop being in this fugue of "we're always right". Who is "we"? I'm not part of the psychopathic Neocons.

Patrick says

Same twit from 1942:

For all propaganda people out there.

Germany beat CCCP long tome ago.

CCCP is now totally relying on the USA for war materiel.

Germany is at war with Allies.

CCCP is just responsible for doing the dying for them

RWSGFY says

For all propaganda people out there.

Germany beat CCCP long tome ago.

CCCP is now totally relying on the USA for war materiel.

Germany is at war with Allies.

CCCP is just responsible for doing the dying for them

TRUE! We would have had a hard time beating Nazi Germany without the Soviets attriting their manpower in the East.

RWSGFY says

Same twit from 1942:

When do you think the US will start sending their "sons and daughters" to prop up the Zelensky regime?

Onvacation says

RWSGFY says

For all propaganda people out there.

Germany beat CCCP long tome ago.

CCCP is now totally relying on the USA for war materiel.

Germany is at war with Allies.

CCCP is just responsible for doing the dying for them

TRUE! We would have had a hard time beating Nazi Germany without the Soviets attriting their manpower in the East.

But why waste so much money on some border dispute in Europe when Americans couldn't afford food? Hitler didn't do anything to us. In fact he was great antiglobohomo leader if you think about it.... And I'm sure their central bank was much less evil than our central bank, because everybody knows nothing is more evil than our central bank.

RWSGFY says

nothing is more evil than our central bank.

You're probably right.

I wonder what Zelinsky had to do for Yellen to get that $1,200,000,000 on her recent overnight trip?

https://www.independentsentinel.com/yellen-thanked-zelensky-for-handling-spent-funds-in-a-most-responsible-way/

Onvacation says

I wonder what Zelinsky had to do for Yellen to get that $1,200,000,000 on her recent overnight trip?

She was following orders from her bosses in the City of London and Switzerland. They are fighting for their criminal enterprises. Every death and flaying is an empowering honor to Moloch and Baphomet.

richwicks says

Look, a nation that actually prosecutes their own people for war crimes:

Knowledge of Russian is quite useful, contrary to what some Patnetters think:

https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/5876339?tg=
and https://t.me/anatoly_nesmiyan for March 17

Любопытный приговор по тривиальному сегодня обвинению в распространении фейков о российской армии был вынесен в Хабаровском крае. К условному сроку был приговорен военнослужащий, который в августе прошлого года рассказал, что застрелил мирного жителя на территории Украины.

Судя по приговору, его осудили не за убийство, а за то, что его рассказ суд счел клеветой в адрес второй армии мира, которая, конечно, не убивает мирных жителей.

Фактически это означает, что в случае огласки случаев военных преступлений судить и карать будут не за сами преступления, а за факт их обнародования. Любопытная и многообещающая практика.

Translation:

A curious verdict on a trivial today accusation of spreading fakes about the Russian army was handed down in the Khabarovsk Territory. A soldier was sentenced to a suspended sentence, who in August last year said that he had shot a civilian on the territory of Ukraine.

Judging by the verdict, he was convicted not of murder, but because the court considered his story to be slander against the second army of the world, which, of course, does not kill civilians.

In fact, this means that in the event of publicity of cases of war crimes, they will be judged and punished not for the crimes themselves, but for the fact of their publication. An interesting and promising practice.

Onvacation says

We would have had a hard time beating Nazi Germany without the Soviets attriting their manpower in the East.

We won WW1 without help from the Russians

richwicks says

Look, a nation that actually prosecutes their own people for war crimes:

I remember a TV interview when I was studying German in Europe, an interview of a German soldier who was part of the force that invaded France in WWII.

He said some other German soldiers raped some French women, and their commander had them shot immediately.

They were Nazis, but they did have certain principles, and they enforced them rigorously.

Booger says

We won WW1 without help from the Russians

Imperial Russia/USSR was in the war from the get go until Early 1918, and hundreds of thousands German soldiers were still in the East for security when the Armistice was signed in November.

The Soviet Union was created by the Kaiser in 1917 when they gave Lenin sacks of gold and put him on a sealed diplomatic train for Saint Pete aka "Petrograd". Kaiserine Germany was negotiating with the Kerensky Government for a cease-fire so they could transfer the million+ Germans on the East Front to the West Front to counter balance the Allies and the new nation joining the fight, America. But the Kerensky government was holding out for some concessions the Kaiser did not want to give.

Lenin, the actual Menshevik ("Minority") was able to buy the support of bandits, criminals, and deserted soldiers to intimidate opponents and create the illusion they were the Bolsheviks ("Majority") thanks to the Kaiser's Gold. With the first bit of it, he was able to establish the first "Soviet" in Petrograd. But most Russian Revolutionaries ranged from Social Democrats to Liberals to Constitutional Monarchists, with the latter being the real majority. In fact, Lenin had to flee several times to Finland in 1917 and direct subterfuge from there to avoid his political enemies who wanted no civil war but to win free elections via the Provisional Government.

The Kaisers saboteurs were very active in the United States when we were neutral, using many contacts with Irish Republicans, esp. Clan-na-Gael, to poison horse herds and blow up ships and nitrate stores (Black Tom).

The Armistice happened mostly because German Sailors mutinied in late October when the Kaiser's High Command, desperate to fire up the Public and the Military after defeats on the Western Front, ordered them to sail against the massively larger Allied Fleet in a sortie with little chance of success. This spread to the Army.

Alternative history?

The Czar didn't honor his alliance with France, and German troops made the French pay at Versailles in 1915 like 1870 part two. No US in WW1, No UK with massive loss of men, United British Isles with the Irish not leaving thanks to a return of a seasoned Ulster Division ready to put down the Fenian Bastards, but perhaps getting devolved government, no Depression, and no Communism.

The German government would remain in place (a Constitutional Monarchy for all the propaganda about the Autocratic Kaiser of the Huns; Germans got universal male suffrage decades before the UK).

France and Germany and the UK wouldn't have lost 10%, 15%, and 12% of their male population. The Empires would have continued, with the Germans slicing off a bit of Alsace or gaining access/control of some French overseas colonies.

Germany would gain European and overseas colonies at French expense to expand elsewhere, and very possibly become a rival commercial nexus to the Anglo one. No 1.5M Indians, Africans, and Caribbean soldiers in Europe for the British (or Asian and African for the French), so the Independence movements in the Turd World could have been delayed a generation or two. Who knows? Maybe Indo-China was the price for the 1915 Armistice and Hitler is sent to patrol some Rice Paddies as a Colonial Policeman dabbling in Asian Watercolors and as a confirmed bachelor with daddy issues, becomes an active member of the Hanoi Gay Nightlife with no nearby Jews to annoy him. Stalin with no Communist Party to join follows his mothers wishes, finishes seminary, becomes an abbott of some Georgian Orthodox Church famous for his quick hand with a whip and infighting other monasteries for pilgrims and money.

The Middle East remains under Ottoman Rule. No substantial outbreaks of terrorism or radical Islam since there is no Westtoxification to resist. No Israel, either

The world might still be very European dominated to the benefit of all humanity, rather than weakened by National and International Socialism Mustache Men and all it's ills.

Booger says

We won WW1 without help from the Russians

You should exclude the US from "we". The biggest impact the US had was on what we might have done had the war continued. As to our actual battlefield contributions, not so much. Australia, India, Serbia, and Canada all lost more men for the Allies in WW1 than we did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties

WW1 was another war we had no business getting involved in. We would be a far stronger nation if we quit caring who rules over the rest of the planet. We should trade with everyone but only go to war when foreign boots hit our shores.

Did our involvement in WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine - has any of this helped you and your's? Can you really say it's made us safer? Who Benefits from spending a trillion per year on war? It's not you, citizen.

RWSGFY says

But why waste so much money on some border dispute in Europe when Americans couldn't afford food?

I suspect because the Biden's, and the deep state, are trying to cover up corruption.

WW1 was probably the dumbest war in history and created a shitload of problems and after effects we're still dealing with today.

That being said, we should have confiscated foreign German-owned property for the Kaiser's Sabotage at Black Tom and for those merchant ships that were bombed, when we were neutral, but just that and nothing more.

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1637682427056234497?ref_src=patrick.net

@JackPosobiec
I can’t believe Russia is doing this to Ukraine. All the leaders who did this should be in jail

Oh wait, that's Iraq.

Patrick says

JackPosobiec
I can’t believe Russia is doing this to Ukraine. All the leaders who did this should be in jail

And just once I want to see the video footage of all of the shelling Russia keeps doing on Ukraine civilian apartments and civilian dwellings.
I bet the smart internet slueths would point out, the shells are coming from Ukraine's side and not from the Russia offensive front.

As much as I don't like being aligned with RINO squishes, Hollywood or Europe - I'd still rather be in their "support" camp as opposed to ethical paragons of North Korea, Iran, Syria and China that support Russia's monumental embarrassment of an invasion.

Even if I were to believe every lame-ass Russian criticism of Zelensky and Ukraine (secret Jewish Nazis pedophiles!) - it wouldn't change the fact that Russia illegally invaded their neighbor and totally botched the war to make it unwinnable for them while getting hundreds of thousands of people killed.

If Russia had even a modest battle success to point to suggesting they could turn the tide - it would be one thing. But people have to be delirious to think that the Russian military (along with Wagner) who can't even manage to conquer Bakhmut is somehow going to get it together and conquer more Ukrainian land.

The quickest way to end the needless death, destruction and world instability is for Putin to stop invading their sovereign neighbor. Yet there are alot of people in the West who are seemingly cheering Russia on to continue fighting this losing war.

socal2 says

Even if I were to believe every lame-ass Russian criticism of Zelensky and Ukraine (secret Jewish Nazis pedophiles!) - it wouldn't change the fact that Russia illegally invaded their neighbor and totally botched the war to make it unwinnable for them while getting hundreds of thousands of people killed.

No tickey no laundry, all we have to show for those MSM claims is their say so. They didn't even get a photo essay or any video of said incursion.

Zelenski could be bombing the shit out of his own people he wants to expunge for all we know. And probably is, he's been doing it for 9 years already.

The time to have done anything was when he first invaded Georgia, but that Jive Ass Mother Fucker first black President was too busy trolling Americans and gloating how he was destroying America to our faces. While he watched Putin do every last bit of everything. That now that the Biden Criminal enterprise is being paid by Ukraine to help them cover their crimes against humanity. We're now supposed to care?

I want Putin to have Ukraine, there I gifted it to him.

Don't like it too bad, it's mine to give away. Just as much so as Biden has the right to give that Nazi Zelenski every last cent to our name.

AmericanKulak says

Alternative history?

The Czar didn't honor his alliance with France, and German troops made the French pay at Versailles in 1915 like 1870 part two. No US in WW1, No UK with massive loss of men, United British Isles with the Irish not leaving thanks to a return of a seasoned Ulster Division ready to put down the Fenian Bastards, but perhaps getting devolved government, no Depression, and no Communism.

The German government would remain in place (a Constitutional Monarchy for all the propaganda about the Autocratic Kaiser of the Huns; Germans got universal male suffrage decades before the UK).

France and Germany and the UK wouldn't have lost 10%, 15%, and 12% of their male population. The Empires would have continued, with the Germans slicing off a bit of Alsace or gaining access/control of some French overseas colonies.

Germany would gain European and overseas colonies at French expense to expand elsewhere, and very possibly become a rival commercial nexus to the Anglo one. No 1.5M...

We can all dream, and that was a nice scenario. However, let's not forget the banksters were causing the Sepoy Rebellion in India as early as 1857, with the goal of killing white colonists families, entire families including women and children (thousands of them killed indiscriminately by the agitated rebels in the historical time line, and nearly a million Indians too in the backlash war/bailout by the British government), so none of them could withdraw money from the bank.

BTW, the Czar entered the war on behalf of Serbia. The French found themselves having planned on Czar coming to French rescue in case of invasion by Germany but turning out having to enter the war because war started on the East (Balkans and Polish frontiers then occupied by Russia, Germany and Austria after the 3rd Partition of Poland); that's how the history books usually describe it. In reality, the banksters likely arranged the incident in Sarajevo in order to have a mass liquidation of European bank account holders.

Tenpoundbass says

No tickey no laundry, all we have to show for those MSM claims is their say so. They didn't even get a photo essay or any video of said incursion.

I don't get this claim. There are literally thousands of hours of reporter front line and drone footage from the first days of the war to today available on Youtube, Liveleak and other streaming channels. I've seen dozens of hours of Russian propaganda talk shows with Russian ultra-nationalists losing their shit over their grinding losses and recommending using nukes and attacking NATO nations. Are we to believe all of this is fake?

Tenpoundbass says

The time to have done anything was when he first invaded Georgia, but that Jive Ass Mother Fucker first black President was too busy trolling Americans and gloating how he was destroying America to our faces. While he watched Putin do every last bit of everything. That now that the Biden Criminal enterprise is being paid by Ukraine to help them cover their crimes against humanity. We're now supposed to care?

No argument there.

But because Obama and Biden totally fucked up 10 years ago, doesn't mean I am going to cheer on Putin and his crap-ass drunk Russian military getting hundreds of thousands of people needlessly killed in Ukraine because I want to see Biden and the Democrats suffer politically.

My consistent goal is to end the death and conflict as soon as possible. If I thought Ukraine was just barely hanging on and Kiev was about to fall turning into Stalingrad, I would be urging Ukraine to stop fighting and try to negotiate a ceasefire as it was a lost cause.

But it is the opposite. Russia continues to flail and fight a lost cause despite throwing more and more bodies into the meat grinder. They still haven't captured Bakhmut. How massively pathetic is it that Russia has to rely on prisoners from Wagner? It's a sad joke!

How does Russia win when they've already burned through some of their best troops, equipment and got more people killed in a single year than all of their wars combined since WWII? Russia doesn't have an endless supply of cannon fodder to throw into the fight like they did in WWII. Besides, in WWII the Russia soldier was more motivated by the Commie propaganda and fighting a defensive war as opposed to a war of naked aggression.

socal2 says

How does Russia win when they've already burned through some of their best troops, equipment and got more people killed in a single year than all of their wars combined since WWII?

LOL! Unlike the US, Russia largely avoided fighting significant wars after WWII. They didn't fight any major war except for in neighboring Afghanistan, where they gave up after losing 15k KIA, contrasting to about 50k KIA each for the US in Korea and Vietnam. The Democrat Secretary of Defense McNamara under the "Civil Rights President" Lyndon B. Johnson even tried to send low IQ population to die in Vietnam as a policy (goes to show the cynicism behind BLM).

Russia can win and is winning the conflict in Ukraine by putting a 1:7 to 1:10 kill ratio on the ground, taking full advantage of Zelensky's role of maximizing Ukrainian deaths; the tool of choice seems to be mass artillery. The initial use of light rapid reaction forces in the opening weeks of the conflict was apparently an attempt to minimize Ukrainian (and Russian) casualty. Putin was an agent of WEF/Globalists himself (at least until the lead up to Georgian conflict in 2008); he sensed the globalist cabal was trying to backstab him and recycle his money (just like they recycled Saddam's, Qaddafi's and tried to recycle Assad's; not to mention earlier examples like the Shah's), so tried to minimize the scale of conflict. There is never any doubt to the eventual outcome of a full-blown war between Russia and Ukraine: millions of Ukranians would die due to war, lack of electricity, heat and water, etc., so that they can not withdraw from banks the money they have saved (or looted from other Ukranians) during their 30 years of exporting cheap labor, and tens of thousands of Ukranians would be trafficked in whole (sex trafficking) or in body parts.

Reality says

Russia can win and is winning the conflict in Ukraine by putting a 1:7 to 1:10 kill ratio on the ground,

Where on earth are you getting these numbers? If this was even remotely accurate, Ukraine would be out of men by now and Bakhmut would have fallen back in November! Nor would have Russia lost all of the land they conquered in the first months of the war.

In virtually every conventional war in modern times, the attackers have 3X the casualties of the defenders. And since Russia is relying on poorly trained convicts and Ukraine is being armed with much more sophisticated weapons and motivated to defend their country - the death rate for Russia is likely much higher.

Ukraine is indeed running out men. That's why they are press-ganging boys and elderly men (and women in some cases) in west Ukraine cities like Lviv. What Russia has done at Bakhmut is rolling Erik von Falkenhayn's original plan for Verdun in WWI (pinning opponent to a fortress that they have to defend, then instead of taking it right away pummeling it and its exposed supply line with artillery superiority in order to bleed the opponent white) and Stalingrad in WWII into one battle.

Take a look at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdwFmjiXkX4
MacGregor actually knows how to conduct a battle; he was the commanding officer at the last major tank battle in world history so far, Battle of the 73rd Eastings during Desert Storm. The legacy media has been lying to you.

Don't have alot of faith in MacGregor, even if he is Tucker's favorite military pundit.

I remember MacGregor telling everyone a couple months ago that Ukraine was being "bled white" the day before Ukraine took back Kharkiv and the Kherson area. Russia has made no significant gains in all that time since despite losing tens of thousands more men in their failure to take back Bakhmut.

Where is the big new offensive Russia has promised all winter long?

Also, Ukraine conscripting eligible Ukrainians to defend against an invader is not a sign of weakness - compared to Russia having to empty its prisons, use poorly trained soldiers from far-flung ethnic provinces- while relying on North Korean/Iranian munitions and 40 year old tanks cobbled together with electronics from kitchen appliances.

I am not going to pretend that Ukraine is totally winning or kicking Russia's ass. They are a much smaller army holding their own defending their country against an aggressor. But to pretend that this pathetic Russian military and Wagner criminals are achieving a 1:10 kill ratio is beyond laughable - IMO. If it was even remotely true, the war would have been over last year!

cisTits says

Ukrainian losses to Russian artillery. Where the fuck have you been?

All I see are videos of Russians laying dead in their trenches or open fields after fruitless attempts to advance their battle lines that have stayed stagnant ever since Ukraine took back much of Kharkiv and Kherson.

I also see lots of videos of poorly trained Russian Mobiks complaining to their superiors that they are poorly equipped and led and don't want to be cannon fodder.

I actually feel sorry for some of the Russians trapped in trenches looking helplessly up at the sky as cheap drones drop grenades on them.

Also, remember at the beginning of the war with all the Jihadi Chechens fighting for Russia and their Tik Tok Rambo videos? Not seeing too many of those videos these days. Long gone are the days where Russia was cruising through cities and towns with combined mechanized, air and ground forces.

socal2 says

Don't have alot of faith in MacGregor, even if he is Tucker's favorite military pundit.

MacGregor happens to be one of the few outspoken military experts (himself being the commanding officer at the last major tank battle in human history so far) who are not bought and paid for by banksters. Tucker Carlson may or may not be a bankster agent, but at least less obvious than most of the legacy media clowns, and war-losing bitches (yes, history has seen a long line of them since at least Madam Pompadour) whipping desk-jockeys into line at the top of the cardboard cut-out administration running the White House. Even the desk-jockeys in uniforms know the war is a losing game and wanted to avoid it, but couldn't resist the war-mongering and war-losing bitches.

What you don't seem to understand is that warfare east of Poland (and north of the Zagros moutains to Yellow River line; i.e. the entire Eurasian hinterland) is not centered on the taking of specific geographical points like on the coastal Eurasia, but focused on the destruction of enemy fighting forces and fighting capacity. Russian forces were not pushed out of Kherson City, but voluntarily withdrew across the river when it became obvious that long-range missiles taking out of the bridges supplying the city bridge head would put Russian forces at risk when they were not committed to push far beyond the bridge head and link up with Donbas interior yet. Russians never took Kharkov, but had only formed a thin screen around half of the perimeter early in the conflict. If you have studied WWII, you'd know that Kharkov changed hands between Nazis and Soviets at least 4 times; i.e. the area is flat plain with little to no defensible position. Ukrainian decision to commit reserve forces there to grab miles of flat land and subject their core mobile reserve forces to artillery strike and bombing while on the move served only a propaganda purpose while achieving very little substance.

At Bakhmut is where Russian forces substantially destroyed the reconstituted Ukranian army. If you think Ukrainians press-ganging boys, old men and women into fighting is exercising their draft law rights, do you think Nazi's recruiting boys and old men into the battle of Berlin was sign of their pending victory against the Allies too (like the Nazi propaganda was telling them)? While governments can draft whoever they want when things get desperate, drafting boys, old men and women is usually the sign of impending collapse.

OTOH, Russian recruitment of criminals is actually a sign of a government having plenty reserve and not in a hurry to commit their core reserve force. A historical parallel would be LBJ's secretary of defense MacNamara's policy of deliberately recruiting low IQ males (another way of saying young black males at the time) to be cannon fodders in Vietnam. The US was far from scraping the bottom of the barrel for men power, but prefer to dispense with the disposables first. IMHO, Russia is being used as a bludgeon tool to kill European bank account holders and pension / asset management account holders, so it is training up far more fighting men than being used up in fighting. If you care about European lives at all, better promote peace instead of the training up of more and more Russian soldiers, who previously had little appetite invading Europe (aside from possibly immigrating individually) but once plucked out of their civilian lives may find invading and taking over parts (or all) of Europe more profitable/enjoyable/thrilling than their previous staid life of eaking out a living in the icebox of Eurasia interior.

The reference to online videos showing Ukrainians killing Russian soldiers is just silly. Most of the real videos showing that are very old and from the beginning of the conflict when Russians tried to use a light mobile force in a surprise attack (similar to Germans using a single battalion of paratroopers to take over Norway by organizing a military parade through Oslo); once that ruse was exposed and element of surprise lost, of course the Ukrainian ground forces with heavy equipment would have the upper hand in a fight deep inside Ukraine, where supply from Russia would be difficult. The slow steam-roller operation on the Russian-Ukraine frontiers since then has been very different. Much of the recent videos claiming to be showing killing Russians are actually screen grabs from video games! Goes to show the desperation among the pro-war and pro-Ukrainian-staying-in-the-fight propagandists.

BTW, all the talks about Wagner running out of ammo is also bullshit: the biggest fly in the ointment in carrying out Erik von Falkenhayn's plan for Verdun during WWI was some German units being too high quality and wanted to grab the French forts quickly instead of following the plan and hunker down while letting artillery superiority destroy French reserves and exposed supply lines. So the nonsense talk to discourage Wagner fighters from pushing forward too fast.